Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: A8TOOL on June 01, 2012, 11:32:28 PM
-
Back in 2000 the MAW were one of the best..in fact they probably set the standard for pre-planning and multiple base takes coming straight outta AW it's end day. The Ak's at the time were excellent if I remember correctly and quite a few others I can't remember.
In 2007 to 2009 Aces & 8's and LTAR were probably the most sought after...but not because they were dirty horders. both flew (or Drove) with honor and had smart leaders.
2011 we all know how dirty the tards are and although disliked, not hunted (why I don't know). Excellect planning IMO but dirty as it gets. In order to stop their lemming minions you need to kill troops just to give a clue.
So who else is there thats any good out there anymore in 2012?
-
I can remember from 2008 to 2010 ThndrEGG's massive noe missions. He probably started the trend of noe hordes, right up to when the radar settings were changed. His missions were always fun, and usually a bit crazy. For instance flying all the way across the ocean on trinity to take an obscure base, or launching masses of Ju-88s to level a field somewhere, even upping many B5Ns to take out a port. Was very fun, and actually required some level of airmanship unlike the hordes of today.
I used to love being a part of the horde, but then certain armchair generals took the helm and it grew old on me. By grew old I mean got absolutely friggin annoying. I've found that killing the horde is much more enjoyable.
I hope that the next horde squads bring the element to tactical mission planning back in, more than just derping in 40 heavy P-51s to flatten and take a base.
Just my .02
-
Odd but in all my years I don't recall any base taking squads.
-
when I first joined I would always look for dredger to plan missions on the rook side. we would take base after base. back then rooks won about 90% of all the wars that was about 5 or 6 maybe 7 years ago. I dont really know how long I have been playing. but I do recall that back then the squad that everybody went after was the ltars, they did put out some pretty good fights.
semp
-
Back in 2000 the MAW were one of the best..in fact they probably set the standard for pre-planning and multiple base takes coming straight outta AW it's end day. The Ak's at the time were excellent if I remember correctly and quite a few others I can't remember.
In 2007 to 2009 Aces & 8's and LTAR were probably the most sought after...but not because they were dirty horders. both flew (or Drove) with honor and had smart leaders.
2011 we all know how dirty the tards are and although disliked, not hunted (why I don't know). Excellect planning IMO but dirty as it gets. In order to stop their lemming minions you need to kill troops just to give a clue.
So who else is there thats any good out there anymore in 2012?
Many good squads back then and some still active. Despite how i feel about the V-tards, I never seen them play dirty. No different then what FB base captures.
-
Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought Loose Cannons had a relatively successful even though short lived run. :salute
-
What I mean by dirty is 2nd acct. hackers chasing CV's and seeing where people are to avoid any opposition. both the 8's and Ltars hit them head on unlike the squad or squads who follow do today.
Shuff has always been anti basetake which is a shame really since it's a major part of the game. You'll always see him near a base take furball just not participating in the actual take. Plenty of muppets and the like feel the same from the old Skyrock days.
The 8's used to take 200+ bases a month and get 10,000 kills Air, Sea and land with just 10 to 16 guys out of a 27 player squad I think it was. Very few NOE's unless V bases and they'd take 2 or 3 at a time many sectors out to establish a foothold. Most takes were the hard way. Planning ahead and skill is why they got so many kills....same as Ltars but in air mostly. Not many small squads can get 10,000 kills in a month anymore.
IMO, there is nothing that beats Teamwork and nothing more challenging than getting a few guys together trying to take a base from qualified defenders. Thats what gets my blood pumping.
-
I can remember from 2008 to 2010 ThndrEGG's massive noe missions. He probably started the trend of noe hordes
NOE hordes have always been commonplace since I have played back in 05. Back then it was the BOPs, GHI and Dredger leading the way as far as "Horde" play was concerned. Back then, the box layout of town and radar settings were much more suitable for the smash-grab type play making it almost impossible to defend.
Although some squads have tried to be a base taking squad, most have resorted to 1 or 2 people in the squad leading public missions to horde. IMO, you rarely see a group of squaddies working together to take a base
-
What I mean by dirty is 2nd acct. hackers chasing CV's and seeing where people are to avoid any opposition. both the 8's and Ltars hit them head on unlike the squad or squads who follow do today.
Shuff has always been anti basetake which is a shame really since it's a major part of the game. You'll always see him near a base take furball just not participating in the actual take. Plenty of muppets and the like feel the same from the old Skyrock days.
The 8's used to take 200+ bases a month and get 10,000 kills Air, Sea and land with just 10 to 16 guys out of a 27 player squad I think it was. Very few NOE's unless V bases and they'd take 2 or 3 at a time many sectors out to establish a foothold. Most takes were the hard way. Planning ahead and skill is why they got so many kills....same as Ltars but in air mostly. Not many small squads can get 10,000 kills in a month anymore.
IMO, there is nothing that beats Teamwork and nothing more challenging than getting a few guys together trying to take a base from qualified defenders. Thats what gets my blood pumping.
The 444th Air Mafia was another great base taking squad. I loved the nights when we ran head to head with the MAW. You KNEW it was going to be a long night!
That is what made the game great for me. Strategist against strategist, wing against wing, who executed better won. When "skill" meant doing the mission with out 6 wingman to "help" finish your objective.
-
I haven't seen any planning at all this last year.
Every CV that attacks a field is sent straight into the shore battery without checking it's traverse.
Every CV that attacks a field is sent straight into the PT boat spawn.
Close enough to be killed by shore battery and PT boats but rarely even put close enough to let LTV off where they spawn near the town.
We have guys who get a white flag on a town is reason to call for troops regardless of the fact that 8 enemy airplanes are circulating over spawn and that the town still has all it's ack up.
When they fail to get troops in, they call for more and eventually involve a substantial amount of the country population for a base take that ultimately fails........instead of having planned a proper base take before executing.
The guys who respond to the calls for help aren't as willing to help after being involved with a couple of these.
I've seen 8 guys in a row speed out of the vehicle hangers and turn thier backs on the enemy tanks to rumble out to spawn camp even as the enemy tanks are driving on the base.........then they whine that they have no place to land thier kills because the base was captured by the enemy.
I'm amazed that a single tank making a simple flanking maneuver befuddles 5 tanks standing on concrete pointed toward spawn while the tank who flanked them kills then all.
The player base has changed from guys who had the love and patience to spend hours writing configuration files and editing AT codes to make gameplay possible and has been replaced by guys who just want instant gratification.
My motivation for taking bases is the using of the asset we just captured.
-
I sure agree with the sentiment of this thread. On a good note, this happened last night. It was just one simple mission, but it reminded me of the old days. I put up a pony run with 100 lb bombs and rockets. Oh, got about 5 or 6 guys. We headed towards the bad guy base into which we had a nice spawn. Their vh was up as was their town. I got questioned by the pilots in the mission what's with the 100 lb bombs. I told them we're out for the field ack, then cap, and have some fun. There was a little kerfuffling about the load out, but not much.
Suffice it to say, we deacked the field. Yes, it was a small airfield, so I'm not holding this little mission up as some great feat. We had a nice cap. The enemy did their best, but the gv guys got the town down and someone drove in an M3. We took it with FH's and BH's up, and with no horde. Was just nice.
Since talking, cajoling, and begging doesn't seem to work, I think I'll up more of these ack missions. And you don't need a horde to pull it off. Because what does seem to work is when our guys see that they can fly over a base without getting pecked at by field ack. It'll be fun doing it at a medium and large airfield. The key is that 1st pass, salvo 1, with the 100 lbers. And it's fun ignoring red guys while we go about our business, then see the enemy get the picture of what is happening.
-
Dredger was that Philly copper right? What ever happened to him? He was a nice guy and had some good missions.
-
I miss defending NOE base take missions, so much fun. I do not miss flying NOE base take missions, so boring.
-
I haven't seen any planning at all this last year.
Every CV that attacks a field is sent straight into the shore battery without checking it's traverse.
Every CV that attacks a field is sent straight into the PT boat spawn.
Close enough to be killed by shore battery and PT boats but rarely even put close enough to let LTV off where they spawn near the town.
We have guys who get a white flag on a town is reason to call for troops regardless of the fact that 8 enemy airplanes are circulating over spawn and that the town still has all it's ack up.
When they fail to get troops in, they call for more and eventually involve a substantial amount of the country population for a base take that ultimately fails........instead of having planned a proper base take before executing.
The guys who respond to the calls for help aren't as willing to help after being involved with a couple of these.
I've seen 8 guys in a row speed out of the vehicle hangers and turn thier backs on the enemy tanks to rumble out to spawn camp even as the enemy tanks are driving on the base.........then they whine that they have no place to land thier kills because the base was captured by the enemy.
I'm amazed that a single tank making a simple flanking maneuver befuddles 5 tanks standing on concrete pointed toward spawn while the tank who flanked them kills then all.
The player base has changed from guys who had the love and patience to spend hours writing configuration files and editing AT codes to make gameplay possible and has been replaced by guys who just want instant gratification.
My motivation for taking bases is the using of the asset we just captured.
5 years ago when I started playing this game, everything you described above was happening. It has happens during my entire tenure here. If you go back and read some of the old threads on the BBS, you will find out they have been griping about the same thing since the creation of this BBS. I have seen little, if any, significant change in the way players are playing the game.
My Opinion
Fred
-
Dredger was that Philly copper right? What ever happened to him? He was a nice guy and had some good missions.
Texas.......he had kids and decided to concentrate on his new family.
-
Texas.......he had kids and decided to concentrate on his new family.
Right, Im thinking of someone else. I remember dredge having to run to his babys crib.
-
The better good old days........needing to take bad guy HQ to win the war......50 goons......fun times, no more :frown:
-
Base taking is not currently our top priority right now.
:noid
-
We tend to get 10-25 captures per month although I really don't know how that stacks up to an official "base taking" squad.
-
Sometimes me and google will get on at night and do a 2 man capture on bases :rofl one night we rolled I think it was 6 bases by ourselves :banana:
-
Sometimes me and google will get on at night and do a 2 man capture on bases :rofl one night we rolled I think it was 6 bases by ourselves :banana:
So you guys use 2 and get captures, others use 40 and don't.
hhhhmmmmm :headscratch:
-
So you guys use 2 and get captures, others use 40 and don't.
hhhhmmmmm :headscratch:
I have captured bases by myself. the thing about being 2 or 40 is not to have defenders.
semp
-
On the night we took 6 I think it was,... we had 3 defenders on the last take, google tied them up (away from town) while I took the base, towered out, upped and we killed all 3 :x
Anyway no need to rag on the v guys gents, they play the game how they like to, we play the game how we like to, don't like how the horde bases out? fly somewhere else, the map designers designed it so we have more than 1 bases= :aok
:salute
-
nowadays....its....I just killed a goon....it was Chewie...that means there's 10 more goons behind him....yall can forget about this base...its gone.
-
Sometimes me and google will get on at night and do a 2 man capture on bases :rofl one night we rolled I think it was 6 bases by ourselves :banana:
Wheres the like button.
Used to love doing that. Anyone who says it's easy...never did it
-
Wheres the like button.
Used to love doing that. Anyone who says it's easy...never did it
It's easy or it's a fail. Midwar shananigans if you ask me but I'm not going to insult those who do it on the BBS.
-
It's easy or it's a fail. Midwar shananigans if you ask me but I'm not going to insult those who do it on the BBS.
What is midwar shananigans?
-
In the old days you flew a handful of 11G's, N1k and goony bird, 5-6 people at most could capture a base.
Now a days its 40 men to drop every hanger, flatten the base completely before taking town out.
Old days nobody bothered to defend bases, now a days whose going to bother when 40 show up?
/More fun to land 5 kills in a Ki-61
-
5 years ago when I started playing this game, everything you described above was happening. It has happens during my entire tenure here. If you go back and read some of the old threads on the BBS, you will find out they have been griping about the same thing since the creation of this BBS. I have seen little, if any, significant change in the way players are playing the game.
My Opinion
Fred
The comparison I made goes back 15 years.
I believe the tide turned around 2002
-
I don't mean for midwar shananigans to be taken as an insult, especially since I've done the same thing and enjoyed it.
Funny how the game changes with changes in tactics, just like tactics change when the game changes. The way I see it as far as base closing goes is like this.
When I was new to the game it was all NOE all the time, lots of 110s flying below radar was pretty much the standard and an easy route to success.
Then the towns and fields got a bit more complex. Before we had the flag and it took 100% of buildings down to get a capture. To capture a base you had to first send 20 sets of eyeballs to check and recheck the town before running troops. Bases needed to be closed just for all the finish work towns required and even then it would take a 2nd or 3rd set of troops to get a capture because we'd miss a building or four.
After this, briefly the flag was introduced and it barely took any destruction to get the white flag. It didn't stay this way long enough to change tactics.
After that we came to where we are now. Personally I got lazy, I kept using effective tactics and got my squad trained up to be pretty efficient. We took a lot of bases but a lot of our enemies started to realize that if they up from a nearby field they could fight back but only after we captured the field and landed so there was no real fun way to defend against the 'bishop horde'. This was unfortunate for both us and them because since they stopped defending like they normally would we were always in low heavy Jugs by the time it was time to fight. I found myself at a crossroads where not only was the enemy not counter-attacking like they normally would, but the base takers never got any air combat practice and pretty much forgot how to fight.
This is when base taking became nothing more than an exercise in boredom to me and forced me to look for new ways to capture fields that were fun again. This usually means leaving hangers up at airfields and hoping they fight back. Granted it's not as efficient or as successful but it is a heck of a lot more fun than working on a base taking assembly line. It's also allowed me to fly a greater variety of airplanes and learn how to dogfight a bit in planes that are well suited to flying low and relatively slow.
Sometimes I feel it's best to pull midwar shananigans or even close a whole field down to get a foothold but I prefer a variety of tactics and a variety of planesets.
-
I don't mean for midwar shananigans to be taken as an insult, especially since I've done the same thing and enjoyed it.
Funny how the game changes with changes in tactics, just like tactics change when the game changes. The way I see it as far as base closing goes is like this.
When I was new to the game it was all NOE all the time, lots of 110s flying below radar was pretty much the standard and an easy route to success.
Then the towns and fields got a bit more complex. Before we had the flag and it took 100% of buildings down to get a capture. To capture a base you had to first send 20 sets of eyeballs to check and recheck the town before running troops. Bases needed to be closed just for all the finish work towns required and even then it would take a 2nd or 3rd set of troops to get a capture because we'd miss a building or four.
After this, briefly the flag was introduced and it barely took any destruction to get the white flag. It didn't stay this way long enough to change tactics.
After that we came to where we are now. Personally I got lazy, I kept using effective tactics and got my squad trained up to be pretty efficient. We took a lot of bases but a lot of our enemies started to realize that if they up from a nearby field they could fight back but only after we captured the field and landed so there was no real fun way to defend against the 'bishop horde'. This was unfortunate for both us and them because since they stopped defending like they normally would we were always in low heavy Jugs by the time it was time to fight. I found myself at a crossroads where not only was the enemy not counter-attacking like they normally would, but the base takers never got any air combat practice and pretty much forgot how to fight.
This is when base taking became nothing more than an exercise in boredom to me and forced me to look for new ways to capture fields that were fun again. This usually means leaving hangers up at airfields and hoping they fight back. Granted it's not as efficient or as successful but it is a heck of a lot more fun than working on a base taking assembly line. It's also allowed me to fly a greater variety of airplanes and learn how to dogfight a bit in planes that are well suited to flying low and relatively slow.
Sometimes I feel it's best to pull midwar shananigans or even close a whole field down to get a foothold but I prefer a variety of tactics and a variety of planesets.
:aok
-
I think I left something out too. A few months ago DOGFITE, our former CO returned from a year of being gone. We told him to pick up like he never left and we went straight back to closing everything. I'd told semp and a few other non bishops about getting away from the field closure thing but as soon as the squad got used to not closing fields, they were being told to nuke every field we attacked with heavy jugs. I got frustrated and took a few weeks off.
Thankfully I think we're all back on track now.
-
I miss defending NOE base take missions, so much fun. I do not miss flying NOE base take missions, so boring.
It was great fun. Falcon23 hitting the ground or a tree or exploding himself with a bomb.
-
Personally.
I have rolled with the horde quite a bit.
Rolling Thunder, Claim Jumpers as a member.
And tagged along with squads like the A8's, Lynchmob, Gunfighters, VTards and Freebirds.
They were, and are, all fantastic groups of guys.
My personal fave was the Aces and 8s. Organized, effective and good natured. And I still miss the late nights with A8WB :pray.
-
It was great fun. Falcon23 hitting the ground or a tree or exploding himself with a bomb.
I remember that! :rofl
we would really be flirting with the squirrels tree-top level in bomb-laden 110s and nikis, and almost always someone bit it.
we would hear a BANG!!! shortly followed by "damnit!!"
:rofl :rofl
-
I think a lot of it has to do with player skill(mine being relatively low), and the nature of the basetake.
I played a few years back, back before the days of the flag in town. I don't remember many people upping then either. Now if you don't shut the base down and/or take it quickly a 262 comes in kills your goons/someone strafes the troops, GVs pour outta of the hangers after 15 mins, and people up like crazy. Leaves you really with 2 options, deack and cap the field, or close the base. I personally consider closing the base a little more...I guess humane? And then you got reinforcments upping from nearby field to get alt,defend and goon hunt, GVs coming into town from adjacent spawns. It just becomes a mess at that point, becomes a possibly long drawn out furball.
When a 20 or 15 man mission comes in and an equal number up to defend, you're going to lose people to Ack, Manned Ack, Whirbls, getting ganged on, HOing, Ramming, stupid decisions and whatever else. The Attackers take 10-15 mins to get back and the defenders just reup. Your mission turns into a drawn out slugfest instead of a basetake.
I personally think the basetakes got uglier/dirtier because the defenders got uglier/dirtier.
My 2 cents, in my experiance.
-
Back in 2000 the MAW were one of the best..in fact they probably set the standard for pre-planning and multiple base takes coming straight outta AW it's end day. The Ak's at the time were excellent if I remember correctly and quite a few others I can't remember.
In 2007 to 2009 Aces & 8's and LTAR were probably the most sought after...but not because they were dirty horders. both flew (or Drove) with honor and had smart leaders.
2011 we all know how dirty the tards are and although disliked, not hunted (why I don't know). Excellect planning IMO but dirty as it gets. In order to stop their lemming minions you need to kill troops just to give a clue.
So who else is there thats any good out there anymore in 2012?
What do you mean dirty?
I know they fly together much, but dirty?
JUGgler
-
What do you mean dirty?
I know they fly together much, but dirty?
JUGgler
I think he meant from hitting the ground so much. :D
-
I think a lot of it has to do with player skill(mine being relatively low), and the nature of the basetake.
I played a few years back, back before the days of the flag in town. I don't remember many people upping then either. Now if you don't shut the base down and/or take it quickly a 262 comes in kills your goons/someone strafes the troops, GVs pour outta of the hangers after 15 mins, and people up like crazy. Leaves you really with 2 options, deack and cap the field, or close the base. I personally consider closing the base a little more...I guess humane? And then you got reinforcments upping from nearby field to get alt,defend and goon hunt, GVs coming into town from adjacent spawns. It just becomes a mess at that point, becomes a possibly long drawn out furball.
When a 20 or 15 man mission comes in and an equal number up to defend, you're going to lose people to Ack, Manned Ack, Whirbls, getting ganged on, HOing, Ramming, stupid decisions and whatever else. The Attackers take 10-15 mins to get back and the defenders just reup. Your mission turns into a drawn out slugfest instead of a basetake.
I personally think the basetakes got uglier/dirtier because the defenders got uglier/dirtier.
My 2 cents, in my experiance.
This is because now a days the WHOLE mission dives in dropping their bombs, some hitting targets, some not, then the entire force hovers over the runways vulching while some poor sucker is "hoping and a praying" he can sneak in with a goon.
Have some guys hold high as cap with bombs. If bad guys come in dump bombs and assist. If bombs are needed to knock something down again, you have them on station. Have those who die to defenders in stead of upping and running back to the field intercept the bad guys coming in from near by bases moving the fight away from the field under attack. Don't fly goons in strait lines from one base to another, same with M3's. Thats the first pass any one looking for a goon is going to take.
The above counts on people NOT worrying about their score (willing to dump ords on no targets) NOT worried about "getting kills" (not everyone can be in the vulch), and learning to fly better, and smarter. (a good goon pilot can last a number of passes if they know how to fly which is even enough to slow a 262 down enough to get shot down by friendlies).
It's all in how you use what you have.
-
We took a lot of bases but a lot of our enemies started to realize that if they up from a nearby field they could fight back but only after we captured the field and landed so there was no real fun way to defend against the 'bishop horde'. This was unfortunate for both us and them because since they stopped defending like they normally would we were always in low heavy Jugs by the time it was time to fight. I found myself at a crossroads where not only was the enemy not counter-attacking like they normally would, but the base takers never got any air combat practice and pretty much forgot how to fight.
Great post and it is EXACTLY how the rest of us feel about attempting to prevent a base capture.
Would you be in favor of HTC creating a reason to defend a newly taken airbase? For example, ack doesn't come up immediately and the flags stay white much longer after capture. Imho, until something like does occur, gameplay will continue to suffer.
-
If the goal was to win a map this would make large maps like Trinity a never ending quicksand bog.
Smaller maps it would be more competitve to the defenders thwarting the rolling hoard's momentum. The hoard would have to get better organised with a dedicated rear action team to hold new ground. Rear guards would have more meaning than to watch your 6 after you get off the bus at the wrong stop on Church Street, February in the Castro.
I recently experienced how this can be a benifit to game play. A just taken feild had two enemy GV spawn close to the town. The hoard began running a hoard of M3 and jabbo at the town while the flag was white. Our hangers were up but ord was down. We kept the feild but, not until after sacraficing 20-30 fighters and A20 into the trees chasing troops, M3 and avoiding picking fighters. We were lucky to have GV in the town still alive with all the jabbo.
Not all feilds are related this way to two or three other feilds so the loosers of a feild have an ideal opportunity to race back in with a hoard of GV from close by spawns. Let alone supporting jabbo. If the random spawn circle had been bigger or the GV'ers had a mouse movable spawn arrow over a larger cricle, we probably would have lost the base to an M3 recapture. It was 7 troops close when the first buildings popped.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's become apperant over the last 10 years, map building players create the relationship of "bases to bases" in the face of geography on many maps with no understanding of the player communitie's fun seeking motivations. They build the map for themselves the same way they would offer a custom arena for 12 like minded freinds.
There is a reason why the furballers and instant action fun seekers always find the two closest bases and not bomb each others base. Or why GV'ers will keep respawning into a close 3 way tank spawn fight on any map in rotation each night. Time and distance to the action. Geography has always seemed to be on the map for eye candy like the AH1 high mountains deep canyons Fad on Trinity and the scaled down Pizza plop map.
What do most players want before all of the mental problem solving and character building gymnastics that get thrown in by this game's arm chair strategists and strategic bus drivers?
Not to spend the majority of their night getting to and from the fight. The customer is paying for "FUN = Action" not "Driving Miss Daisy" 5-10 minutes to a drive by shooting just to die and waste another 5-10 minutes getting back to the fun to die again. New players might eventualy wonder if all this game is about is spending a long time in transit then die. That learning curve paradox of stick to carrot.
Until the new player has put enough time into the game, all he gets is the stick at the other end of the flight by hand delivering his carrot over that 5-10 minute flight. You cannot blame him much for not learning how to fight in the face of this along with HOing everything he sees after a 5-10 minute transit.
I can see new players prefering a hoard becasue of this unforgiving fact of our game.
Lusche should do a graph on player tollerances to "time delaying fun" cross referenced to travel time on our biggest maps. Actualy you can't without sending out a player satisfaction survey with questions designed to show player tollerence(boredom) to time in transit. I'll bet newer and younger players have a lower tollerance than older players.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Testing gunsights offline on a special events historic map, I discovered why you don't want airbases closer than 3\4 of a sector from each other. Your FPS starts dropping by looking in the direction of the other feild offline with 6 drones in the pattern.
-
Great post and it is EXACTLY how the rest of us feel about attempting to prevent a base capture.
Would you be in favor of HTC creating a reason to defend a newly taken airbase? For example, ack doesn't come up immediately and the flags stay white much longer after capture. Imho, until something like does occur, gameplay will continue to suffer.
YES!!
JUGgler
-
i remember when you could run into a town after the base was taken and deack it with an M3 and drop troops.
heck i remember one time when rooks and Bish where fighting for a base and i think rooks took it. me and another LTAR where hiding in the buildings with M3s with troops when we saw they all landed we took out the two ack guns that didnt shoot at you and dropped troops and took the base back in 2 minutes LMFAO 200 just blew up
good times
-
YES!!
I know how you feel about it, I was curious if vRob felt the same way. ;)
-
It might be fun to set the arena up such that the war is won (actually....lost) when a country only has a single uncapturable field left.
People would have another reason to capture or defend fields if losing them removed the ability to launch.
As it is now, there is very little effect of an enemy running amok all over your country and rolling bases other than your country losing the war.
I've seen some epic battles where a country had only two fields left and battled back to take the map.
I often look at the map when a war is won and can't tell the difference between how it looks when fresh and new versus having lost the war.
I would hope losing or winning the war would be obvious from looking at the map but the only way I can tell a huge event just occurred (war being won)............. is when I see the yellow text message in the buffer that I don't have enough time to land before the server kicks me.
-
Great post and it is EXACTLY how the rest of us feel about attempting to prevent a base capture.
? For example, ack doesn't come up immediately and the flags stay white much longer after capture. Imho, until something like does occur, gameplay will continue to suffer.
I think it should be even simpler than this, and should be based on "the condition" of the base when it is captured.
Anything the base takers have destroyed during the capture should stay down for a further 20-30 minutes after said capture.
If they render the base to nothing to capture it, then they should defend nothing till it comes up!
I bet many would find ways to capture a base with minimum damage to it :aok and this would be good!
JUGgler
-
I would totally enjoy that and it might promote some pretty wild battles.
-
Would you be in favor of HTC creating a reason to defend a newly taken airbase? For example, ack doesn't come up immediately and the flags stay white much longer after capture. Imho, until something like does occur, gameplay will continue to suffer.
I would have not much hope that this or similar changes (like hangars staying down for extended times after capture) would change the general play dynamics. It possibly could even increase the phenomenon. After some adjustment time, the horde will learn to keep hangars up, and just become even bigger. They may defend now (but only as long as necessary), but that doesn't mean the other side will actually counter attack, not to speaking of defending that base in the first place.
Because one main important factor in the whole problem is the general unwillingness to react and to defend. The system as is does rarely create prolonged battles, because no place is "worth" it. All bases count the same for "the war", and if you can hope to grab two bases instead of defending (or re-capturing) a single one, it's clear what will happen most of the time.
It's that part of the game dynamics that I personally want to see changed the most. Create truly strategic hot-spots that are more worth fighting for than grabbing 3 different coastal VBases in insane horde NOE's. Either by reintroducing a kind of zone bases with big impact on local resupply, or additional regional ('zone') targets with a similar function, or by assigning a simple point value depending on base type and size for winning the war (like VBase=1, small Airfield=3, large airfield =6). Something so valuable that it's creating a battle, that it's worth fighting for even against fierce resistance.
-
I would have not much hope that this or similar changes (like hangars staying down for extended times after capture) would change the general play dynamics. It possibly could even increase the phenomenon. After some adjustment time, the horde will learn to keep hangars up, and just become even bigger. They may defend now (but only as long as necessary), but that doesn't mean the other side will actually counter attack, not to speaking of defending that base in the first place.
Because one main important factor in the whole problem is the general unwillingness to react and to defend. The system as is does rarely create prolonged battles, because no place is "worth" it. All bases count the same for "the war", and if you can hope to grab two bases instead of defending (or re-capturing) a single one, it's clear what will happen most of the time.
It's that part of the game dynamics that I personally want to see changed the most. Create truly strategic hot-spots that are more worth fighting for than grabbing 3 different coastal VBases in insane horde NOE's. Either by reintroducing a kind of zone bases with big impact on local resupply, or additional regional ('zone') targets with a similar function, or by assigning a simple point value depending on base type and size for winning the war (like VBase=1, small Airfield=3, large airfield =6). Something so valuable that it's creating a battle, that it's worth fighting for even against fierce resistance.
I think you want a "thinking mans" game, a sort of "strategic" chess match, where the Rommels and Pattons will emerge to lead their chess piece to ultimate victory! I think the average player plays for far simpler reasons Snail! I think most could care less of the "strategic" or "war victory" conditions as they do getting some kills and landing them hence have their "fun meter" pegged as high as possible!
I think most folks just want a fair and fun experience with the limited time they have online! By fair I mean less odiously one sided encounters. :aok
By fun I mean whatever brings them back for more! :aok
:salute :cheers:
JUGgler
-
I agree with Juggler.
I'd like to see one of your piecharts on overall time spent online; the average for players during the tours. I'm guessing most average about an hour and 15 minutes to an hour and a half of actual game time a day and the strategic war is almost impossible to manage in that shortened time period, particularly without any centralized command apparatus. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see strategic targets for the bomber guys, but forcing the game to operate solely on a strategic level isn't the way to go.
Right now, Aces High is almost all tactical combat, so we have large strategic bombers pinpointing airfields for destruction, massive numbers overwhelming an airfields defenses, etc. There has to be balance between the immediate gratification of the tactical war and the long term success of a strategic one. Changing the game so the pendulum swings in the opposite direction, from tactical to strategic, is also the wrong way to go.
-
I think you want a "thinking mans" game, a sort of "strategic" chess match,
No, I don't.
I just want the game giving incentives to shape the fight into fronts, to see more sustaine battles. The players should have a reason to stick to a battle instead of just going elsewhere at the slightest sign of resistance.
As it is now, all targets are worth the same, translated into real world: A small fishing village in Norway counts as much as Berlin or Tokio for the war, and that what makes defending so unattractive and sometimes futile even. Once the defenders have finally rallied, the well known 'leaders" have taken their mob in a NOE to a totally different place. And this is much more "chess like" than anything I have in mind.
As a matter of fact, we once had something in that direction. Called "zone bases". ;)
-
Right now, Aces High is almost all tactical combat, so we have large strategic bombers pinpointing airfields for destruction, massive numbers overwhelming an airfields defenses, etc. There has to be balance between the immediate gratification of the tactical war and the long term success of a strategic one. Changing the game so the pendulum swings in the opposite direction, from tactical to strategic, is also the wrong way to go.
I don't want to change the basic way the game is working.
-
If you remember the original "Base Capture Order" Hitech tested a few years ago - it was actually trying to aim at the same thing I am with my proposal. He had the same goal I have. Creating hot spots of action, clear & distinct fronts.
It just didn't work becasue it was way too rigid, took away all freedom of action (you could ONLY fight at that massive battle or nowhere at all) and worst of all, often ran into dead ends on the maps. The result was quite horrible. That's what I definitely want to avoid
-
No, I don't.
I just want the game giving incentives to shape the fight into fronts, to see more sustaine battles. The players should have a reason to stick to a battle instead of just going elsewhere at the slightest sign of resistance.
As it is now, all targets are worth the same, translated into real world: A small fishing village in Norway counts as much as Berlin or Tokio for the war, and that what makes defending so unattractive and sometimes futile even. Once the defenders have finally rallied, the well known 'leaders" have taken their mob in a NOE to a totally different place. And this is much more "chess like" than anything I have in mind.
As a matter of fact, we once had something in that direction. Called "zone bases". ;)
I don't think you'd have this result without some "restrictive" element to the game, ie: restrict which bases can be captured, restrict captures based on strategic values or some other "limiting" idea. I don't think limiting ones choices is ever the answer.
With my idea above you limit nothing, in fact bases can be taken in any fashion desired, Smashed to bits, surgically, or sneak the hell out of it, who cares?
If you choose to smash it to bits then you must defend it for 30 minutes or so till it is usable. This defense would be from another field as well as the folks your defending against will be from another field, giving some separation, altitude and planning space for whatever is to come. I bet in any of GHIs "smash and grab" missions he would have supported defense of the target until it was usable! As I believe most anyone would. As it is now there is no need to defend it as it pops almost instantly or very soon there after. Most players are "offensively" minded I think, and that goes for those who might wish to defend a base as well, but those types are virtually stuck with "immediate" defense from the attacked base because of the timing involved. With my idea they would have a choice, they could defend the attacked base, wading thru the horde and vulchers time and again trying to get that one shot on the troops to "make a difference", suffering 20+ deaths in the process OR they could prepare a counterattack themselves from a nearby base to try and retake the base! Ironically the original attackers also have a choice to make, #1 crush the base, making it unusable for 30 minutes but easily capturable or take the base "HOT" hoping to use it to defend from it, or any combination in between! This way everyone has choices with no weird restrictions! :aok
JUGgler
-
I don't think limiting ones choices is ever the answer.
Exactly. And that's why I am making these suggestions of mine :aok
-
I'm for the opposite of restricting capture.
I feel all bases should be captured to win or lose the war.
Having an opponent taking your last base would be a huge incentive to actually fight.
-
That is the way it used to be, Icepak. It was horrid, the last several hours it was a vulchfest until the defenders all logged off. You don't want that, trust me.
-
Having an opponent taking your last base would be a huge incentive to actually fight.
Which opponent?
Both? Then you can forget winning the war.
One? See Deliriums answer.
-
I can log in seconds after the war was won by one country and can't even tell that any war has been won by looking at the map.
Much of the incentive to take a base has been removed.
-
I think it should be even simpler than this, and should be based on "the condition" of the base when it is captured.
Anything the base takers have destroyed during the capture should stay down for a further 20-30 minutes after said capture.
If they render the base to nothing to capture it, then they should defend nothing till it comes up!
I bet many would find ways to capture a base with minimum damage to it :aok and this would be good!
JUGgler
sounds good then the bases remain uncapturable for the whole
time the said map is up. :banana:
-
Which opponent?
Both? Then you can forget winning the war.
One? See Deliriums answer.
I'd bet very, very few care much about this! There are some who do (and there is nothing wrong with it) but most I bet do not.
Maybe 2-3 peeps log on daily, study the map and (in their mind) formulate a plan for conquest of the map. Most folks log on for some fun an hour or 2 at best. If they've spent the night in the tower time and again from odious unfairness and lame play, they'll go to bed (questioning IF they should continue wasting their $ and time) angry at the game. If they've PWNed all night (or something in the middle) then they will go to bed feeling the "force" and excited to return the next day. I think the motivation really is this simple.
I don't see how you could get folks to care about winning the war when their main focus at any given time is finding a reasonably fair fight and/or winning the current engagement they may be in. I do think folks would like to have their efforts "MATTER" to the game in some way, but what that looks like I'm not sure but I'm pretty sure it's not (concerted war winning strategies)! I believe we ALL have more selfish reasons for how we would like to (MATTER) to the game!
JUGgler
-
sounds good then the bases remain uncapturable for the whole
time the said map is up. :banana:
How do you figure they would be uncapturable? He is proposing that the ack doesn't pop back up instantly so they people the "took" the base had better defend it or it can be taken back by a single guy hiding in the trees with an M3/troops.
I'd bet very, very few care much about this! There are some who do (and there is nothing wrong with it) but most I bet do not.
Maybe 2-3 peeps log on daily, study the map and (in their mind) formulate a plan for conquest of the map. Most folks log on for some fun an hour or 2 at best. If they've spent the night in the tower time and again from odious unfairness and lame play, they'll go to bed (questioning IF they should continue wasting their $ and time) angry at the game. If they've PWNed all night (or something in the middle) then they will go to bed feeling the "force" and excited to return the next day. I think the motivation really is this simple.
I don't see how you could get folks to care about winning the war when their main focus at any given time is finding a reasonably fair fight and/or winning the current engagement they may be in. I do think folks would like to have their efforts "MATTER" to the game in some way, but what that looks like I'm not sure but I'm pretty sure it's not (concerted war winning strategies)! I believe we ALL have more selfish reasons for how we would like to (MATTER) to the game!
JUGgler
I think you would be surprised how many people think about winning the war. Most are realistic enough to know that it might not happen on their "watch" but still will spend their time working toward that goal. While they may not get the "win" while they are on, they can also hide the fact that they are "losing" because the rest of the team didn't defend, or push forward.
When it's you against someone else there is a very definite winner and a loser. Many don't have the skill to be the "winner" in those situations and so hide behind the "team". I'm sure that for many they do transition towards the "individual" at some point, but I think most are happy with the team aspect of the game and work toward it each time they are on.
Personally I love a great fight, but that is ANY kind of fight. Fighters 1 vs 1, fighters in a furball, GVs spawn camping (tho not much of a "fight" unless your the "camped"), GV running battle, missions for bases, to capture, or defend. I like winning the war. The perks are unimportant as I have thousands, but the "battle" for the win is what I look for.
-
Man the muppets have to bring back the epic air battles we had a while back, muppets would organize over two countries for a fighter sweep - using two planes that performed similar and gathered 15-20 in the missions then squared off.
Those were good times, I might have to switch knights and try to plan one some day.
-
How do you figure they would be uncapturable? He is proposing that the ack doesn't pop back up instantly so they people the "took" the base had better defend it or it can be taken back by a single guy hiding in the trees with an M3/troops.
I think you would be surprised how many people think about winning the war. Most are realistic enough to know that it might not happen on their "watch" but still will spend their time working toward that goal. While they may not get the "win" while they are on, they can also hide the fact that they are "losing" because the rest of the team didn't defend, or push forward.
When it's you against someone else there is a very definite winner and a loser. Many don't have the skill to be the "winner" in those situations and so hide behind the "team". I'm sure that for many they do transition towards the "individual" at some point, but I think most are happy with the team aspect of the game and work toward it each time they are on.
Personally I love a great fight, but that is ANY kind of fight. Fighters 1 vs 1, fighters in a furball, GVs spawn camping (tho not much of a "fight" unless your the "camped"), GV running battle, missions for bases, to capture, or defend. I like winning the war. The perks are unimportant as I have thousands, but the "battle" for the win is what I look for.
Snail, I think you and I agree and would like a similar outcome, we are just entering the same house from different doors!
:salute
JUGgler
-
Limitlessness kicks boredom into full gear. And pilot lives are the #1 limitless resource in our game. Give me something with a finite number to go after: bases, field elements, etc.
As to folks hiding in a horde, I don't know. Part of is the banter and fun. Another part is the likelihood that they will do the chasing rather than being chased. And, perhaps, the biggest plus is safety. They've never learned how to remain alive -- which fights to push and from which to withdraw.
Lately, nicking field ack has become fun for me. It's easy to spot the new players who give chase with not only no hope of catching, but of scuttling their chance of nailing me on a 3rd or 4th pass. No one as taught them any different when it comes to "how to." Saw that on the bish side last week when beaucoup bish were chasing a low Tempest making repeated passes trying to defend a town. Calls to reverse and climb away from the Temp were met with derision. Ahh, it's just how things are.
-
I miss defending NOE base take missions, so much fun. I do not miss flying NOE base take missions, so boring.
Well you missed the mother of all noe's Thursday. I couldn't count the b17s heading to 83 I believe. They were on deck with about 5 escorts. Fortunately or unfortunately the escorts were high over the NOE mission. Rapier was near their base, 100. I called out what's there. "A horde of 17s. All on the deck" (Or something like that). I was about 17k being use to high alt bombers. When I spotted them I thought how in the world do get over the top with out smacking the water. Short answer can't. Took a deep breath and went for the pilot of the 17 on the outer skirts of the horde. Zipping in at around 500 mph it's not easy to train your guns. Finally inched over and took the wing off the center 17 and just barely missed the water. Only took a light ping.
Much to my surprise I got a 2nd kill. Then I realized the 17 pilot didn't jump planes fast enough. Say this could be fun! Now they are approaching the base and have to grab. I loop back and take out another. Then maybe they didn't plan the mission very well. From the angle of attack there's a steep hill of about 3 to 4k behind the base. As I dove in again I see them straining to make the hill. another proxie, then another as they crashed into the side of the mountain. Then one is wisely turning the 17 for all she's worth. He's about to make it. Opportunity knocks. I take him out and his remain drone hits the mountain. Finally I sweep in behind one of the escorts and down he goes. I'm low fuel and low ammo. By this time a dozen p51s are in the area looking for revenge. I slip out the back side and am spotted by a yak and a 51. It's a long ways to safety and I'm on auxiliary. I wep it up and hope for the best. They dive after me. Slowly they gain.
I stay true to my path. Finally they fear a higher friendly and they pull off. I see rapier land 7, I landed 8, and FBLazy lands 9. Maybe knights can't take bases but they sure do get some kills.
-
I'd bet very, very few care much about this! There are some who do (and there is nothing wrong with it) but most I bet do not.
In my opinion this is absolutely opposite. The ability to wage war - and especially to win it - is the main driving force behind the MA game dynamics, no matter how relaxed each individual pilot's stance on it. That's why the old method of winning the war was changed in the first place, why the percentage of fields needed for a win was adjusted or the flag and town percentage was introduced.
Taking away the "war" from AH would hurt the game tremendously.
-
Man the muppets have to bring back the epic air battles we had a while back, muppets would organize over two countries for a fighter sweep - using two planes that performed similar and gathered 15-20 in the missions then squared off.
Those were good times, I might have to switch knights and try to plan one some day.
This. :aok
-
The town right now can be WF in 2 passes the old town took 3 also the new town can be deacked in 3 passes not to sure about old town but this new town is way easier to kill then the old town and the need to shut down a base is b/c if there is 5 attackers all it takes is 1 defender to stop the take defenders die reup over and over attackers cant so the attackers go in level base to increase there odds of taking it and not failing. far as a 40 man horde goes if there aint 20 defenders upping repeatedly then its gone and its rare to see that many ppl up and defend
-
How do you figure they would be uncapturable? He is proposing that the ack doesn't pop back up instantly so they people the "took" the base had better defend it or it can be taken back by a single guy hiding in the trees with an M3/troops.
I think you would be surprised how many people think about winning the war. Most are realistic enough to know that it might not happen on their "watch" but still will spend their time working toward that goal. While they may not get the "win" while they are on, they can also hide the fact that they are "losing" because the rest of the team didn't defend, or push forward.
When it's you against someone else there is a very definite winner and a loser. Many don't have the skill to be the "winner" in those situations and so hide behind the "team". I'm sure that for many they do transition towards the "individual" at some point, but I think most are happy with the team aspect of the game and work toward it each time they are on.
Personally I love a great fight, but that is ANY kind of fight. Fighters 1 vs 1, fighters in a furball, GVs spawn camping (tho not much of a "fight" unless your the "camped"), GV running battle, missions for bases, to capture, or defend. I like winning the war. The perks are unimportant as I have thousands, but the "battle" for the win is what I look for.
:salute
-
I miss the old days of Lynchmob, Jumpers, LCA and Thunder. It was good because there was a horde for each country... and you knew that sooner or later the hordes would bump into one another, and lo and behold, 50 plane furball...
Ahh as a noob getting whacked into the turf, nothing was more chaotic and fun.
P.S
Once the Delta returns........ Aluminum clouds... shall blot out the sky.
-
Odd but in all my years I don't recall any base taking squads.
you gotta remember at least one. i left them to come join the 80th.
the hired guns.
the soars