Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: uptown on December 01, 2011, 10:28:53 PM
-
I'm one and if finally occurred to me why tonite. First of all this is not a dig or flame job on the mission type folks. They're just dandy. But tonight i joined 3 missions flying a heavy 51D and got to drop 2 bombs. I spent an hour and a half flying like I was told just to arrive at target to find nothing to shoot at or bomb. Boring ! I ended up bailing out during the 3rd mission because quite frankly I felt like i was just flying around doing nothing. The first 2 missions had 6 sets of 17s, at least 5 heavy 51s and just as many 38s. All that for a small airfield and a Vbase.
So as instructed, I held ord just to watch from 15K as the 17s did their thing. Base shut down, no uppers......now what. Land and type WTG. :lol
I'd rather fly the way I want to and get killed rather then fly in a mass and never get a chance to even engage a bad guy. This is why I never was a fan of these big squads that we have out there. I don't want or need CptMarv or GenFab telling me what to fly, when to fly, where to fly and how to fly. I'll figure it out.
Oh I forgot....I was allowed to kill 4 town buildings in one mission. :rolleyes:
I should say that ALL the guys in the missions were great guys, I like all of them. They just enjoy a different type of play. Actually more realistic then my preference of play. I'm just expressing my personal point of view. :cheers:
-
Yep, that sux. Sounds like you need to remember or find out who makes crap horde mishuns and who makes fun combat-inducing missions.
-
Hordes may have have better stats, but lone wolfs are usually better pilots I've found. Yeah, you've only been shot down 12 times this tour. But those 12 times are the only times when you got into a fight with less than a 12:1 advantage.
-
Missions are fun when they succeed to within a second or 2 of failing. Overwhelming numbers for easy base captures are for little boys who were bullied, abused by their gay uncle, and will otherwise amount to jack squat in the real world.
I dont blame the "Lone Wolf" Squadron members, not one bit. :)
-
Hordes may have have better stats, but lone wolfs are usually better pilots I've found. Yeah, you've only been shot down 12 times this tour. But those 12 times are the only times when you got into a fight with less than a 12:1 advantage.
are you saying that I usually fight when there is a 12 to 1 advantage on my side? Because if you are, we can discuss this in further detail. If you aren't then escuse me for the misunderstanding...
-
I love to fly with my squaddies (the few that we have on a regular night) but I find that I fly much better when I'm on my own. I don't know whether it's because I don't feel like I need to keep an eye on another pileit all the time, or because I'm not jabbering away on vox with someone about who's gonna win the game this weekend, why steaks are better with garlic butter rather than A1, or why why Shawk's mullet tastes funny...
All I know is, some of the best times I've had are when I've just logged on by myself and went a-hunting. In fact... I'm gonna go fly one or two right now just for grins.
-
I'll see you in there :aok
<----waves from centerville ....ur six as it were :devil
-
After being CO of a sixty person squad in AW I came here flying alone.
I joined a squad after a year or so here. They only flew NOE missions and everytime an enemy showed up the squad leader ordered everyone to stay on mission so he could go get the kill. I left after two weeks.
I started a squad a couple of years later. We had 7 members and took turns calling planes and missions. Every mission was a fighter sweep. Every mission in different planes. Now that was a lot of fun. We were outnumbered most missions. I tired of the constant recruiting and the squad dwindled and died within about a year.
I joined 1-2 GHI missions. Enough bombers to flatten 2-3 bases. Boring.
I occasionally (every few years) organize a mission. 10 B-17's, Spit IX fighter sweep, Stukas with E-4/F-4 escorts. Those were the biggies over 10 years.
Yep, loner here. I like it better that way. Sometimes I miss being in a squad but then I organize a mission and I'm good for a few more years.
-
I don't have any history in AW or WB but I've spent more than a few years here with AH and in that span I've dabbled in or played all parts of the game, a long time ago I used to look for big missions, big missions = more players, more player = good or so I thought at the time. After doing that a while I realized my favorite part of the mission was shooting down the defenders, that once the fight was over and it was just the base that was left with no one shooting back the interest started to dwindle, it became a race with the other mission participants to get as many kills as I could before the hangars were dropped or they stopped upping. Sure it felt good to be "winning" but when I saw that I was just sort of along for the ride and not really participating I started looking elsewhere.
Ever since then missions have sort of been the exception rather than the rule. That is unless it's a group of bombers looking for escort, I really enjoy flying escort. Trying to get the big friends to target AND home again I find really fun even if I don't get to shoot down many bad guys, I think it's looking over and seeing all those heavies helps me forget if only for a couple minutes that I'm playing a video game, it's those little moments of immersion that I live for in AH.
-
Have you ever seen a Jayro-mission?
When theres about 40-50 fighters, couple bombers over the target (usually a cv nearby too) and he is asking for more "help"? And the "more help" is coming to shoot the big nothing?
Sad. Isnt it?
-
Find the right guys on, post an Emil, P-39, P40b mission.
There is no way to fail.
-
I think that I have it figured out now...... ;)
Rule #1: I am having fun in the game when I am successfully ending sorties. Who amoung us, and I know there are some, feel some accomplishment for flying head on into a storm of massively outnumbering foes? Maybe if I can get a Brewster up and slip by the horde and grab a couple of quick scalps and land or at least entertain myself with a half hearted attempt at locating and downing a troop carrier, I might consider this a successful sortie. Other than that, I am either looking to grab my gear and head to where my odds are better at survival.
Rule #2: It is a no brainer that flying with a wingman increases your chances, so in the absence of a squadmate or some other volunteer, missions do provide a buffer.
Rule #3 -Here is the rub: Why make a mission that has a small chance of success? The mission fails = I feel ummm.... :uhoh less than happy. The mission succeeds = I have checked off my to do list and eager to head on to other challenges.
Rule #4: Why are there huge missions? The answer is simply because THEY INSURE A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF SUCCESS.
Solution: How could HTC balance the Borg approach to base capture? The answer again is simply INCREASE THE PERCENTAGE OF SUCCESS FOR SMALLER NUMBERS. It is simple math, and not rocket science. If you use 20 teamates to take one base and I use 4 teams of 5, totaling 20 teamates to take 4 bases, how long would it take before some of the 20 teamates would have to go on the defense?
It is just logical that the degree of difficulty in base capture is proprotionately related to the number of players attempting to capture any base. So capture criteria are still not adequately balanced to suit any style of strategic war other than the current horde takes all. However, changes in game features such as ordinance, supplies, troops, availability of ground and air cover, or number of structures including gun emplacements that need to be destroyed would provide a broader range in size of successful capture missions.
:old: Can I get a WITNESS!!!!! Or was I the only one who was paying attention when we had 50% town percentages and fights spread all across the maps, even during off hours? Okay, so they bombed a town flat in no time. Why not do away with auto calibration? Why not remove formations? Why not just leave it the heck alone, and let players work together in small groups and achieve some feeling of success for the time they devoted to an online game?
-
Rule #4: Why are there huge missions? The answer is simply because THEY INSURE A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF SUCCESS.
Definitions of success vary.
Getting a dar bar down with minimal #'s and low eny planes is as much a success to some as an overkill base take.
-
I'm very much a lone wolf, after having done "the war" and etc way back when.
Every now and then I try and toss out a themed mission with a variety of appropriate rides and roles, for example, a mid war usaaf, or vvs mission, a late war lw or uk mission - those kind of deals.
Never get any takers.
Jayro's style is nohthing but an extension of AW smash and grab style, get a bunch of guys and just go after a base, close it down in one swoop and move on... very much how it was done in the AW RR euro arenas when certain squads wanted to roll a map (my squad was one of them, heh) to piss everyone off, or just because we could. Wasn't as horde-y as it is here in AH, tho'
What I've noticed in decline over the years is a more "strategic" fight where multiple bases would be porked/attacked, or counter-attacks and interdiction missions.
Personally I think the biggest change to game play was the introduction of the M3 and ground troops for base-captures. Think about that for a minute.
-
I miss the MOM missions. :( They were the most fun I've had in any mission. Massive mission announced so massive opposition could intercept. Now that was combat!
I do fly lone wolf often even flying lone Bombers against the odds. Thats my fun trying the impossible and though often fail when I do survive it or take several with me to earth I enjoyed the risk. No risk no reward.
To each his own but if a mission starts from 2 or more sectors from the front lines I'd rather fight than flight. :airplane:
-
Find the right guys on, post an Emil, P-39, P40b mission.
There is no way to fail.
Well, there is until they're all scrambling in the hangar complaining "I can't find the P-40B!"
:devil
-
Solution: How could HTC balance the Borg approach to base capture? The answer again is simply INCREASE THE PERCENTAGE OF SUCCESS FOR SMALLER NUMBERS. It is simple math, and not rocket science. If you use 20 teamates to take one base and I use 4 teams of 5, totaling 20 teamates to take 4 bases, how long would it take before some of the 20 teamates would have to go on the defense?
I also think bases should be easier to take. With that said I think there should be something that motivates or organizes a response to base takers. The base takers are confronted with a ironic situation. They can overwhelm a base with #s yet not capture the base cause one guy in a jet smokes their goons OR some dude jumped in the map room and shoots all their troops, this is mitigated a bit IF the target base can be supported with GVs but it's still a fairly awkward situation.
The basetakers who start with a "mission" enjoy an overwhelming advantage cause there is nothing to organize a like "defensive mission", the "lions share" of defenders are loners and not organized in the least and it shows. I've yet to figure out why some missions are defended against and yet others go untouched. I still think making the bases easier to take, then after capture the base goes into limbo for a small amount of time before it actually changes hands so the attackers must defend their potential prize would help the interaction and support a sense of "desperate effort" that is lacking in almost all base fights!
as it is now after a base is captured the attackers as well as the defenders move on to other areas. The struggle for the base should not end exactly at the moment the last troop enters the map room, the ack should not mysteriously rebirth the instant the last troop enters the map room, the base should not be usable by the takers at the instant the last troop enters the map room!
I say lets find a way to encourage the "totality of desperate struggle" as much as possible :aok
JUGgler
-
No valid solution should revert us back to the "2-3 guys sneak NOE to a base and can take it within 3 minutes" milkrunning bogus adventures that were rampant throughout the arenas before HTC listened to our cries and made bases harder to take.
You're saying the hordes are a result of bases being too hard to take.
Wrong, I say. I say you're putting the effect before the cause. The hordes are a direct result of milk runners not wanting to expand their skills or grow in the game. They don't want to progress past the first stage of the learning curve. The harder base take requirements are not creating hordes... They're preventing milk runners. The milk runners, instead of getting better, simply take 50 more people and create the horde.
It's the weak skills of the horde that make the game suffer. NOT the base take requirements.
Some fights can get large but not be a horde. Some base takes can create sector-wide fighting zones where any kind of combat could be had and I wouldn't qualify that as a horde. A horde is set up for the purpose of steamrolling. YOu see that often enough when you get 3 full sector dar bars hitting a field with almost no defenders, and then 2 sectors away the enemy is doing the same..... instead of fighting each other they horde bases. Hording has a major milkrun "avoid conflict" mentality IMO.
-
I'm one and if finally occurred to me why tonite. First of all this is not a dig or flame job on the mission type folks. They're just dandy. But tonight i joined 3 missions flying a heavy 51D and got to drop 2 bombs. I spent an hour and a half flying like I was told just to arrive at target to find nothing to shoot at or bomb. Boring ! I ended up bailing out during the 3rd mission because quite frankly I felt like i was just flying around doing nothing. The first 2 missions had 6 sets of 17s, at least 5 heavy 51s and just as many 38s. All that for a small airfield and a Vbase.
So as instructed, I held ord just to watch from 15K as the 17s did their thing. Base shut down, no uppers......now what. Land and type WTG. :lol
I'd rather fly the way I want to and get killed rather then fly in a mass and never get a chance to even engage a bad guy. This is why I never was a fan of these big squads that we have out there. I don't want or need CptMarv or GenFab telling me what to fly, when to fly, where to fly and how to fly. I'll figure it out.
Oh I forgot....I was allowed to kill 4 town buildings in one mission. :rolleyes:
I should say that ALL the guys in the missions were great guys, I like all of them. They just enjoy a different type of play. Actually more realistic then my preference of play. I'm just expressing my personal point of view. :cheers:
I love winging with my buddy Uptown...even tho he leaves me to die while hes off chasing some running dweeb in a pony :D Lone wolf, winging, squad fighter sweeps, base capture missions, all are fun aspects of this game. Switching from one to another keeps things fresh and fun.... for me anyway.
This is the biggest problem with the hordes. Mission planners that don't have a plan! They rely on numbers to accomplish what there lack of skill can't cover. I agree with Krusty, that to many people are ok with being mediocre in this game as long as they can run in a gang/horde. It's up to the mission leaders and squad leaders to ......what for it......
LEAD!
They are the ones that must look at what they have and say I have too much for this mission and split the force. This makes it more challenging for the players, as well as giving everyone a part to play. On top of that, it will create more fights along the front as the force attempts to grab one base while porking two others. Defenders will defend if there looks like there is a shot at defending. Trying to defend at a base with 10 to 1 against isn't fun so no one is going to show, but 2 or 3 to 1... I'd give that a shot!
If the community/leaders don't start to lead HTC will have to step in. Hordes are going to kill this game. People in hordes get bored and leave the game, and for right now, those coming in are keeping pace with those leaving. Should the numbers start to drop, things WILL change. Remember back when 4 out of 5 missions where NOE? Not any more :devil
-
I think part of it is a misunderstanding on the part of the hordlings....
They recall they have fun in the big fights... So they make a big group. Only they don't recreate the fun because they don't have the same point, the same combat, the same action. It's a shallow attempt to recreate based on not understanding what it was they were trying to recreate.
-
I always fly alone, or I should say, without a wingman or another to fly with me. I haven't joined a mission in many years. Why? Invariably, most missions are badly thought out. Moreover, there are too many helpless player that join the missions, guys who cannot possibly defend themselves, much less support anyone else. Likewise, I don't need a guy with a fractional K/D ratio telling me how to fly. I will assist a mission if I happen to be there, but I will not participate as part of the mission.
Besides, I prefer to fly mid-war fighters, which are never selected for missions, nor do they carry the ordnance they want. Indeed, if in a P-39Q for example, the Mustang mission will be miles ahead of me in short order.
-
Lazy server double post.....
-
No valid solution should revert us back to the "2-3 guys sneak NOE to a base and can take it within 3 minutes" milkrunning bogus adventures that were rampant throughout the arenas before HTC listened to our cries and made bases harder to take.
You're saying the hordes are a result of bases being too hard to take.
Wrong, I say. I say you're putting the effect before the cause. The hordes are a direct result of milk runners not wanting to expand their skills or grow in the game. They don't want to progress past the first stage of the learning curve. The harder base take requirements are not creating hordes... They're preventing milk runners. The milk runners, instead of getting better, simply take 50 more people and create the horde.
This is rather naive, These masses that take bases are made up of very diverse types and skill levels of players, from the very best to the very worst and everywhere in between. There is something to the accomplishments felt from taking bases that attracts a wide range of players. This should not be restricted it should be encouraged but the ability to respond to base captures should be enhanced to encourage a sense of "struggle" that includes risk, reward, thrill of victory and the agony of defeat! The system has made it one sided the players are merely operating within the system that has been created!
The system can be changed FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR easier than the mindsets of the folks wo use the system! :aok
JUGgler
-
Missions are fun when they succeed to within a second or 2 of failing. Overwhelming numbers for easy base captures are for little boys who were bullied, abused by their gay uncle, and will otherwise amount to jack squat in the real world.
I dont blame the "Lone Wolf" Squadron members, not one bit. :)
Hey now, I was on the "bullied" end of the spectrum and I detest the "play it safe, hide in the horde" mission mentality. I also go lone wolf when I play.
-
Players should be able to buy snippets of intel, number of planes, type of planes, GVs that are in missions by using perk points. If the intel has already been purchased, the buyers name is posted. If the player logs, changes sides, or gets discod after the purchase, it gets reposted. The planners could still augment the mission after posting but if you applied equipment minimums to missions, it would keep "counter-intel" from being too much of a problem.
Intel was and is a huge part of any war or upcoming battle and would help make base takes a bit easier and give some time to assemble a defense.
Troops should be able to do damage to towns....mass airdrops...how cool would that be?
-
Juggler, not all base take efforts are hordes. There is a difference. The spectrum exists yes, but there tends to be a mindset/mentality amongst those that can ONLY horde. Some who have progressed beyond that point might slum it to join the horde but as we've heard in this thread they often find the missions dull, boring, unhelpful, and no fun at all.
So yes there is a wide variety of skills and pilot types.... But we find the same few over and over making 100-player steamroll-base-X missions with no point. They fit the category I was describing more than the ones you described.
-
:salute umm lone wolves isnt that an oxymoron? :headscratch:
-
Players should be able to buy snippets of intel, number of planes, type of planes, GVs that are in missions by using perk points. If the intel has already been purchased, the buyers name is posted. If the player logs, changes sides, or gets discod after the purchase, it gets reposted. The planners could still augment the mission after posting but if you applied equipment minimums to missions, it would keep "counter-intel" from being too much of a problem.
Intel was and is a huge part of any war or upcoming battle and would help make base takes a bit easier and give some time to assemble a defense.
Troops should be able to do damage to towns....mass airdrops...how cool would that be?
Er... would that not be undone by people not formally posting the mission, thus rendering the whole idea pointless?
I'd suggest a system where on the map it shows the number of enemy planes above a certain altitude, possibly displayed as a line in the sector they are located in that gets longer the more aircraft are in the sector. This would give the defenders a heads-up that there are enemy planes in that sector, and it might be worth going there to stop whatever they're doing.
Sure, it has the downside that the players would have to look at the map or monitor the country channel for people calling out enemy activity, but I believe if people used this proposed system, they could use it effectively to respond to far more threats than they currently do.
Wiley.
-
:salute umm lone wolves isnt that an oxymoron? :headscratch:
Wolves are pack animals... The lone wolf is the exception to that. Thus, the use of the term.
-
Juggler, not all base take efforts are hordes. There is a difference. The spectrum exists yes, but there tends to be a mindset/mentality amongst those that can ONLY horde. Some who have progressed beyond that point might slum it to join the horde but as we've heard in this thread they often find the missions dull, boring, unhelpful, and no fun at all.
So yes there is a wide variety of skills and pilot types.... But we find the same few over and over making 100-player steamroll-base-X missions with no point. They fit the category I was describing more than the ones you described.
I think base captures is a critical component to the game. It is the current system that encourages these base takes with no follow on commitment. I think most people think the capture system is integral to a healthy gaming environment, lets face it most will find constant furballing dull and anti climactic. The "all out effort" base take is rendered lame cause once the capture happens all fight is over cause the ack comes up immediately and the base is usable immediately for the victors requiring then an equal effort to recapture the base.
I think the ack and buildings should stay down (albeit the base is now defaulted to the current side who got troops in) and not be usable for either side until a set of troops has cooked in the maproom for 20-30 minutes. This would force (if they wanted to keep it) the original attackers to defend their new conquest amd give the original defenders a small light of hope at retaining posession of said property, creating risk, reward, victory and defeat!
As it is now, the victors certainly can't feel a sense of victory cause the capture had little risk or struggle and the vanquished don't feel a sense of defeat cause they probably weren't even there
or honestly never had a chance in the 1st place!
encourage the desperate struggle and this game will be amazuzuzing!
With this idea, the capture system could be made easier! and it should be!
JUGgler
-
I agree on one point: Base taking is vital to the gameplay.
I disagree on the following: I feel a great sense of accomplishment when I help take a base. Mind you this is because I don't join those kinds of horde missions and usually taking a base for me involves working for it.
The suggestions you propose only really benefit people in the horde-hits-a-field example. For non-horde gameplay, does it help any? IMO not so much.
You can't change the system to accommodate the horde when it gives the non-horde players the shaft. I'd rather not see base taking tweaked to promote the phenomenon.
-
One cure is to find the right group of pilots to fly with. People who share your likes and dislikes.
I guess I was lucky to find a squad of great guys, and to be invited to join. I've flown with the same basic group of pilots for about 6 years in both AH and War Birds. If I didn't fly with my friends I think I would have left the game long ago.
So I encourage you to research the squads or ask some that seem to be doing what you like, if you can tag along. We have had some great guys join our squad from doing just that.
I think there is something for everyone in AH, you just got to find what you like, get good at it, and find others that do the same.
<S>
~kc "of the Loose Deuce"
-
I'm one and if finally occurred to me why tonite. First of all this is not a dig or flame job on the mission type folks. They're just dandy. But tonight i joined 3 missions flying a heavy 51D and got to drop 2 bombs. I spent an hour and a half flying like I was told just to arrive at target to find nothing to shoot at or bomb. Boring ! I ended up bailing out during the 3rd mission because quite frankly I felt like i was just flying around doing nothing. The first 2 missions had 6 sets of 17s, at least 5 heavy 51s and just as many 38s. All that for a small airfield and a Vbase.
So as instructed, I held ord just to watch from 15K as the 17s did their thing. Base shut down, no uppers......now what. Land and type WTG. :lol
I'd rather fly the way I want to and get killed rather then fly in a mass and never get a chance to even engage a bad guy. This is why I never was a fan of these big squads that we have out there. I don't want or need CptMarv or GenFab telling me what to fly, when to fly, where to fly and how to fly. I'll figure it out.
Oh I forgot....I was allowed to kill 4 town buildings in one mission. :rolleyes:
I should say that ALL the guys in the missions were great guys, I like all of them. They just enjoy a different type of play. Actually more realistic then my preference of play. I'm just expressing my personal point of view. :cheers:
this is why you'll never see me join a mission. i may tag along hoping for action.....but i'll never join.
-
Players should be able to buy snippets of intel, number of planes, type of planes, GVs that are in missions by using perk points. If the intel has already been purchased, the buyers name is posted.
Most of them have already "purchased" it--it's called a SECOND ACCOUNT.
It's covered in the "Hordez" thread about how to keep the hoarde from happening and even how to destroy it once it has. Extremely simple fixes. If people cannot easily identify a hoarde mission by the huge red darbar 2 sectors back from the front they deserve to get hoarded. If people refuse to kill enemy ords for front line hoardes they deserve to get hoarded.
No disrespect to you Changeup.
-
I agree on one point: Base taking is vital to the gameplay.
I disagree on the following: I feel a great sense of accomplishment when I help take a base. Mind you this is because I don't join those kinds of horde missions and usually taking a base for me involves working for it.
The suggestions you propose only really benefit people in the horde-hits-a-field example. For non-horde gameplay, does it help any? IMO not so much.
You can't change the system to accommodate the horde when it gives the non-horde players the shaft. I'd rather not see base taking tweaked to promote the phenomenon.
my idea would give the "non horde" or "defenders" a chance to respond, maybe this would bring 2 hordes together in a desperate struggle <-- this sounds like what most are after!
JUGgler
-
Floats always make good missions, Jayro make ad hoc strike missions which are very good by the way (Base given for take off and take what you want).
It must be noted that both floats and Jayro are colonials :)
-
I am a Lone wolf 99.99% of the time, always have been always will be.
the exception is when a lot of squadies are on, even then we are a bunch of lone wolf's....if I am in a fight, I hate being interrupted by anyone....
hell I remember I was in a fight with 3 cons and was doing very well, put rounds in each one of them, here come some friendlies and jumped on the red guys...I was so pissed off.
I wont jump in on a 1vs1 even if the friendly asks for help, unless they are a squadie...but then most Muppets wont ask for help, and would rather fight it out to the end live or die :aok
last night I ran across a huge hoard of 51's and 1 n1k...the N1k had the misfortune to be out front....he died in all of a half turn the 51's wouldnt engage me so I chased them back to the base they were bombing....got 3 of the 51's...... eventually I had I think 7 or 8 all trying to kill me....sad but I was still able to put rounds in a few of them before they dragged me down......was quite sad actually....the ones who always fly in the hoard have absolutely NO clue as to how to really fight and are easy kills even the guys that been here twice as long as I.
-
Being a 1 man band is great in AH, you can bounce between countries, squads and missions willynilly.
Never missing out on any fun. Flying for yourself and the greenies around you gets you places :)
:aok
-
This is rather naive, These masses that take bases are made up of very diverse types and skill levels of players, from the very best to the very worst and everywhere in between. There is something to the accomplishments felt from taking bases that attracts a wide range of players. This should not be restricted it should be encouraged but the ability to respond to base captures should be enhanced to encourage a sense of "struggle" that includes risk, reward, thrill of victory and the agony of defeat! The system has made it one sided the players are merely operating within the system that has been created!
The system can be changed FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR easier than the mindsets of the folks wo use the system! :aok
JUGgler
Amen JUGler. Finally, I have got a witness!!! Simply pointing to one another and saying that you are lame for what you do - not the answer. Pointing the game in the direction of variety in action - priceless.
JUGler, I like what you have said about holding off the change in country colors to allow a proper defense, but with reservations on how that would be gamed. Perhaps adding a time delay on base surrender might have the opposite effect and encourage larger hordes, justified by the increased difficulty- who knows?
But Krusty and some others seem to draw a hard line against enabling smaller numbers impacting the game play stradegy. This goes against the valant "elite" forces that accomplished just that. Small skilled teams inserted into enemy territory under cover with a precise plan of operation. This is the stuff of legend, not the Hitler Blitzkrieg horde overrunning Europe that depleted both machine and men wrecklessly headed towards doom.
-
I'd be curious how Juggler's idea would work out. If enough people were of the defensive mindset, it could make for a pretty intense battle. What would the conditions for a retake be? 10 troops into the maproom? What if the third country got involved?
I think it might result in more fights, but hard to say. We might still have 2 hords operating a couple sectors away from one another rolling bases.
Wiley.
-
Being a 1 man band is great in AH, you can bounce between countries, squads and missions willynilly.
Never missing out on any fun. Flying for yourself and the greenies around you gets you places :)
:aok
Was a lot more fun when you didn't have to wait 1/2 a day to switch.
-
I think base captures is a critical component to the game. It is the current system that encourages these base takes with no follow on commitment. I think most people think the capture system is integral to a healthy gaming environment, lets face it most will find constant furballing dull and anti climactic. The "all out effort" base take is rendered lame cause once the capture happens all fight is over cause the ack comes up immediately and the base is usable immediately for the victors requiring then an equal effort to recapture the base.
I think the ack and buildings should stay down (albeit the base is now defaulted to the current side who got troops in) and not be usable for either side until a set of troops has cooked in the maproom for 20-30 minutes. This would force (if they wanted to keep it) the original attackers to defend their new conquest amd give the original defenders a small light of hope at retaining posession of said property, creating risk, reward, victory and defeat!
As it is now, the victors certainly can't feel a sense of victory cause the capture had little risk or struggle and the vanquished don't feel a sense of defeat cause they probably weren't even there
or honestly never had a chance in the 1st place!
encourage the desperate struggle and this game will be amazuzuzing!
With this idea, the capture system could be made easier! and it should be!
JUGgler
This would be great, I'd even be happy with letting the capture force have the use of what ever they leave up. If they hold it for 15-20 minutes it's theirs. Sure it would be tough on a small group to grab and hold, but if the idea works, the defenders would be spread out along the front defending at any number of capture sites.
Most of them have already "purchased" it--it's called a SECOND ACCOUNT.
It's covered in the "Hordez" thread about how to keep the hoarde from happening and even how to destroy it once it has. Extremely simple fixes. If people cannot easily identify a hoarde mission by the huge red darbar 2 sectors back from the front they deserve to get hoarded. If people refuse to kill enemy ords for front line hoardes they deserve to get hoarded.
No disrespect to you Changeup.
Sorry whopper, with the smaller amounts of time that I get to fly these days I don't want to spend that time porking ord along a front. A lot of people couldn't care less whether bases are being captured or not. The only thing they care about is that is where the fight is.
Was a lot more fun when you didn't have to wait 1/2 a day to switch.
I was never a big switcher, but would to find a fight, or wing with old friends. Since they changed it back to 12 hours I haven't switched once :(
-
I think base captures is a critical component to the game. It is the current system that encourages these base takes with no follow on commitment. I think most people think the capture system is integral to a healthy gaming environment, lets face it most will find constant furballing dull and anti climactic. The "all out effort" base take is rendered lame cause once the capture happens all fight is over cause the ack comes up immediately and the base is usable immediately for the victors requiring then an equal effort to recapture the base.
I think the ack and buildings should stay down (albeit the base is now defaulted to the current side who got troops in) and not be usable for either side until a set of troops has cooked in the maproom for 20-30 minutes. This would force (if they wanted to keep it) the original attackers to defend their new conquest amd give the original defenders a small light of hope at retaining posession of said property, creating risk, reward, victory and defeat!
As it is now, the victors certainly can't feel a sense of victory cause the capture had little risk or struggle and the vanquished don't feel a sense of defeat cause they probably weren't even there
or honestly never had a chance in the 1st place!
encourage the desperate struggle and this game will be amazuzuzing!
With this idea, the capture system could be made easier! and it should be!
JUGgler
I'm with you in many points: That the base captures are a (maybe even the most) critical component of the game, and that more commitment to a certain area even after the immediate capture could mean more protracted battles, more fighting etc.
As of now, I personally think the current system of AH warfare is lacking in several way. The lack of strategic targets, but even more the purely numerical requirements of winning the war (x fields, no matter where) do not only favor the attack on a massive scale but, more importantly, also the "strike where they never expect it" way of operations. IMHO this is the part that's actually making defense very frustrating for most players, as once they finally started to react in a certain sector, the enemy will simply strike elsewhere.
I haven't mad up my mind on your proposal yet. However, I would wish for an entirely different system for winning the war: The capture of one (or a cluster of) strategic targets deep in the enemy homeland.
In theory, this could result in what we may be looking for: Commitment to a certain battle, the requirement of sustained effort and more actual strategy. Base captures would be required to get to the heart of the enemy country, so once a had been created, the attacker would have very high interest in continuing the attack at this specific place. Sneak raids would still be possible but not always make much sense. Diverting from the direction of main trust could happen to break a stalemate, get out of a dead end or eliminate a threat to the flank.
But in the end, combat could be less erratic and more concentrated.
-
Well why even have base takes? Why have countries. Why have a war no side can win? The bottom line is people band together for different reasons, base takes, dog fights, etc. This game provides it all. I say do what makes you happy and dont worry about the rest. The map will still be there when you log on later.
-
Er... would that not be undone by people not formally posting the mission, thus rendering the whole idea pointless?
I'd suggest a system where on the map it shows the number of enemy planes above a certain altitude, possibly displayed as a line in the sector they are located in that gets longer the more aircraft are in the sector. This would give the defenders a heads-up that there are enemy planes in that sector, and it might be worth going there to stop whatever they're doing.
Sure, it has the downside that the players would have to look at the map or monitor the country channel for people calling out enemy activity, but I believe if people used this proposed system, they could use it effectively to respond to far more threats than they currently do.
Wiley.
Er, Wiley, they can already not formally post the mission. Posting missions is a way for the mission creator to have the equipment necessary to prosecute the target and get a mass of people to join that they don't know or who are looking for something else to do. That won't change. It's much much more difficult to run a mission without the using the mission feature....unless of course you're in a mega squad like the vTards and they organize their own missions anyway and that won't change either.
I do, however, enjoy your sarcasm...it possesses a certain naive-pinache
Changeup
-
I'm with you in many points: That the base captures are a (maybe even the most) critical component of the game, and that more commitment to a certain area even after the immediate capture could mean more protracted battles, more fighting etc.
As of now, I personally think the current system of AH warfare is lacking in several way. The lack of strategic targets, but even more the purely numerical requirements of winning the war (x fields, no matter where) do not only favor the attack on a massive scale but, more importantly, also the "strike where they never expect it" way of operations. IMHO this is the part that's actually making defense very frustrating for most players, as once they finally started to react in a certain sector, the enemy will simply strike elsewhere.
I haven't mad up my mind on your proposal yet. However, I would wish for an entirely different system for winning the war: The capture of one (or a cluster of) strategic targets deep in the enemy homeland.
In theory, this could result in what we may be looking for: Commitment to a certain battle, the requirement of sustained effort and more actual strategy. Base captures would be required to get to the heart of the enemy country, so once a had been created, the attacker would have very high interest in continuing the attack at this specific place. Sneak raids would still be possible but not always make much sense. Diverting from the direction of main trust could happen to break a stalemate, get out of a dead end or eliminate a threat to the flank.
But in the end, combat could be less erratic and more concentrated.
Always good to hear Lusche chime in. :salute I think that most of us, including the OP would like less finger pointing towards other players style of play and more diverse interaction AVAILABLE through design in game play.
What you are proposing sounds close to a system that uses a "tweaked" version of the old base capture sequence. This is meaningful to me, because it means that there are tools already in place that may produce an easy fix for the designers :noid. This hopefully, would allow them to continue on the path of utilizing available resources for improving graphics and adding new toys, while deferring only a minimum amount of resources in changing game play. :cheers: Win :aok Win Baby!
Oh yeah, and base capture should be made easier... ;) <<< Only way to produce the most effective argument for reducing hordes while increasing a variety in options for game play fun incentives.
-
I hate wolves, yet I enjoy flying "lone wolf".
I also enjoy freeballing in the summer.
So confusing... :uhoh
-
What you are proposing sounds close to a system that uses a "tweaked" version of the old base capture sequence.
It is in as much as the capture order had a similar intention - concentrate the action. But it was way too extreme in doing this and was very rigid, it eliminated all freedom of action. My intention would be not to force players to do something, but to to make it just the most reasonable course of action to press the attack along an axis of advance.
But unfortunately there's a big reason why I haven't post it in the wishlist yet: I have no idea how to implement it without having to design completely new maps. So far it's just a vision what I would AH gameplay to be: Tactical combat and base captures as a means to reach a strategically favorable position, creations of "fronts" with more coherent action and reduction (but not total elimation) of the "grab and disappear" style.
-
are you saying that I usually fight when there is a 12 to 1 advantage on my side? Because if you are, we can discuss this in further detail. If you aren't then escuse me for the misunderstanding...
Not at all. I'm saying that a lot of the chest thumpers that cite stats or their KTD ratio are those that fly with the horde. If you look at Kills per sortie or kills per hour, its a lot lower. They maintain that high KTD not though skill, but because they have 20 other people to watch their back, or always run if the see an enemy.
-
I very much like the gist of Lusche's ideas.
-
I do not wish to further derail this thread so I will put my thoughts in the wishlist for you guys to ponder! :salute :salute :cheers:
JUGgler
-
Find the right guys on, post an Emil, P-39, P40b mission.
There is no way to fail.
I logged on a minute ago and typed on country channel, "if I post a Stuka/109 mission would anyone join". I got 2 responses...both basically said no. The one guy told me no because stuka only has one bomb :huh :rolleyes: Dude, it's a egg the size of a fricken M3 ! :bhead :lol we got this..... trust me :devil
But here's the ying and the yang. By his response I could tell his fighting style. His first thought is to go in there and do shock and awe. in/out...smash, bang, boom, fight over. And that's awesome. I'm a big Mike Tyson fan here! That's what he did in a fight. But I kind of rather change it up from time to time. Fly TBM or D3A , JU87. It's hard to find guys that want to do things like that, let alone enough to get a mission together. I've been off on a 109 kick for the past few weeks and been getting pretty battered and bruised, but I'm having a blast! I wish more folks liked this kind of thing in the main arena.
-
Wolves are pack animals... The lone wolf is the exception to that. Thus, the use of the term.
:salute to tell the truth i seen that on the movie airheads thought it would apply here. :rofl
-
I don't have any history in AW or WB but I've spent more than a few years here with AH and in that span I've dabbled in or played all parts of the game, a long time ago I used to look for big missions, big missions = more players, more player = good or so I thought at the time. After doing that a while I realized my favorite part of the mission was shooting down the defenders, that once the fight was over and it was just the base that was left with no one shooting back the interest started to dwindle, it became a race with the other mission participants to get as many kills as I could before the hangars were dropped or they stopped upping. Sure it felt good to be "winning" but when I saw that I was just sort of along for the ride and not really participating I started looking elsewhere.
Ever since then missions have sort of been the exception rather than the rule. That is unless it's a group of bombers looking for escort, I really enjoy flying escort. Trying to get the big friends to target AND home again I find really fun even if I don't get to shoot down many bad guys, I think it's looking over and seeing all those heavies helps me forget if only for a couple minutes that I'm playing a video game, it's those little moments of immersion that I live for in AH.
Now I gotta state for the record that Soulyss has "GOT IT"! I always like him and now I know why.
All the Best...
Jay
-
I logged on a minute ago and typed on country channel, "if I post a Stuka/109 mission would anyone join". I got 2 responses...both basically said no. The one guy told me no because stuka only has one bomb :huh :rolleyes: Dude, it's a egg the size of a fricken M3 ! :bhead :lol we got this..... trust me :devil
But here's the ying and the yang. By his response I could tell his fighting style. His first thought is to go in there and do shock and awe. in/out...smash, bang, boom, fight over. And that's awesome. I'm a big Mike Tyson fan here! That's what he did in a fight. But I kind of rather change it up from time to time. Fly TBM or D3A , JU87. It's hard to find guys that want to do things like that, let alone enough to get a mission together. I've been off on a 109 kick for the past few weeks and been getting pretty battered and bruised, but I'm having a blast! I wish more folks liked this kind of thing in the main arena.
I love to roll the Stuka once in a while, especially sinking ships in one drop.. Only problem is getting out of it alive, I tend to get hunted down on my way there or on my way out of there.. :furious :noid
-
are you saying that I usually fight when there is a 12 to 1 advantage on my side? Because if you are, we can discuss this in further detail. If you aren't then escuse me for the misunderstanding...
I think h was speaking in general and not you specifically. Least thats what I got out of it
-
In reply to the first post, I definitely echo much the OP's and Soulyss's sentiments. I dabbled very little in the other aspects of the game in the MA. For me it's about flying a plane slick and looking for the air to air fight. Sometimes I'm the windshield and sometimes I'm the bug. that's twice today I've managed to quote that phrase :) But it's all good to me. And I echo W.W. in that I'll help if a mission is happening where I'm at, but I rarely join them.
To the horde base taking discussion. I don't know if missions are the reason for the horde, or catalyst or if it's the map, or even just the time of day. But saying they are, maybe HTC could ramp up the Intell if will. We already get a "base under attack" warning, maybe a "mission has launched" warning. Just a thought, after all I'm a "lonewolf" AH personality type. And the horde just gives me an opportunity to try and drag 1 or 2 away for some knuckle banging, stick breaking I broke mine recently air to air combat or Jenks makes another stupid move and dies an embarrassing death. :D
:cheers:
-
In reply to the first post, I definitely echo much the OP's and Soulyss's sentiments. I dabbled very little in the other aspects of the game in the MA. For me it's about flying a plane slick and looking for the air to air fight. Sometimes I'm the windshield and sometimes I'm the bug. that's twice today I've managed to quote that phrase :) But it's all good to me. And I echo W.W. in that I'll help if a mission is happening where I'm at, but I rarely join them.
To the horde base taking discussion. I don't know if missions are the reason for the horde, or catalyst or if it's the map, or even just the time of day. But saying they are, maybe HTC could ramp up the Intell if will. We already get a "base under attack" warning, maybe a "mission has launched" warning. Just a thought, after all I'm a "lonewolf" AH personality type. And the horde just gives me an opportunity to try and drag 1 or 2 away for some knuckle banging, stick breaking I broke mine recently air to air combat or Jenks makes another stupid move and dies an embarrassing death. :D
:cheers:
I tip my hat to the lone wolf player. Players like you and the ones that have posted is why I keep coming back for more.
I always admired your style JenKs :salute
-
I always admired your style JenKs :salute
Careful there, you may be confusing me with my somewhat more successful but I maintain that's he's uglier doppelganger, JensK ;)
But :salute :D
-
Careful there, you may be confusing me with my somewhat more successful but I maintain that's he's uglier doppelganger, JensK ;)
But :salute :D
:lol I think ur right :lol sorry :salute
All you guys look alike to me. :D
-
Even if I am in one of the biggest squads in the game, and join up in missions as often as I can. I have to say that I am just as much a lone wolf, because the freedom to up where I want and do what I want whenever I want appeals to me alot. Luckily the Aerofighters allow just that kind of freedom, so I don't join missions out of duty I do them because I love to hang around with the great guys in the squad and more often than not the missions turn out to be quite fun. :aok
I also like the realism part of the missions, and I enjoy the variety of gameplay. One day I hang with my squad doing whatever, some times we do realistic bombing missions and some times we just up the plane of our choice to go berserk just for fun. And other days I up at a totally different base than my squaddies just to hunt on my own, just pick a random place of the map where it is likely to find a good fight, or up a stuka to try to destroy something. I even pick a tank once in a while to practice my aim in the darn things, because I am just so bad at it.. :lol
But I think the variety of gameplay is what makes this game so great, and I don't like to commit to just one thing!
-
I would never join a group that would have me as one of it's members...
-
I would never join a group that would have me as one of it's members...
One of Grouchos greatest lines :aok :aok
There is a group I fly with but I mostly do lone wolf stuff.
And as many lone wolves can tell you . Its amazing the effect one plane can have on a fight.
I prefer to fight over enemies bases rather then my own. Even if my own is being attacked. It never ceases to amaze and amuse me how one person can have an effect on a fight. Im sure you've seen it. One person shows up at your field and the next thing you know. Half the uppers have taken their eye off the ball that is the other base. or other cons that are inbound and are all start chasing that one con low like a school of marlin all going after one small herring completely oblivious to the fact that they just gave the other side a breather or enabled them to all get to your base with an advantage.
Not matter if it is my side that does ot or the other two sides. I'll never understand why 10 people will insist on chasing one lone low con when 10 others or more are inbound that they will then have to deal with while at a disadvantage. because they just blew any alt they had and wasted half their ammo load spray and praying from 1.5 out in hopes they get the kill before their team mates do.
Lemmings. Lemmings I tell ya
-
I would never join a group that would have me as one of it's members...
Pots is one pile-it I'd fly with anytime, anywhere...and proven it over and over....but lone wolf all the way. :salute
-
Pots is one pile-it I'd fly with anytime, anywhere...and proven it over and over....but lone wolf all the way. :salute
Agreed, pots is a good fight, and fun to fly with and against.
Wurz