Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: haggerty on July 05, 2012, 07:21:58 AM
-
Recently while trying to capture a port base we began to wonder why the base was not being captured after releasing our troops. It soon became clear that the enemy was upping a storch and bailing in the hanger just so they could shoot the troops. VH and all guns were down. This is extremely gamey and should be addressed. If you bail too low to the ground you should be towered instantly, if not, the paratroopers should be able to fire at pilots.
Yes you can destroy the Storch hanger but I doubt Hitech intended for that to be necessary to capture a base.
-
Yes you can destroy the Storch hanger but I doubt Hitech intended for that to be necessary to capture a base.
Yes he did.
The FH was explicitly added just because of the tactic you described. So it was intended to be necessary to be destroyed.
-
Well, there are some historical precedents... http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2005/KristinaArthurs.shtml
:)
-
Storch was added so that people could walk around fields with a .45?
If that was the intent, they should make it so the paratroopers can defend themselves.
-
Storch was added so that people could walk around fields with a .45?
That was not the intention. :)
-
(Sigh..) just blow up the hangar & strafe the maproom. No Storch, no pilot, no problem. :rolleyes:
-
(Sigh..) just blow up the hangar & strafe the maproom. No Storch, no pilot, no problem. :rolleyes:
Yes, I know that is the solution right now, doesnt mean a fix cant be wished for.
-
Maproom was strafed several times...those little men are hard to see when they are hiding in trees though. Its hard enough to see a vehicle from the air, let alone a man hiding. However when said man shoots his .45 at soldiers, the soldiers would likely know where to return fire.
-
Maproom was strafed several times...those little men are hard to see when they are hiding in trees though. Its hard enough to see a vehicle from the air, let alone a man hiding. However when said man shoots his .45 at soldiers, the soldiers would likely know where to return fire.
Not if they are drunks, as I often hear them referred to in game.
-
Yes, I know that is the solution right now, doesnt mean a fix cant be wished for.
The FH was the fix.
-
why should it be insta death for stepping out and a storch in the hanger? Bomb 1 more hanger Im sure SOMEONE in the horde has the ords.
-
why should it be insta death for stepping out and a storch in the hanger? Bomb 1 more hanger Im sure SOMEONE in the horde has the ords.
+1
-
You guys are just arguing for the sake to argue, its not so much I have a problem with people bailing and shooting troops, I suppose my problem is the paratroopers dont fire back. Sure they shouldnt shoot down planes or destroy tanks, but pilots that decide to shoot at them should be fair game.
-
I usually attack ports with the jug N and have made a nice bag of free proxies from vdudes who do it.
they cant get far or close enough to map room before they are getting gunned down by 8x 50 cals. Gamey yes, free kills and target practice = fun :aok
-
Maproom was strafed several times...those little men are hard to see when they are hiding in trees though. Its hard enough to see a vehicle from the air, let alone a man hiding. However when said man shoots his .45 at soldiers, the soldiers would likely know where to return fire.
There are many ways around this problem already available in the game.
That said, I do feel (comparatively) 6VHs (at 2500 toughness each) in adition to the Storch hangar AND in adition to the manned and auto AAA (including the 17-pounders and two 88s) is a little overkill.... how many players, one sortie, is it intended it to take/capture a Vbase being defended by one (1) person or equal numbers?
It's something I'm always pondering and perplexed at... especialy given if its a large map in rotation, it takes a small (or larger) horde (aka: half-organized group of players) to take down a Vbase in a single effort, but these fields can be spread out 1-2 sectors from the nearest friendly airfield... so does that mean they should be harder/tougher?... :headscratch:
-
There are many ways around this problem already available in the game.
That said, I do feel (comparatively) 6VHs (at 2500 toughness each) in adition to the Storch hangar AND in adition to the manned and auto AAA (including the 17-pounders and two 88s) is a little overkill.... how many players, one sortie, is it intended it to take/capture a Vbase being defended by one (1) person or equal numbers?
It's something I'm always pondering and perplexed at... especialy given if its a large map in rotation, it takes a small (or larger) horde (aka: half-organized group of players) to take down a Vbase in a single effort, but these fields can be spread out 1-2 sectors from the nearest friendly airfield... so does that mean they should be harder/tougher?... :headscratch:
Only four VHs
-
10 paras (who can capture an entire town remember) are decimated by one guy with an ACP and no infantry training ... yup its gamey nonsense.
if that wasnt bad enough, a few mins after this happened I went to rearm and get tagged by a pilot on the rearm pad. how is this possible? either the field ack doesnt shoot at pilots, or he managed a headshot from hundreds of yards out.
edit: this got me thinking - maybe instead of taking 4 or 5 guys to capture a base like we normally do, next time we should get 40-50 guys just to make sure ...
-
You could always designate volinteers to bail over the feild and run around hunting the bailed Storch pilots. Did that once by accident and surprised a parachuted fighter pilot I had shot down over the GV base in the map room becasue I wanted to be sneeky by hiding in it to protect our inbound troops. It was a late slow night with two of us capturing a GV base and about 95 players in the LWMA on a giant map.
I always wondered why we didn't have the ability to join an M3 carrying troops with the option to exit it first with a tommy gun to protect troops from downed pilots at map rooms. It could be used as a prototype for the future if HTC adds FPS ground troops. Think of the M3's at the GV base you are attacking upping to release map room defenders with tommy guns. How's about an M3 that sneeks within 1k of an airfeild, releases you with your tommy gun and you hide at the end of the runway zapping pilots in the cockpit as they spawn.
Downsides:
60 vTards running around your feild with tommy guns. Next thing they will be whining for bazookas and satchel bombs to destroy buildings. That would also mean the potential of less aircombat with players migrating to FPS assaults which would be easier than constantly being cannon fodder in the air. I keep forgetting how long it takes the new player to become confident in a fighter. Sorry about that......
-
Only four VHs
Meant that. It seems imbalanced in a single defender's (or more) favor, thus encouraging a horde air-raid tactic on a vehicle-centric target.
10 paras (who can capture an entire town remember) are decimated by one guy with an ACP and no infantry training ... yup its gamey nonsense.
if that wasnt bad enough, a few mins after this happened I went to rearm and get tagged by a pilot on the rearm pad. how is this possible? either the field ack doesnt shoot at pilots, or he managed a headshot from hundreds of yards out.
edit: this got me thinking - maybe instead of taking 4 or 5 guys to capture a base like we normally do, next time we should get 40-50 guys just to make sure ...
DING DING DING DING, winner winner, chicken dinner.
Now, throw in one of the larger MA maps. Most VBases on most those maps are 1-2 sectors from the nearest friendly airfield.
-
That would also mean the potential of less aircombat with players migrating to FPS assaults which would be easier than constantly being cannon fodder in the air. I keep forgetting how long it takes the new player to become confident in a fighter. Sorry about that......
This is already happening on a large scale for a long time now, and seemingly at an ever accelerating rate. In tour 147 we had almost as many ground vs ground kills as air vs air kills. If this trend continues (and I don't see many reasons for it not to do so) Aces High will become a kind of Aces Low in the near future (I don't mean that deprecatory in any way)
-
You guys are just arguing for the sake to argue, its not so much I have a problem with people bailing and shooting troops, I suppose my problem is the paratroopers dont fire back. Sure they shouldnt shoot down planes or destroy tanks, but pilots that decide to shoot at them should be fair game.
ok fine yea I'll go with let em shoot back, hell a while back there was a wish that they would blow any building up too Id be fine with that but you'd have to drop more than 10
-
edit: this got me thinking - maybe instead of taking 4 or 5 guys to capture a base like we normally do, next time we should get 40-50 guys just to make sure ...
Isnt this SOP?
-
This is already happening on a large scale for a long time now, and seemingly at an ever accelerating rate. In tour 147 we had almost as many ground vs ground kills as air vs air kills. If this trend continues (and I don't see many reasons for it not to do so) Aces High will become a kind of Aces Low in the near future (I don't mean that deprecatory in any way)
A big reason for those numbers in the spawn battles though, tanks are constantly dieing and reupping every few seconds, its no suprise the kill count could surpass air kills.
-
A big reason for those numbers in the spawn battles though, tanks are constantly dieing and reupping every few seconds, its no suprise the kill count could surpass air kills.
This is correct, but that hasn't changed, it's been that way almost forever. So it's still indicating a big change in AH gaming culture when the absolute number g2g kills go up steadily, while the number of a2a kills drop off almost dramatically.
More and more players are spending more and more time in vehicles.
-
Lusche,
Have you reached the point yet that you can suggest what the odds are for new players in how often they will die in a fighter versus a GV before they have aquire the skill to break even on killing and being killed? GV's have the illusion of hideing in plain sight for awhile becasue they are on the ground and your travel is 2 dimensional. Fighters....eventualy no matter how high you come in, if you want to shoot at the red guys, you have to get close up and personal with all of the risk and effort involved learning the complex 3 dimensional skill sets needed to succeed as a fighter pilot.
I also wonder for some of the newer generation entering Aces High if the GV game isn't more aligned to the skills they bring with them from other FPS games? The aircombat in this game is a demading motherwuker intollerant of FPS style skills. After all what was the number of fighter pilots in the U.S. militairy branches versus the number of ground based combat troops and GV crews in WW2?
Not everyone likes hanging their bare skinny out in the chilly high alt breezes for a year or more just to learn how not to get it shot off. GV's have some illusion of safety while you sneek around in the bushes sniping at other GV's. No matter the endevor from games to leading nations, one thing you can measure as a constant in human beings is risk tollerance levels related to outcomes.
-
Lusche,
Have you reached the point yet that you can suggest what the odds are for new players in how often they will die in a fighter versus a GV before they have aquire the skill to break even on killing and being killed?
Not really. It's very possible that a majority of players never even gets to that "break even" point, but it's very difficult for me to quantify, as I can not track players, only 'pilots' by the Pilot ID, making long time studies kinda futile.
I think the change towards more GV activity is caused by two factors: motivation: genuine interest in ww2 aviation and flight simming which keeps him trying to overcome the difficulties of air combat (which is imho declining) - and accessibility, in which GV have a huge advantage. Controlling a tanks with mouse and WASD is very simple compared to flying a fighter with a mouse only...
But I think this rather deserves a thread of it's own than a hijacked wish thread ;)
-
So you're saying if a pilot gets out of his plane while it's stopped on the ground he should instantly die? Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think that's what happens to real world pilots.
-
10 paras (who can capture an entire town remember) are decimated by one guy with an ACP and no infantry training ... yup its gamey nonsense.
if that wasnt bad enough, a few mins after this happened I went to rearm and get tagged by a pilot on the rearm pad. how is this possible? either the field ack doesnt shoot at pilots, or he managed a headshot from hundreds of yards out.
edit: this got me thinking - maybe instead of taking 4 or 5 guys to capture a base like we normally do, next time we should get 40-50 guys just to make sure ...
That was me at the rearm pad.
Try creeping up to a field and avoid the field ack to find safe haven behind a building.
It's not easy.
I shot your cockpit from 30 feet away twice until it sprayed red and I figured you would .ef at that point..........but you didn't so I fired more.
After that, I walked to the selection hanger, traded moves with the troops, climbed onto the roof, and stood there until some guy in a jeep shot me up.
-
Recently while trying to capture a port base we began to wonder why the base was not being captured after releasing our troops. It soon became clear that the enemy was upping a storch and bailing in the hanger just so they could shoot the troops. VH and all guns were down. This is extremely gamey and should be addressed. If you bail too low to the ground you should be towered instantly, if not, the paratroopers should be able to fire at pilots.
Yes you can destroy the Storch hanger but I doubt Hitech intended for that to be necessary to capture a base.
I have gotten out of planes on the ground lots of times and never so much as stubbed a toe. So isn't your Insta-Tower just as gamey
as you claim the bad guys are?
-
That was me at the rearm pad.
I assumed you were close, I just couldnt understand how I got sniped since all the ack was up (I did a combat landing pattern like always to check ack/radar/darbar etc). I always assumed ack would shoot at a pilot like it does chutes, GV supplies etc.
-
I have gotten out of planes on the ground lots of times and never so much as stubbed a toe. So isn't your Insta-Tower just as gamey
as you claim the bad guys are?
I suggested 500ft because there is no logical reason to bail from a plane below that altitude unless you plan to run around shooting paratroopers.
So you're saying if a pilot gets out of his plane while it's stopped on the ground he should instantly die? Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think that's what happens to real world pilots.
I'm not saying the pilot should die, im saying your sortie should be over and you are back in the tower. Correct me if im wrong, but pilots in real life dont jump out of perfectly good airplanes unless they are ready to finish their sortie.
-
I'm not saying the pilot should die, im saying your sortie should be over and you are back in the tower. Correct me if im wrong, but pilots in real life dont jump out of perfectly good airplanes unless they are ready to finish their sortie.
Yes but that doesn't mean some psycho might then decide to go run around with a gun and shoot people does it?
-
I suggested 500ft because there is no logical reason to bail from a plane below that altitude unless you plan to run around shooting paratroopers.
I'm not saying the pilot should die, im saying your sortie should be over and you are back in the tower. Correct me if im wrong, but pilots in real life dont jump out of perfectly good airplanes unless they are ready to finish their sortie.
Pilots in real life always land with the wheels down unless they are damaged.
-
I suggested 500ft because there is no logical reason to bail from a plane below that altitude unless you plan to run around shooting paratroopers.
That is not correct. You just want a different fix than dropping the hanger. You don't seem to care about unintended consequences for pilots who don't run around with .45's but might have good reasons to bail out below 500 ft.
If this trend continues (and I don't see many reasons for it not to do so) Aces High will become a kind of Aces Low in the near future (I don't mean that deprecatory in any way)
It will still be Aces High... targets below. :D