Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Raga on August 30, 2012, 02:38:17 PM

Title: change to strats?
Post by: Raga on August 30, 2012, 02:38:17 PM
On facebook today HTC posted that they changed their strats system "its a more straightforward system". so can anybody shed some light on the subject of what exactly it is that they did?

thanks

Raga54
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: skribetm on August 30, 2012, 02:59:38 PM
http://bit.ly/SWtWuS (http://bit.ly/SWtWuS)

(http://i.minus.com/iDoQTsqSXKNXk.png)
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 03:05:18 PM
Killing the City extends downtime of town buildings from 30 to 150 minutes :)
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 100Coogn on August 30, 2012, 03:18:23 PM
Sweet.  May just have to dust off my 17's...

Coogan  :airplane:
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 04:39:16 PM
I see a big downside right now, so big I think it's not really intended to be this way: Only one single load of field supplies does now instantly bring up destroyed objects on fields, even when they just went down. Standard downtime is 30 minutes, but supplies reduce that by 30 minutes...
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: ToeTag on August 30, 2012, 04:42:47 PM
I see a big downside right now, so big I think it's not really intended to be this way: Only one single load of field supplies does now instantly bring up destroyed objects on fields, even when they just went down. Standard downtime is 30 minutes, but supplies reduce that by 30 minutes...

um this does not seem right....have not tried it but dang that must be a box of easy buttons.   :rofl
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 04:48:37 PM
Tested it on several fields. 5 mins after dar and ords were down I had them back up with a single cargo run.
A single run will also restore all acks in a town...  :uhoh
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Rebel on August 30, 2012, 04:52:20 PM
Ooooooh- keep it like this!

That's AWESOME.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 04:55:02 PM
Ooooooh- keep it like this!

That's AWESOME.

No, that's a gamebreaker.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Rebel on August 30, 2012, 04:57:06 PM
No, that's a gamebreaker.

Might wanna check that sarcasm meter there, hoss. :)
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 04:59:58 PM
Might wanna check that sarcasm meter there, hoss. :)

Might wanna check your sarcasm technique.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Babalonian on August 30, 2012, 05:19:33 PM
Killing the City extends downtime of town buildings from 30 to 150 minutes :)

Looks like guns (I asume the AAA vareity) are up in damage to 100lbs of damage, compared to 50lbs for a convoy veicle? 
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: perdue3 on August 30, 2012, 05:22:46 PM
Might wanna check your sarcasm technique.

Agreed.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: climber on August 30, 2012, 05:39:28 PM
yep a single box to bring up ack is a bit quick. 

Maybe a percentage of revitalization as opposed to a time recoup could be better.  For example a box cuts time down by 25% or some other percentage.  I'm not sure how the programming works but maybe when the downtime has expired to a certain amount for example :30 seconds remaining then a box would complete the rebuild as opposed to the percentage.

This may need to be included in the wishlist.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 05:48:37 PM
I'm quite sure this is an oversight. Right now I'm running my m3 across Nitland and doing magic. Sometimes the enemy that just killed the ords is still over the field when they pop back up.

The downtime restore should simply set to the same value as the one for factory resupply: 4 minutes instead of 30. No programming required. :)
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Babalonian on August 30, 2012, 06:03:44 PM
I'm quite sure this is an oversight. Right now I'm running my m3 across Nitland and doing magic. Sometimes the enemy that just killed the ords is still over the field when they pop back up.

The downtime restore should simply set to the same value as the one for factory resupply: 4 minutes instead of 30. No programming required. :)

I'm curious, in this manner, if we could resuply the strats, I know we can resuply the HQ...

I see the M3 in my future tonight as well, lol.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 06:06:13 PM
I'm curious, in this manner, if we could resuply the strats

Yes, the factories.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Babalonian on August 30, 2012, 06:18:54 PM
Yes, the factories.

Oh man, yeah, this will get fixed tomorrow, lol.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 06:22:43 PM
Oh man, yeah, this will get fixed tomorrow, lol.

Why? Factories had always been resupplyable, and only recently the ressuply value was lowered to 4 minutes (as I wrote above) from 30 minutes.
As a factory stays down 180 minutes, that's a lot of C-47 sorties...
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Babalonian on August 30, 2012, 06:34:59 PM
Wait a minute, now I'm confused snail, I thought you said one package was resuplying fields a lot more/quicker than it should.  By that logic they're resuplying HQs and strats more too.  So I understand they're down for 180 minutes now, but doesnt that also mean with this resuply quirk it can be resuplied quicker/easier and restored relatively easily(er)?
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 06:36:43 PM
Wait a minute, now I'm confused snail, I thought you said one package was resuplying fields a lot more/quicker than it should.  By that logic they're resuplying HQs and strats more too. 

No. resupply restore times for factories and field opbjects are different. Setting is 4 minutes for factory and 30 minutes.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: MachNix on August 30, 2012, 06:39:08 PM
If a field resource, such as fuel, is destroyed and then the fuel factory is hit, does it change the time fuel will be back up at the field?  Or put another way, does the status of a factory change the value of the supply convoy?

It is possible the system is set up where the condition of the controlling factory is check when the object is destroyed to determine the downtime.  From there the status of the factory has no impact on the object's recovery time.

Trying to determine if it is worth hitting (or resupplying) a factory AFTER a field resource is taken down.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: SPKmes on August 30, 2012, 07:05:29 PM
Careful Lusche...we don't want a repeat of 200 the other day now do we  :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol .... Are you sure about this...have you been playing long enough to know these things  :t
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: DREDIOCK on August 30, 2012, 07:10:36 PM
No, that's a gamebreaker.

I wouldnt say game breaker. But I cant say Im for it.

I'd be happy if they just went back to the old strat system and zone bases.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 07:11:45 PM
It's rediculous. I reduced downtime of stuff on a certain Vbase to less than 5 seconds. Nikki dives down, takes out dar, and while still in the AA fire the dar pops back up, because Snailman was waiting in his M3.
I did this several times in a row. The longest time they could ever get down the guns on field was about 3 minutes, just because a single player was hauling supps in.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: SPKmes on August 30, 2012, 07:14:37 PM
It's rediculous. I reduced downtime of stuff on a certain Vbase to less than 5 seconds. Nikki dives down, takes out dar, and while still in the AA fire the dar pops back up, because Snailman was waiting in his M3.
I did this several times in a row. The longest time they could ever get down the guns on field was about 3 minutes, just because a single player was hauling supps in.


So then does this mean the factories strats actually need to be dropped to cause a lasting effect? ...bringing the the strats more into the game again?
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Scherf on August 30, 2012, 07:17:29 PM
^ one can only hope.

Mentioned in a previous thread how some dude in an M3 effectively held a couple dozen of us at bay by doing supply runs.

Can't say if that's a good or bad thing, hope he got a lot of perks.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 07:22:16 PM

So then does this mean the factories strats actually need to be dropped to cause a lasting effect? ...bringing the the strats more into the game again?


I'd almost say you'd need to constantly flatten the strats with the current settings to have about the same balance of destruction vs manual resupply effiency as before. I don't think that this is viable or desired.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 07:25:12 PM
Ha! Just as I wrote this ^^^^, HT reduced the resupply time effect to 10 mins  :banana:
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 100Coogn on August 30, 2012, 07:38:36 PM
I wouldnt say game breaker. But I cant say Im for it.

I'd be happy if they just went back to the old strat system and zone bases.

+1  At least, for me anyways, it was more of a challenge to go strike a dar factory, or fuel factory.  Sometimes simultaneous with my squad.  I miss the coordination of a nice strat/milk run.

Coogan
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Babalonian on August 30, 2012, 08:13:36 PM
OK, so, now it's 4 minutes "bonus/acceleration" per "unit/package" for resupplied factories, and 10 minutes for fields?
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 30, 2012, 08:22:07 PM
yes.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: kvuo75 on August 30, 2012, 08:35:00 PM
16.87 perks for a box of cargo dropped at ammo factory that was only down to 38% (it's still at 38% now too, half hour later)

so it will be good bomber perk farming.  probably better than hitting town centers. (?)

Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 321BAR on August 30, 2012, 09:37:41 PM
Dusts off the P51... ladies and gentlemen the 20th now has a reason to exist in game again... anyone need an escort soon? :)
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: shiv on August 30, 2012, 09:42:14 PM
Nice catch. I was wondering why dar was popping so fast tonight.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: thndregg on August 30, 2012, 10:26:17 PM
Killing the City extends downtime of town buildings from 30 to 150 minutes :)

You just made my night.  ;)

Look out for a ****load of escorted B17's. :cool:
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: thndregg on August 30, 2012, 10:30:41 PM
Dusts off the P51... ladies and gentlemen the 20th now has a reason to exist in game again... anyone need an escort soon? :)

We'd be glad to be in your company. <S> :)
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 68Raptor on August 30, 2012, 10:31:07 PM
Count us in on that also!
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Scherf on August 30, 2012, 10:57:20 PM
Does "killing the city" mean down to 0%, or something less?

I guess the news isn't out yet. Just spent a few hours trying to intercept inbound buffs at altitude, most just bailed or went in to fields at 10k.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 31, 2012, 04:06:59 AM
Does "killing the city" mean down to 0%, or something less?


To get the maximum effect of 150 minutes, yes. But every city tile detstroyed counts.

As a matter of fact, the City is very important now. Not only because the standard downtime of towns has been cut by 1/3rd down to 30 minutes, but because the town buildings can now be resupplied. And it takes only 3 loads of cargo to bring it back up if the City had not been hit.



I guess the news isn't out yet. Just spent a few hours trying to intercept inbound buffs at altitude, most just bailed or went in to fields at 10k.


It will take time for the changes to really get known to and understood  by the people. We had years of "the strats ain't worth it" and basically nobody cared about them. And now there is this big change, but only a small note on FB and in the News & Announcements section. And not even an explanation, one would have to figure out the changes from the help section on the website. I' am curious how long it will really take for the populace to fully recognice the importance of the mechanism I described above. 7 years in AH land made me a pessimist in that regard...


---------


And there is one issue I still have. Well, not really an issue, possibly more of an personal preference. But I really do not like the new .dt command much. Yes, it's a great tool at first look, but I'm not very fond of that huge reduction of fog of war. "Is the town down?" "Was that CV X? that I just hit"? "How long until hangars pop?"
Players knowing that the town or the VH will be back up in exactly 1.4 minutes may take out some exiting moments, IMHO.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 68Raptor on August 31, 2012, 05:43:32 AM
And there is one issue I still have. Well, not really an issue, possibly more of an personal preference. But I really do not like the new .dt command much. Yes, it's a great tool at first look, but I'm not very fond of that huge reduction of fog of war. "Is the town down?" "Was that CV X? that I just hit"? "How long until hangars pop?"
Players knowing that the town or the VH will be back up in exactly 1.4 minutes may take out some exiting moments, IMHO.


Agreed and disagree. If there is a timer can it be made so you can only see your own country's items? If so, then can there just be a small bit of text added to the chalkboard in the tower showing an approximate time before the hanger is rebuilt. Call it the engineers board or something?   
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Citabria on August 31, 2012, 06:02:58 AM
so what effect do trains and convoys have on downtimes? is 180min including the ai resupply?
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: HawkerMKII on August 31, 2012, 06:03:46 AM
Last night I got over 200 perks dropping supplies in town in lvt's on several runs. One run it said I had supplied 74 objects, did not know you could supply 76 objects in town?
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Scherf on August 31, 2012, 06:19:16 AM
HTC really should send you a T-shirt or something, Lusche.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on August 31, 2012, 06:39:46 AM
Last night I got over 200 perks dropping supplies in town in lvt's on several runs. One run it said I had supplied 74 objects, did not know you could supply 76 objects in town?

Buildings.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 31, 2012, 07:15:50 AM
Last night I got over 200 perks dropping supplies in town in lvt's on several runs. One run it said I had supplied 74 objects, did not know you could supply 76 objects in town?

I'm not sure if being able to resupply the town buildings is a good idea at all for gameplay balance, but the perks are definitely out of whack. 30 perks for a single drop in a town at modifier 1.0 that's not even white flagged. Simlar at the strats, where the resupply value of 4 minutes means you can harvest perks for more than one hour.
If the word spreads around will may see more people doing resupply runs that doing combat, because the perk gain in combat is puny compared to running supplies.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Fish42 on August 31, 2012, 07:31:15 AM
 :furious This new sup system may work for fields and towns but for the low numbers late at night it SUCKS, 1 person in a NOE lanc can drop a HQ. But now it takes over 20 people 2 flights to get it back. When you have 7 people in the bloody AIR that means at most you can get 2-3 guys supping it without just letting someone roll your fields. Sorry but I want to FIGHT SOMEONE NOT SPEND 40 mins running sups so I can find a FIGHT IN AN AIR COMBAT SIM.


Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Hap on August 31, 2012, 07:34:57 AM
at the strats, where the resupply value of 4 minutes means you can harvest perks for more than one hour.  If the word spreads around will may see more people doing resupply runs that doing combat, because the perk gain in combat is puny compared to running supplies.

Harvesting strat resupply might put more 29's in the air.  Will have to see how all this shakes out in-game.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: SmokinLoon on August 31, 2012, 07:39:57 AM
Just relax, no sense in soiling your drawers.  I think this will be HUGE in the fact that now the industrial complex actually means something.  

Essentially, HTC has adjusted the stategic element to help match the number of players in the servers.  Case in point: if there are low numbers of players and the strats are not dealt with, the resupply times for the fields will help the defenders.  If there are enough players online to make a large enough mission to the industrial complex worth while, then there will be enough players to spread out over the map to compensate for the lack of quick field resupply. 

I like it, so far anyways.  Regardless, this change/adjustment is great for AH.  Maybe it is a start of some other adjustments we may see.   :aok
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Tilt on August 31, 2012, 07:42:04 AM
what is the priority of supply usage when different field object are competing for resupply ?  If a town is near flattened and AA down and I drop an M3 load of field supplies what uses them first? ground guns or town buildings?

There seems little use in killing a city to increase town down time if the greater part of the town and its AA can be resurrected in a few minutes by an M3?

Generally the mechanisms in place here seem ideal but the implementation of the timings seems to fight the original objectives.

Would seem to me that the timings with respect to supply effects on factories and field objects would be better reversed (to be -30 minute on factory object down times and -4 minute reduction on field object down times) this would be in balance with the effect of killing a convoy (+7mins) as a convoy should hold more supplies than an M3.

Field supply/barracks porking will become a major game play requirement if these timings remain
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 31, 2012, 07:48:08 AM
what is the priority of supply usage when different field object are competing for resupply ?  If a town is near flattened and AA down and I drop an M3 load of field supplies what uses them first? ground guns or town buildings?

All objects within range are resupllied the same, regardless how many are being down
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: RTHolmes on August 31, 2012, 07:49:17 AM
what a mess  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Slate on August 31, 2012, 07:50:47 AM
   Perhaps this will lead to needing ground forces to hold the town for capture instead of the air horde just rolling bases. GVs fighting it out at the town and preventing the resupply. Sounds a little more like WWII.  :aok
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 31, 2012, 07:51:18 AM
what a mess  :rolleyes:

One that could be fixed with by tweaking the numbers. :)

At this time, my proposal would be:

- make City/Town buildings unresuppliable again
- increase HQ hardness so that no longer a single NOE player can bring it down.
- set a top limit for resupply perk gain. Maybe 10, that's still a lot.


But despite all that teething problems, things are going FORWARD finally  :aok
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: RTHolmes on August 31, 2012, 08:09:41 AM
10 perks is way, way too much for a single run, whatever its resupplying. 30 is just plain ridiculous.

even ~2 was pretty generous before the changes. thats the same as killing 2x same ENY tanks and landing.


I dont do much base-taking as it is, if town buildings become resuppliable I will do none at all. its bad enough that the ack is resuppliable.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Fish42 on August 31, 2012, 08:15:05 AM
There it goes agian, Knights just worked their buts off to get HQ back then another NOE suicide lanc sneaks in  :mad:
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Citabria on August 31, 2012, 08:28:55 AM
omg actual consequences to not defending strategic targets that make bombers want to spend 2 hrs to hit a target that they may get killed at before they even drop then deal with me163s that can get to any altitude within 2 minutes and respawn rinse repeat as soon as they die?

I think I would actually want to play again if this change is true :D

there used to be epic bomber hq/strat missions before resupply. this is good stuff.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Fish42 on August 31, 2012, 08:31:44 AM
Sure fester, comeback. you can then fly CAP all day long over a HQ to protect it from NOE lancs. I am sure you will find that fun, as I know how many others love flying in circles far behind your lines for hours at a time.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on August 31, 2012, 08:32:40 AM
omg actual consequences to not defending strategic targets that make bombers want to spend 2 hrs to hit a target that they may get killed at before they even drop then deal with me163s that can get to any altitude within 2 minutes and respawn rinse repeat as soon as they die?

I think I would actually want to play again if this change is true :D

there used to be epic bomber hq/strat missions before resupply. this is good stuff.

 :aok
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: thndregg on August 31, 2012, 08:34:25 AM
there used to be epic bomber hq/strat missions before resupply. this is good stuff.

Oh, I know.. I'm chompin' at the bit to get the 91st up in force. Too bad I'm busy for a couple days.  :(
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on August 31, 2012, 08:35:21 AM
I'm not sure if being able to resupply the town buildings is a good idea at all for gameplay balance, but the perks are definitely out of whack. 30 perks for a single drop in a town at modifier 1.0 that's not even white flagged. Simlar at the strats, where the resupply value of 4 minutes means you can harvest perks for more than one hour.
If the word spreads around will may see more people doing resupply runs that doing combat, because the perk gain in combat is puny compared to running supplies.

Let people have the perks doing boring resup runs... just means they'll use em for combat later and add to the fun of chasing perk bombers.  So, 10 or so town resup runs (300 perks) will allow you to lift a formation of B29s (approx. 100 perks each B29).  That sounds great to me.  More bombers, more fighters chasing after the bombers, more escorts for bombers to protect from the fighters.

Awesome! :x
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Butcher on August 31, 2012, 08:37:18 AM
Sure fester, comeback. you can then fly CAP all day long over a HQ to protect it from NOE lancs. I am sure you will find that fun, as I know how many others love flying in circles far behind your lines for hours at a time.

Sounds better then watching a dozen ponys at 20k just pick and run in a typical fight anyhow, or horde of 40 trying to attack one undefended base.

I would have much fun blowing my perks on 163s trying to disrupt the buffs hitting strat targets.

I agree with Fester, it does open my eye - if anything goes under 20k i'd be happy to test some high eny planes :)
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Fish42 on August 31, 2012, 08:38:55 AM
Butcher thats the problem, atm you dont get a chance to defend HQ, someone just NOEs lancs in and the 1 min after flashing starts you lose dar. even 163 will have trouble intercepting those before they drop.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Hap on August 31, 2012, 08:42:05 AM
Just finished a run to Rook's Ammo and Grunt Training Factories on ND Isles.  1 formation of B17's w/50% gas.  Climbed to 25K; went to normal power.  Hit targets, but had to ditch.  Even on max cruise had but 23 mins remaining slogging along at 197 tas.

I ditched at got 9.90 perks with a slew of new system messages saying buildings (they came up as abbreviations or AH in-game names) were down for 180 mins and guns down for 30 mins.

On this small map and starting at a 6K base, the trip was not over long.

As Lusche said, we're moving forward.  
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Butcher on August 31, 2012, 08:43:54 AM
Butcher thats the problem, atm you dont get a chance to defend HQ, someone just NOEs lancs in and the 1 min after flashing starts you lose dar. even 163 will have trouble intercepting those before they drop.

Very true, I had that problem in the past with someone willing to fly 3-4 hours NOE just to bomb HQ - while its quite a fate to fly under 50 feet the entire time - I think Radar should be extended around HQ only - making it much harder to hit - then again it will simply draw a Horde to attack it.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Hap on August 31, 2012, 08:45:34 AM
Butcher thats the problem, atm you dont get a chance to defend HQ, someone just NOEs lancs in and the 1 min after flashing starts you lose dar.

Depends on the map and the dar circles. ND Isles has some open spots.  But on Rook side, a nasty hill to climb.  I've not tried it.  Saw it on the map and figured that could be rough.  While I was on my flight, staying out of dar, I saw a Bish bee-line to Rook HQ dar rings be darned.  He didn't make it.

Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Hap on August 31, 2012, 08:46:53 AM
its quite a fate to fly under 50 feet the entire time

500 feet outside of a dar ring that's operational, and as you said, too darn low to pull it off with any high degree of success inside a functioning dar ring.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: LYNX on August 31, 2012, 09:31:25 AM
How very interesting... good news about the strat.  Although I have no right to comment (don't play no more) it can stand a tweak or two for ballance on down time and resupply.  However there's one thing I notice being overlooked in this thread --->

Quote
Trains, convoys, and barges are built into the terrain.  Each train, convoy, or barge has a source point and a destination point, and each can be damaged or destroyed while traveling from point to point.  Trains, convoys, and barges automatically respawn every ten minutes.
Destroying a train, convoy or barge will add an additional 7 minutes of downtime to any destroyed field or strategic resource that it supplies.(See table below)

Once a train, convoy, or barge has successfully reached it's destination, a new supply convoy spawns.

Yeah OK.  It's not the most entertaining thing do...popping rolling stock with HE but what a treat for perk farmers new to the game.  Thats why I like the megga resupply perks...good for newbs. 

This Strat system made me salivate but my priorities are above getting a new PC, CH gear, AH widowing the wife and staying up half the night lol.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: RTHolmes on August 31, 2012, 09:34:00 AM
good lord, I think I just saw a lesser-spotted Lynx!


alright geezer ;)
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: LYNX on August 31, 2012, 09:36:18 AM
good lord, I think I just saw a lesser-spotted Lynx!


alright geezer ;)

chipper old boy  :salute  Hope all is well  :aok
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 31, 2012, 09:36:31 AM
500 feet outside of a dar ring that's operational,


250 ;)




--------------

Funny thing. Rook and Nits HQ's are both down, both sides employing a third of their population for extended times trying to bring HQs back up....
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Fish42 on August 31, 2012, 09:37:57 AM

250 ;)




--------------

Funny thing. Rook and Nits HQ's are both down, both sides employing a third of their population for extended times trying to bring HQs back up....

Yes and what FUN we are having...
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Hap on August 31, 2012, 09:38:15 AM

This Strat system made me salivate but my priorities are above getting a new PC, CH gear, AH widowing the wife and staying up half the night lol.

Good to hear from you, Lynx  :aok
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 31, 2012, 09:40:10 AM
This Strat system made me salivate but my priorities are above getting a new PC, CH gear, AH widowing the wife and staying up half the night lol.


I tried the real life thing again last year as well. Didn't work. It sucks.  :uhoh
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Noir on August 31, 2012, 09:41:23 AM
long time no see LYNX <S>
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on August 31, 2012, 09:51:36 AM

I tried the real life thing again last year as well. Didn't work. It sucks.  :uhoh

 :rofl :rofl :rofl   :headscratch:    :uhoh

 :noid
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 31, 2012, 09:54:45 AM
as Nit HQ is now being continually down, the mob is forming on Knight country channel...  :uhoh
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Noir on August 31, 2012, 10:02:10 AM
as Nit HQ is now being continually down, the mob is forming on Knight country channel...  :uhoh

yeah well if 2 noobs can down the HQ for 300minutes that had to happen :P I think I'm going to put drop tanks on my P51 and go near nits HQ tonight  :x
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on August 31, 2012, 10:03:14 AM
yeah well if 2 noobs can down the HQ for 300minutes that had to happen :P I think I'm going to put drop tanks on my P51 and go near nits HQ tonight  :x

Am there now in my 262.  :banana:
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 68Raptor on August 31, 2012, 10:03:40 AM
Yup.. leave the perks. Makes a thankless job worthwhile and in the end will result in more B29s up for folks making those strat runs.

A few ideas on the HQ issue:
Double or triple the hardness or
add a dar ring around the place or
add a VH with a decent spawn or
add some soft guns or
change it from a single building to include the surrounding buildings
or max out the amount of auto ack (not puffy ack, the 37 and the 40s) to make a NOE run near impossible.

Those NOE lancs are a pain. The current way (at least on ndisles), a single player can keep the HQ down at the northern country no problem. Especially combined with the new .dt command.  

The .dt command does take away from the fog of war but if we are going to make the towns resupply-able then it's needed.  


Overall from what I saw this morning  :aok :aok to HTC! Nice work!
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 1Eagle on August 31, 2012, 10:31:14 AM
First... theres been a few changes since I was last here and I think most of them are PERFECT.

But this change on the downtime and its effect on resupply has left me very very dissatisfied and disappointed.

This..... was a HUGE MISTAKE.

I was actually so angry yesterday that I wanted to log in here and use a lot of filthy language I havent used much since High School.

1. Running supply was always something anyone, even the newest of players, could do successfully and make a "difference" for their team even when outnumbered and the chips are down.

2. For some of us veterans, me in particular, running supply was always cool to do for some reason. Also i still remember the supply trucks from Air Warrior (2 1/2 ton trucks, very easy to flip over in the game and big targets on the ground... you could break a sweat trying to sneak one onto a base that was under attack lol. Yesterday I had 3 messages "No Buildings Resupplied" after all that driving.

One of my biggest complaints has always been these maps designed for failure.... isolated bases that cannot be resupplied are difficult and frustrating to defend.

All bases should be resupplyable from the ground!

My prediction is that small attacks to capture will drop off dramatically due to the new failure rate, and the vulchers who take a base by flying in at bomber alttitude and then picking off all the uppers for an hour to get perks and points before they tire of playing with their food and finally take the base - will eventually prevail and that will be the end of the game for good. New players want to have some fun too, but vulchers aren't in the business of giving a darn.

3. We DO still have a number of players who enjoy the more realistic and historic type of long range bombing missions. But whats the point if all the damage is going to be back up before you even get landed? So now the freaks that want to fling bombs from a Lancaster at low altitude are going to be the common experience here? Is there any concern whatsoever for a touch of realism in the game?

And so I have a message for the "genius" that broke the game with this change: FIX THIS NOW YOU IDIOT! WHAT WERE YOU THINKING??

And lets just get the TRUTH out- this game wasn't created by Hitech (Dale Addink) it was created by KESMAI (Kelton Flinn and friends). It has been tinkered with over the years by Hitech and sometimes in a good way, but this is and always will be a KESMAI product. Please stop tinkering around and messing it up!

ALSO! ---- If you want to screw this up... why cant you post the Original in its own Classic Arena so we can enjoy our game the way we liked it before!!

Joe
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Hap on August 31, 2012, 10:33:53 AM
Guys, what about HQ being idiosyncratic to ND Isles?  And as far as Bish HQ, a nit did make a run at it.  I heard the alert on country when he was still 25 miles out.  Upped a 163 and throttled back to 15 mins and climbed.

Lo and behold there he was at 8K.  Nailed lead plane.  That was all.

We all yawn a bit when things blink.  Maybe it's our yawning and not low Lancs that's the problem.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 31, 2012, 10:34:06 AM
And lets just get the TRUTH out- this game wasn't created by Hitech (Dale Addink) it was created by KESMAI (Kelton Flinn and friends). It has been tinkered with over the years by Hitech and sometimes in a good way, but this is and always will be a KESMAI product. Please stop tinkering around and messing it up!

ALSO! ---- If you want to screw this up... why cant you post the Original in its own Classic Arena so we can enjoy our game the way we liked it before!!

Joe


Your "truth" made me spit my tea all over the screen  :rofl
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Rebel on August 31, 2012, 10:35:26 AM
Quote
And lets just get the TRUTH out- this game wasn't created by Hitech (Dale Addink) it was created by KESMAI (Kelton Flinn and friends). It has been tinkered with over the years by Hitech and sometimes in a good way, but this is and always will be a KESMAI product. Please stop tinkering around and messing it up!

ALSO! ---- If you want to screw this up... why cant you post the Original in its own Classic Arena so we can enjoy our game the way we liked it before!!

Joe


 :lol
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Zoney on August 31, 2012, 10:36:51 AM
That is just an awesome first post.  Did you just call Dale an idiot?  Did you say that Dale did not create this game?

And this,
"ALSO! ---- If you want to screw this up... why cant you post the Original in its own Classic Arena so we can enjoy our game the way we liked it before!!"

Your game?  Really?

Has insulting people been the method you use to get your way before?  Does that work with your wife?

Frankly, I feel sorry for you because you are so far out of touch with reality.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Alpo on August 31, 2012, 10:40:53 AM

And so I have a message for the "genius" that broke the game with this change: FIX THIS NOW YOU IDIOT! WHAT WERE YOU THINKING??

And lets just get the TRUTH out- this game wasn't created by Hitech (Dale Addink) it was created by KESMAI (Kelton Flinn and friends). It has been tinkered with over the years by Hitech and sometimes in a good way, but this is and always will be a KESMAI product. Please stop tinkering around and messing it up!

ALSO! ---- If you want to screw this up... why cant you post the Original in its own Classic Arena so we can enjoy our game the way we liked it before!!

Joe


 :rofl   GREAT first post!
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Fish42 on August 31, 2012, 10:45:14 AM
Guys, what about HQ being idiosyncratic to ND Isles?  And as far as Bish HQ, a nit did make a run at it.  I heard the alert on country when he was still 25 miles out.  Upped a 163 and throttled back to 15 mins and climbed.

Lo and behold there he was at 8K.  Nailed lead plane.  That was all.

We all yawn a bit when things blink.  Maybe it's our yawning and not low Lancs that's the problem.

That was me, I was at over 17k when I started to flash your bases but I had a P51 closing fast so I dove to pick up speed to get to the target and bomb it. the warning you had was from your Airbase that picked me up 20miles from your HQ, not  like the current knight and rook bases that have large spaces between Dar that its easy to NOE buffs into. I had just done an NOE to the Rooks HQ.

The knights know its NOE lancs as we have killed them each time, sometime we even spotted them as they were dropping. but as our warning system is the first flash of a HQ, we struggled to get there quick enough.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: tunnelrat on August 31, 2012, 11:11:10 AM

And lets just get the TRUTH out- this game wasn't created by Hitech (Dale Addink) it was created by KESMAI (Kelton Flinn and friends). It has been tinkered with over the years by Hitech and sometimes in a good way, but this is and always will be a KESMAI product. Please stop tinkering around and messing it up!

Joe

You need to be banned, not just for libel, but for the sake of the brain cells around the world.


Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: The Fugitive on August 31, 2012, 11:45:18 AM


And so I have a message for the "genius" that broke the game with this change: FIX THIS NOW YOU IDIOT! WHAT WERE YOU THINKING??

And lets just get the TRUTH out- this game wasn't created by Hitech (Dale Addink) it was created by KESMAI (Kelton Flinn and friends). It has been tinkered with over the years by Hitech and sometimes in a good way, but this is and always will be a KESMAI product. Please stop tinkering around and messing it up!

ALSO! ---- If you want to screw this up... why cant you post the Original in its own Classic Arena so we can enjoy our game the way we liked it before!!

Joe

This is the best part of this post! LOL!!!

First off, this game was up and running for some time before they shut down AW, I know because I was playing them both at the same time. This game is farrrrr more than AW ever was ( and that is only because EA games killed it before it could "mature").

I'm sure the new strat system will need a bit of tweaking, and I'm sure it will be taken care of, but this kind of post is just ridiculous!  LOL!!! WTG 1eagle
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: NatCigg on August 31, 2012, 12:21:49 PM
-45 minute down time for town was short enough.
-30 minutes and resupplyable, eek.
is there a train convoy or barge that can add time to town buildings or town ack?
where can we tell what a train convoy or barge is resupplying? does it have an assigned "reach" or a specific target once at destination?
must i bomb the city 50 percent so that town buildings will be down for 90 minutes?
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 1Eagle on August 31, 2012, 12:26:02 PM
Yes, it is the same game engine with many changes and tack-ons.

Even the smallest of details from Air Warrior are still here: ability to shut down a specific engine on a bomber for example (in the original this used to work most of the time to put out a fire if done quickly enough, but this was changed.... explanation given was basically: "to make the fighter pilots happy - get more kills/perks"  - it used to be a REAL challenge to take down a bomber, especially a B-17 with all guns manned!!! (which was also disabled... now you can only have 1 gunner aboard.)  This was probably a reasonable change though, because pilots abused this by flying low over targets as airbase suppression, which is something real bombers never did.

The orgininal aircraft still have all the very same basic 3D innards (which they dont really need and eat up memory- but they wanted them accurately built for more realism.)

Doubt me if you want ;)

On the ground they elminated the old supply trucks (deuce and a halfs) which were difficult to drive on solid ground and would flip over very easily, and replaced with Jeeps.

I LIKE A LOT OF THE CHANGES...... most of the things done by Dale are exactly right. This change is not good for the game. It will appease the Playstation crowd, likely, but that seems to be the way most changes are headed... quick gratification over patience and a certain respect for realism.

Joe





Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Noir on August 31, 2012, 12:30:00 PM
same game engine  :lol

shutting an engine independently is inherent to any multi engine plane I'd say?

Jeeps were added quite recently.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: The Fugitive on August 31, 2012, 12:34:44 PM
oh ya, I see what you mean this.....

(http://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/401437-air-warrior-dos-screenshot-he-is-in-serious-trouble-major.png)

Looks exactly like Aces High spit dash looks like. It was hard for me to believe that this is a screen shot from Air Warrior.

And this 190 D9.....

(http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/screenshots/9/196569/airwar3_screen002.jpg)

spitting image of ours in Aces High.

and the 3D....

(http://www.gamershell.com/static/screenshots/7205/66130_full.jpg)

spot on!


I think you need to do a bit of research BEFORE you start spouting off. You won't look so silly.

Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 1Eagle on August 31, 2012, 12:38:13 PM
same game engine  :lol

shutting an engine independently is inherent to any multi engine plane I'd say?

Jeeps were added quite recently.

EH???

Jeeps were put in several years ago to replace the 2 1/2
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 1Eagle on August 31, 2012, 12:43:03 PM
oh ya, I see what you mean this.....

(http://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/401437-air-warrior-dos-screenshot-he-is-in-serious-trouble-major.png)

Looks exactly like Aces High spit dash looks like. It was hard for me to believe that this is a screen shot from Air Warrior.

And this 190 D9.....

(http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/screenshots/9/196569/airwar3_screen002.jpg)

spitting image of ours in Aces High.

and the 3D....

(http://www.gamershell.com/static/screenshots/7205/66130_full.jpg)

spot on!


I think you need to do a bit of research BEFORE you start spouting off. You won't look so silly.



I need to research myself??? I WAS THERE ROFLMAO!

Every single thing was exactly the same when Hitech started running this in 2000.  10 troops to capture town, pilots can wait in pillbox and shoot the troops. Yes the graphic engine has been overhauled and skins changed, but the mechanics of flight and all the smallest of details are still there. Some screen shots you posted are from the earliest 3D engine from Kesmai. They improved the graphics engine over time.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Rob52240 on August 31, 2012, 12:43:55 PM
No, that's a gamebreaker.

+1

HQ is the opposite.  -4 minutes from 120 minutes per load.  That's 30 loads.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on August 31, 2012, 12:47:54 PM
HQ is the opposite.  -4 minutes from 120 minutes per load.  That's 30 loads.

180 minutes...
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Rob52240 on August 31, 2012, 12:50:33 PM
Sorry, bad at math / emotional over the HQ shanannigans.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on August 31, 2012, 12:54:46 PM
I like it all the way it is right now.  Let's leave it alone for several tours and see how things develop.  I even did an HQ run in Lancs today, which is odd for me.  I liked it though cause it did some lasting damage.   :)
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Slate on August 31, 2012, 01:14:41 PM
   Which game is like AW?  :headscratch:        AH1 and AH2 are worlds apart IMHO.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: HawkerMKII on August 31, 2012, 01:39:04 PM
I need to research myself??? I WAS THERE ROFLMAO!

Every single thing was exactly the same when Hitech started running this in 2000.  10 troops to capture town, pilots can wait in pillbox and shoot the troops. Yes the graphic engine has been overhauled and skins changed, but the mechanics of flight and all the smallest of details are still there. Some screen shots you posted are from the earliest 3D engine from Kesmai. They improved the graphics engine over time.

I need the same drugs this guy is taking :confused:
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: hitech on August 31, 2012, 01:44:20 PM
The HQ was an oversight, It will be changed to 45 mins down time + it will work like the town does in that it's down time will be increased an additional 2 hours base on the cities state.

The change will happen when we install a host this afternoon.

HiTech
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Iraqvet on August 31, 2012, 01:47:33 PM
On facebook today HTC posted that they changed their strats system "its a more straightforward system". so can anybody shed some light on the subject of what exactly it is that they did?

thanks

Raga54

Adds to the game, gives new meaning to pouding the strats. And you now will see a result for all the effort with times equal to the effort put forth. Wtg be prepared for all the whines, because they too lazy to resupply.
A change to the game that should have been namde long ago  :aok
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: waystin2 on August 31, 2012, 01:50:52 PM
The HQ was an oversight, It will be changed to 45 mins down time + it will work like the town does in that it's down time will be increased an additional 2 hours base on the cities state.

The change will happen when we install a host this afternoon.

HiTech

Thank you Sir!
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: The Fugitive on August 31, 2012, 01:51:40 PM
I need to research myself??? I WAS THERE ROFLMAO!

Every single thing was exactly the same when Hitech started running this in 2000.  10 troops to capture town, pilots can wait in pillbox and shoot the troops. Yes the graphic engine has been overhauled and skins changed, but the mechanics of flight and all the smallest of details are still there. Some screen shots you posted are from the earliest 3D engine from Kesmai. They improved the graphics engine over time.

I see what your saying. So if I built a air combat game and used 10 troops to capture (because its a nice round number), and my planes "fly" throught the virtual air I programmed I'd be using Air warriors game/code right?  :rolleyes:

You may have been there, but your not remembering very well.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: hitech on August 31, 2012, 02:03:32 PM
Yes, it is the same game engine with many changes and tack-ons.

Even the smallest of details from Air Warrior are still here: ability to shut down a specific engine on a bomber for example (in the original this used to work most of the time to put out a fire if done quickly enough, but this was changed.... explanation given was basically: "to make the fighter pilots happy - get more kills/perks"  - it used to be a REAL challenge to take down a bomber, especially a B-17 with all guns manned!!! (which was also disabled... now you can only have 1 gunner aboard.)  This was probably a reasonable change though, because pilots abused this by flying low over targets as airbase suppression, which is something real bombers never did.

The orgininal aircraft still have all the very same basic 3D innards (which they dont really need and eat up memory- but they wanted them accurately built for more realism.)

Doubt me if you want ;)

On the ground they elminated the old supply trucks (deuce and a halfs) which were difficult to drive on solid ground and would flip over very easily, and replaced with Jeeps.

I LIKE A LOT OF THE CHANGES...... most of the things done by Dale are exactly right. This change is not good for the game. It will appease the Playstation crowd, likely, but that seems to be the way most changes are headed... quick gratification over patience and a certain respect for realism.

Joe


I never worked for Kesmei. Nothing in AH has any code in any way from AW.No art work was ever used, or even looked at to build AH. I wrote an entire different product (Warbirds) and created a different company in between playing AW and writing AH.


HiTech
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: thndregg on August 31, 2012, 02:08:44 PM
Adds to the game, gives new meaning to pouding the strats. And you now will see a result for all the effort with times equal to the effort put forth. Wtg be prepared for all the whines, because they too lazy to resupply.
A change to the game that should have been namde long ago  :aok

... as well as the other side of the fence. If the side being attacked values there strat to remain entact, the resulting defensive action makes for a great fight. And, yes, I'm waiting for the "would rather whine than drive/fly a resupply vehicle."
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: SmokinLoon on August 31, 2012, 02:37:37 PM
I never worked for Kesmei. Nothing in AH has any code in any way from AW.No art work was ever used, or even looked at to build AH. I wrote an entire different product (Warbirds) and created a different company in between playing AW and writing AH.


HiTech

I think HiTech just body slammed someone.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Hap on August 31, 2012, 02:41:44 PM
And you now will see a result for all the effort with times equal to the effort put forth.

More so during maps where the strats are positioned too far away from those pesky 163's.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: SmokinLoon on August 31, 2012, 02:44:20 PM
More so during maps where the strats are positioned too far away from those pesky 163's.

bah... they are easy enough to shoot down.  Just lead them a bit more.   :aok
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Alpo on August 31, 2012, 02:45:25 PM
EH???

Jeeps were put in several years ago to replace the 2 1/2


 :noid

Dang... we had trucks and I missed it?!?  I would have loved to RAM enemy perk tanks and flip them on their turrets!

Pssst... Joe, it time for your meds  :old:
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: RTHolmes on August 31, 2012, 03:58:11 PM
I think HiTech just body slammed someone.

yeah, now wheres that apology? (like Eagle's man enough to ...)
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on August 31, 2012, 04:10:45 PM
I took down radar at a field, said it would be down for 30 minutes... then I went after the road convoy... and for each truck it said it added .9 minutes to 10 objects at the field.

Yet, the radar downtime did not increase.

What are the ten objects that the road convoy added downtime to and why was the radar not one of them? :headscratch: (1)  Use the damage list to figure it out.

...and it also said the road convoy would be down for 600 minutes (10 hours). :headscratch:


I made a 2nd sortie and went straight for the convoy again... it said the same thing except now 12 objects had their time increased by 0.9 minutes.   This time the remaining downtime for the radar did increase from 24 to about 27 minutes.

I think the 600 minutes is a bug and maybe is suppose to be 600 seconds / 10 minutes? (2)Yes, it's a bug.

Also I don't understand how it decides whether to increase radar downtime... why did it not increase it on my first sortie, but did on the second? (3) Use the damage list to see if radar was included on the first run.

How does it decide how many objects (10 and 12) to include in increasing downtime?  (4)Based on what is grey in the damage list  

Is it all objects that are resupped by the convoy which are down at a field? (5)Yes, other than hangars.

Also, if I take radar down, and then camp by a convoy road and keep killing the convoy... would radar stay down until I stop killing the convoys since every time I kill a convoy it adds down time? (6)Yes.

Six questions (I numberred them)... am trying to understand this.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: flatiron1 on August 31, 2012, 04:15:48 PM
thanks for adding the full names back to objects.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Skuzzy on August 31, 2012, 04:36:37 PM
Midway, HiTech and I just tested to make sure the time is being added when a convoy gets blown up and it is.

If you want to see what objects are destroyed at a field, then go to the Options->Arena Settings->Objects->Destroy Objects panel.  Select the field from the list and scroll through the objects.  The grayed out ones are destroyed.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on August 31, 2012, 04:37:58 PM
Midway, HiTech and I just tested to make sure the time is being added when a convoy gets blown up and it is.

If you want to see what objects are destroyed at a field, then go to the Options->Arena Settings->Objects->Destroy Objects panel.  Select the field from the list and scroll through the objects.  The grayed out ones are destroyed.

It didn't get added that first time.  Odd.  Maybe it didn't see the radar as one of the 10 objects yet.  I will try and figure it out.

Thanks for the info on the list.  I will use that.

I updated my prior post with six specific questions and answerred them myself.  Please let me know if I'm wrong on any.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: hitech on August 31, 2012, 04:43:02 PM
It didn't get added that first time.  Odd.  Maybe it didn't see the radar as one of the 10 objects yet.  I will try and figure it out.

Thanks for the info on the list.  I will use that.

I updated my prior post with six specific questions.  Can you answer?

You do realize that every time you type .dt the time is less?
Other possibilities, someone dropped supplies at the field.

HiTech
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on August 31, 2012, 04:44:26 PM
You do realize that every time you type .dt the time is less?
Other possibilities, someone dropped supplies at the field.

HiTech

Yes, I do.

That is possible I guess.  I will have more specfics next time with film... if I don't understand what's happening.  Don't want you all to chase issues without clear info.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on August 31, 2012, 05:04:52 PM
Midway, HiTech and I just tested to make sure the time is being added when a convoy gets blown up and it is.

If you want to see what objects are destroyed at a field, then go to the Options->Arena Settings->Objects->Destroy Objects panel.  Select the field from the list and scroll through the objects.  The grayed out ones are destroyed.

The gray is a little hard to distinguish from the black on the damage list.  Can you use red for damaged items or something with more contrast?
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: bustr on August 31, 2012, 05:17:59 PM
If the HQ and Strat are going to be something worth fighting over for the bomber drivers and escorts time and effort. Maybe the perk on the 163 should go up to make watching the DAR around the two targets more than an after thought. Eventualy everyone will adjust to this change along with developing copeing strategies that will require the least effort for the most results. 40,000 feet in a few minutes will be the xBoxyest.

Over use of the 163 will be the primary strategy at which point the Claw might as well be offered at the 163 feilds. In WW2 there never were clouds of 163 responding to raids like we all will eventualy respond with each time a bomber squad mounts an overt effort. Yes it takes time to get prop fighters in place to defend against bombers at alt and not always as effective as the 163 and 262. But, the majority of WW2 bomber defence over germany was fought with prop fighters that took the time to get into coordinated position.

The NOE's aside, you will know for some time that a DARBAR has grown in the enemy backfeild moving your way. In the past many didn't bother to investigate and kept at whatever local efforts they were at. Afterall the HQ could be resupplied in 15min or less. Now it looks like we ignore those obvious DARBAR at our peril of loosing radar and global resupply for a long time. It seems appropriate to reinforce that level of peril by making 163 as scarce as reasonable.

Otherwise whats the point of changing so much of these two targets when quickly half of each country will probably become 163 aces to maintaine a comfortable status quo this change seems aimed to push us past. This looks like it's aimed at generating more air combat and strategic bombing but, the current status quo will instead generate mass salughter by the easily available 163 upping in hoards.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Butcher on August 31, 2012, 05:27:30 PM
163s are 50 perks with limited ammo and very limited fuel -  in the right hands its by far the most dangerous aircraft for 3 sectors. Given 1% of pilots can actually manage to fly it let alone get a kill.

I think the perks are just fine for it, one wrong move it becomes an unguided lawn dart from 30k or it runs out of gas in the process of flying.



Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Scherf on August 31, 2012, 05:31:28 PM
NOE lancs ib HQs? that's not gamey dweeb BS, that's a gold-plated invitation for a Mossie VI patrol! Or even the 410 with the beeeeeg honking cannon! Yessssssssssssssss!
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Volron on August 31, 2012, 06:25:42 PM
oh ya, I see what you mean this.....

(http://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/401437-air-warrior-dos-screenshot-he-is-in-serious-trouble-major.png)

Looks exactly like Aces High spit dash looks like. It was hard for me to believe that this is a screen shot from Air Warrior.

And this 190 D9.....

(http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/screenshots/9/196569/airwar3_screen002.jpg)

spitting image of ours in Aces High.

and the 3D....

(http://www.gamershell.com/static/screenshots/7205/66130_full.jpg)

spot on!


I think you need to do a bit of research BEFORE you start spouting off. You won't look so silly.



Fugi, didn't you mean RETARDED? :headscratch:

Regardless, anyone arguing with 1Eagle WILL accomplish a LOT more if ye all pissed into the wind. :)
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 1Eagle on August 31, 2012, 11:45:50 PM
I never worked for Kesmei. Nothing in AH has any code in any way from AW.No art work was ever used, or even looked at to build AH. I wrote an entire different product (Warbirds) and created a different company in between playing AW and writing AH.


HiTech

I'll take you at your word on that. I find it very hard to believe (or even understand), but if you're going to claim it then I'll take your word on it.

But this was never the point of my post, the point is the change is taking out the resupply part of the game. Some players like to do it for a number of different reasons, including for newer players its something they can do to help their team even when they dont yet have pilot skills to make much of a difference. I think its a huge mistake and it does make me very angry that you are just taking it out.

So.. can you at least post the old version in its own "Classic Arena" so those of us that don't like these kinds of changes can still play the game we have enjoyed?

Joe
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on August 31, 2012, 11:53:37 PM
I'll take you at your word on that. I find it very hard to believe (or even understand), but if you're going to claim it then I'll take your word on it.

But this was never the point of my post, the point is the change is taking out the resupply part of the game. Some players like to do it for a number of different reasons, including for newer players its something they can do to help their team even when they dont yet have pilot skills to make much of a difference. I think its a huge mistake and it does make me very angry that you are just taking it out.

So.. can you at least post the old version in its own "Classic Arena" so those of us that don't like these kinds of changes can still play the game we have enjoyed?

Joe

I don't get what you are saying.  The resupply aspects are still in the game.  With the latest changes, resupply runs can bring towns back up, ords, radar and guns back up.  Even HQ and factories can be resupplied.  You also earn perks when resupplying.

Do you play the game?  If so, try a few supply runs and see if they work. :aok
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Raga on August 31, 2012, 11:54:28 PM
I miss trains, a lot, they were fun to shoot.


<S>

Raga54
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on September 01, 2012, 12:05:21 AM
I miss trains, a lot, they were fun to shoot.


<S>

Raga54

Trains are near HQ and strats still.  I have also found trains in other areas of some maps, but we do have less now.  I like them too and wish we had a few more... Maybe have one out of five fields be supplied with trains instead of convoys would be good.  Not too many, but enough to find them easily.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 1Eagle on September 01, 2012, 12:06:51 AM
I don't get what you are saying.  The resupply aspects are still in the game.  With the latest changes, resupply runs can bring towns back up, ords, radar and guns back up.  Even HQ and factories can be resupplied.  You also earn perks when resupplying.

Do you play the game?  If so, try a few supply runs and see if they work. :aok

Heres the Scoop:  3 times right after the change went in... delivering supply to an airbase that is not only in flames... its smokin. We all know what the smoke means. I get this message: something like "No buildings were resupplied".  3 times.... nothing supplied, no perks. Doesn't work.  It now only requires 1 box to resupply everything at once. If anyone drops supply nobody else is going to resupply anything and no perks for the effort.

If bases are going to just pop up automatically in 30 minutes... really... why bother with resupply? Better to just try get aircap on town and wait for base to pop back up again. Resupply isn't needed anymore... except remote bases where flying them in on C47 is the only way (and i'm an expert on dropping them from the air, if you can believe that, got it down to a science... drop em right on the runway.). Havent done any air drops since coming back though.

That and the long range bomber pilots, and i'm mostly a bomber pilot, how does it make sense to do stuff like long range high alt bomb raids (more realistic) when the base is gonna pop back up long before you even get landed?  This is not the same game at all now.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on September 01, 2012, 12:25:25 AM
Heres the Scoop:  3 times right after the change went in... delivering supply to an airbase that is not only in flames... its smokin. We all know what the smoke means. I get this message: something like "No buildings were resupplied".  3 times.... nothing supplied, no perks. Doesn't work.  It now only requires 1 box to resupply everything at once. If anyone drops supply nobody else is going to resupply anything and no perks for the effort.

If bases are going to just pop up automatically in 30 minutes... really... why bother with resupply? Better to just try get aircap on town and wait for base to pop back up again. Resupply isn't needed anymore... except remote bases where flying them in on C47 is the only way (and i'm an expert on dropping them from the air, if you can believe that, got it down to a science... drop em right on the runway.). Havent done any air drops since coming back though.

That and the long range bomber pilots, and i'm mostly a bomber pilot, how does it make sense to do stuff like long range high alt bomb raids (more realistic) when the base is gonna pop back up long before you even get landed?  This is not the same game at all now.

Hangars were never able to be resupplied.  

It takes at least three boxes of field supplies to bring a town back up.  Before you couldn't resup town buildings at all.

If resupplyable objects have been down for a while, it may only take one supply run to get them back up.  Worked like this before also.  The change is that you can now check how long before an object is back up by using the .dt command.   So, you can resup fields that need them and not waste time on a field that's been down a while and is about to come back up anyway.

Towns will only pop in 30 minutes if the city is up 100%.  There is now a strong incentive for bombers to take the city down extending town down times up to 2 and 1/2 hours.  Resups are crucial then.  Similar situation with factories and their related field objects.

Read the details of how this works. There is a summary and detail link on the home page.

I see all the recent changes as nothing but improvements.  Resups are just as, if not more, important than before.  Bombing runs to strats and HQ now make a lasting strong impact on the game and are worth the time and effort.  The damage you do to strat targets are highly likely to still be in place well after you land a long range bombing run.

Even knocking out road convoys, trains, and barges make a noticeable, measurable difference by extending down times of objects.

It's all good and better now from what I can tell.  It's more like a real strategic war than before.

Get a few bombers up and destroy the city and damage some of the factories.  This will extend down times of field and town objects materially.

When you pork ords and radar at a town, kill the convoy or barges as well, extending the impact of your porking.

Camp a truck convoy route and don't let any trucks pass and you'll continually extend downtime.

Earn lots of perks resupping objects.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: NatCigg on September 01, 2012, 10:14:29 AM
glad to see we are somewhere near being on topic again.


What do  1)Trains 2)Bardges 3)convoys supply?
I cant find any detail on this issue.


Trains, convoys, and barges are built into the terrain.  Each train, convoy, or barge has a source point and a destination point, and each can be damaged or destroyed while traveling from point to point.  Trains, convoys, and barges automatically respawn every ten minutes.
 Destroying a train, convoy or barge will add an additional 7 minutes of downtime to any destroyed field or strategic resource that it supplies.(See table below)
 
Once a train, convoy, or barge has successfully reached it's destination, a new supply convoy spawns. 
Train
adds 7 minutes downtime to object it supplies
 Convoy
 Adds 7 minutes downtime to object it supplies
 Barge
 Adds 7 minutes downtime to object it supplies
 

Can we get the details expained further?

What does not get supplies, that can be destroyed to add time to the downed object?
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on September 01, 2012, 10:18:40 AM
glad to see we are somewhere near being on topic again.


What do  1)Trains 2)Bardges 3)convoys supply?
I cant find any detail on this issue.


Trains, convoys, and barges are built into the terrain.  Each train, convoy, or barge has a source point and a destination point, and each can be damaged or destroyed while traveling from point to point.  Trains, convoys, and barges automatically respawn every ten minutes.
 Destroying a train, convoy or barge will add an additional 7 minutes of downtime to any destroyed field or strategic resource that it supplies.(See table below)
 
Once a train, convoy, or barge has successfully reached it's destination, a new supply convoy spawns.  
Train
adds 7 minutes downtime to object it supplies
 Convoy
 Adds 7 minutes downtime to object it supplies
 Barge
 Adds 7 minutes downtime to object it supplies
 

Can we get the details expained further?

What does not get supplies, that can be destroyed to add time to the downed object?


Same thing field sups supply... which is everything except hangars and, I think, SB..
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on September 01, 2012, 10:40:45 AM
What does not get supplies, that can be destroyed to add time to the downed object?

Everything but hangars and mannable guns.


............................. .............................




It seems to me that the importance of the City for the landgrab game is sipping in only at a small pace. Particularly with the usual armchair generals, who throw their pawns at enemy bases and wonder whytheir assault stalls so often because the town is back up in very short time  :devil

So here few numbers with current settings. This table shows the length of the downtime of town buildings, depending on the state of the City:

(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/3e1d5d3d.jpg)

Furthermore, it shows the practical number of M-3 runs a single player has to make to bring up the town buildings, assuming he starts immediately and travel time from span to town is 5 minutes.
Once players have finally grasped how easy they can up the town, a constant smashing of the enemy city will be almost mandatory. OR - the NOE hordes will rise once again, this time bigger as ever before to ensure they smash town & base within the few minutes they have.




There are three things I'm still not happy with:
- The ease of town resupply (a few m3s with field supps hiding in the trees nearby can make a town pop up right under the goon dropping the dudes)
- The insane number of perks you can gain by doing supply runs compared to those you can make by combat. (Even I as a well above average vet player can't make even remotely as many GV/buff perks per hour by active fighting). The biggets reward should be for combat.
- The all seeing .dt command and the removal of fog of war. That really bugs me.

edit: the thing I forgot about resupply: I'd guess in future the horde will bring a few goons with field supps along, which can instantly rebuild the town after capture...


--------


By the way, almost everything 1Eagle writes is still so much wrong I suggest to simply ignore him.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Hap on September 01, 2012, 10:48:02 AM
Valuable intel   :aok
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: RTHolmes on September 01, 2012, 10:52:01 AM
There are three things I'm still not happy with:
- The ease of town resupply (a few m3s with field supps hiding in the trees nearby can make a town pop up right under the goon dropping the dudes)
- The insane number of perks you can gain by doing supply runs compared to those you can make by combat. (Even I as a well above average vet player can't make even remotely as many GV/buff perks per hour by active fighting). The biggets reward should be for combat.
- The all seeing .dt command and the removal of fog of war. That really bugs me.

agreed on all 3 counts.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: HawkerMKII on September 01, 2012, 11:14:13 AM
If the HQ and Strat are going to be something worth fighting over for the bomber drivers and escorts time and effort. Maybe the perk on the 163 should go up to make watching the DAR around the two targets more than an after thought. Eventualy everyone will adjust to this change along with developing copeing strategies that will require the least effort for the most results. 40,000 feet in a few minutes will be the xBoxyest.

Over use of the 163 will be the primary strategy at which point the Claw might as well be offered at the 163 feilds. In WW2 there never were clouds of 163 responding to raids like we all will eventualy respond with each time a bomber squad mounts an overt effort. Yes it takes time to get prop fighters in place to defend against bombers at alt and not always as effective as the 163 and 262. But, the majority of WW2 bomber defence over germany was fought with prop fighters that took the time to get into coordinated position.

The NOE's aside, you will know for some time that a DARBAR has grown in the enemy backfeild moving your way. In the past many didn't bother to investigate and kept at whatever local efforts they were at. Afterall the HQ could be resupplied in 15min or less. Now it looks like we ignore those obvious DARBAR at our peril of loosing radar and global resupply for a long time. It seems appropriate to reinforce that level of peril by making 163 as scarce as reasonable.

Otherwise whats the point of changing so much of these two targets when quickly half of each country will probably become 163 aces to maintaine a comfortable status quo this change seems aimed to push us past. This looks like it's aimed at generating more air combat and strategic bombing but, the current status quo will instead generate mass salughter by the easily available 163 upping in hoards.

My question is why the 163 is in this game to start with.....only 8 kills in WW2? :huh
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Jayhawk on September 01, 2012, 11:41:17 AM
Strat changes you say?  Hmmm.  Not quite ready to re-sub yet, but soon...soon.  :airplane:
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: thndregg on September 01, 2012, 12:02:26 PM
Your B17 still awaits, Jay.  :salute
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: HawkerMKII on September 01, 2012, 01:05:04 PM
Strat changes you say?  Hmmm.  Not quite ready to re-sub yet, but soon...soon.  :airplane:

Get out of your bomb shelter and get back into the game :cheers:
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Flayed on September 01, 2012, 04:29:35 PM
 Mmmmm strat change......  May just pop in to check it out.  :rock
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Dimebag on September 01, 2012, 05:23:17 PM
I miss trains, a lot, they were fun to shoot.


<S>

Raga54

I remember getting drunk as hell out at the train tracks with my buddy Jig.. We'd sit there and shoot trains for hours on end, all while playing pokerstars in the background waitin 10 minutes for the next train.  Sounds stupid as folk but it was fun lol
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 100Coogn on September 01, 2012, 05:45:07 PM
I remember getting drunk as hell out at the train tracks with my buddy Jig.. We'd sit there and shoot trains for hours on end, all while playing pokerstars in the background waitin 10 minutes for the next train.  Sounds stupid as folk but it was fun lol

+1 on pokerstars, since fulltilt seems to be no more...

Coogan
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: thndregg on September 01, 2012, 07:55:49 PM
Get out of your bomb shelter and get back into the game :cheers:

Funny you should say that, Hawk. :lol  I just got back from practice at the Boise Bomb Shelter. Fixin' to get into the game here tonight, I hope.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Dimebag on September 01, 2012, 10:34:38 PM
+1 on pokerstars, since fulltilt seems to be no more...

Coogan


but pokerstars sucks now since us citizens can't download the .com version..... we're stuck with the .net one and with it you can't have pix or search for friends.... but it still beats the hell out of ANY pokersite


so we dont get hacked for being off subject, the new strats are fun   :D
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: thndregg on September 02, 2012, 09:07:02 AM
Did a sizeable B17 run last night on Knight city and ord factory. Resistance was light as usual. Only way to really know what the effect would be was to do the mission. I'll probably do some more experimenting to see what the overall cause & effect turns out to be as far as those objects being vital enough to be attacked and defended. So far, it looks like business as usual, but we will see.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: NatCigg on September 02, 2012, 09:23:33 AM
Everything but hangars and mannable guns.



so then, shooting a convoy truck destine for the field, will add seven minutes to all destroyed town buildings corresponding to the supplied field?

with ten (guess) trucks in a convoy. destroying a convoy will add 70 minutes of downtime to the town corresponding to the supplied field?
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on September 02, 2012, 09:28:34 AM
so then, shooting a convoy truck destine for the field, will add seven minutes to all destroyed town buildings corresponding to the supplied field?

with ten (guess) trucks in a convoy. destroying a convoy will add 70 minutes of downtime to the town corresponding to the supplied field?

Each truck adds about a minute (0.9 minutes). I think there are eight trucks in a convoy, so destroying the whole convoy adds about 7 to 8 minutes.

When a new convoy spawns ten minutes later, if you destroy it too, you'll add another 7 to 8 minutes, etc..

That is my understanding of it.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on September 02, 2012, 09:34:12 AM
Did a sizeable B17 run last night on Knight city and ord factory. Resistance was light as usual. Only way to really know what the effect would be was to do the mission. I'll probably do some more experimenting to see what the overall cause & effect turns out to be as far as those objects being vital enough to be attacked and defended. So far, it looks like business as usual, but we will see.

Odd, because I saw a lot of activity at strats and HQ.  At least when I was on during the day and evening.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on September 02, 2012, 09:55:21 AM
so then, shooting a convoy truck destine for the field, will add seven minutes to all destroyed town buildings corresponding to the supplied field?

with ten (guess) trucks in a convoy. destroying a convoy will add 70 minutes of downtime to the town corresponding to the supplied field?


You get the seven minutes only if you completely destroy one convoy, each truck carries only a fraction of that.
As the convoys are coming in every 10 minutes, you can't completely prevent the rebuilld of items. But if the corresponding factory is at 0%, you could keep stuff down for many hours, though that practically won't happen in game.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Lusche on September 02, 2012, 10:02:47 AM
Did a sizeable B17 run last night on Knight city and ord factory. Resistance was light as usual. Only way to really know what the effect would be was to do the mission. I'll probably do some more experimenting to see what the overall cause & effect turns out to be as far as those objects being vital enough to be attacked and defended. So far, it looks like business as usual, but we will see.

The 'furballers' (not meant as a derogative) do not care about the war and don't bother to climb to alt to stop buffs.
The 'landgrabber' are too much stuck in their ways, and as we all know "defence is useless/boring" anyway. So the only people right now really 'appreciating' and making use of the change are the (more or less) dedicated bomber guys, who do strike at the strats and not defend them.

There was a lot more of bombing activity over the strats yesterday, but resitance was overall indeed very light. Almost every bomber came through and dropped his load, the ones that were intercepted and shot down were dieing almost invariably after their attack - making the defense non-effective.

Defending the strats would require keeping an eye on the map and identifying threats long before they arrive over the factories, and not taking off when the strats are flashing (and on top of that,flying a true interception course instead of taking off behind them and chasing them down). But we know that not many players are willing or even able to do so. Always fun to see a strat raider cross a base way behind the front at 20k, and below him the wirbels on the field are trying to shoot him....
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: skribetm on September 02, 2012, 01:04:58 PM
love the new strat adjustments. you've made previous land-grabbers into fulltime bombers.
twice yesterday alchemists flew to rook strats in huge bomber formations + escorts.
once with NOE lancs (no escorts), but they got bloopered by our CV guarding the strats.
next one was a hi-alt B-17 mission, although chuwie was absent for this one. (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/26005082/ahss1.bmp)

new strat system has been fun. i hope it stays this way +refinements.


I never worked for Kesmei. Nothing in AH has any code in any way from AW.No art work was ever used, or even looked at to build AH. I wrote an entire different product (Warbirds) and created a different company in between playing AW and writing AH.
HiTech

some talk never gets old. (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/26005082/ahss0.bmp)  :huh
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Greebo on September 02, 2012, 01:06:13 PM
How about if HTC created a long range radar sited in the strats to give defenders more of a chance to intercept? Give it maybe a 30-40 mile range and make it a lot tougher than field radar.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Ten60 on September 02, 2012, 01:34:37 PM
How about if HTC created a long range radar sited in the strats to give defenders more of a chance to intercept? Give it maybe a 30-40 mile range and make it a lot tougher than field radar.
+10.  Extra large dar would would entirely realistic and appropriate.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Midway on September 02, 2012, 01:37:33 PM
How about if HTC created a long range radar sited in the strats to give defenders more of a chance to intercept? Give it maybe a 30-40 mile range and make it a lot tougher than field radar.

Bar dar works great for this.  I've found Snailman's B29s a few times thanks to bar dar.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 100Coogn on September 02, 2012, 04:08:36 PM
See rule #4
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: bustr on September 02, 2012, 04:27:02 PM
Now that the door has been opened to make bombing strats worth the trouble, it's still not worth the trouble for fighter fans to defend them.

The best example was a big long furball I was in for hours friday night to take A20 from A16. Very few players were willing to stop furballing once they knew bombers were hitting their strats just a sector away from the furball and their 163. They were more interested in flying 163 to A20 to furball.

So with the door opened to the slippery slope leading down to strategic bottelnecks, here is one thing that can be done to get fighter pilots interested in protecting their status quo. Put a 163\262\Tempest\F4u-4\spit14 factory in the strats. As it's destruction percentage goes up, so does the price for 163\262\Tempest\F4u-4\spit14 for that country until non are available. And as the resupply effort takes place the perk price reduces back to normal with each resupply or some such formula. Throw a few bombers into this while we are at it. Even get so nasty as to engage a perk price on P51D, D9, Ta152 and K4 when the perked fighter factory is 100% down.

You could even get the tank guys up in fighters or resupplying the strat if you include their pet rides in the same process. I suppose a modifyer for ENY will have to work with it.

If the HQ and strat are now high value bombing targets, it's logical to give them long range radar to assist in defending them. Create a secondary clipboard map that only shows the long range radar coverage for the HQ and strat. The germans watched the allied bomber hoards group up over england and all the way to their targets on the continent if I'm not mistaken. Restrict this radar to only showing planes above 10-15k but, with a long radius. Bombers that try to stay just below this most of the way to the HQ or strat will leave themselves open to interception.

But, if you sit back and look at this from a 50,000 foot perspective. The bomber guys will be controlling everyones game happiness by forcing them into fighters or on resupply runs in the hope that they can get their favorite perked ride at a resonable price before some jerk with a B29 screws their only saturday in the last month that they have time to play the game.

So maybe as your bomber guys destroy another country's perk plane factory your own price for them goes down untill they are free or something like that. At least you would make the arena an intersting place if 3 bomber squads worked together from the 3 different countires and 100% dropped all 3 perk ride factorys. Hundreds of noobs in 262 all over the arena in littel hoards untill the first resupply train or players got to the strats.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Saurdaukar on September 02, 2012, 05:11:56 PM
Now that the door has been opened to make bombing strats worth the trouble, it's still not worth the trouble for fighter fans to defend them.

Nope.  Not at 35,000ft in the MA.

Give me an individual dar dot for any airplane over 20k and I'll come play with the lot of you. 

Otherwise; spending an hour climbing to the moon and chasing dar bars across multiple sectors, in search of a fight, isn't my idea of a good time.

Frankly, I have much more fun upping from a vulched field.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: 100Coogn on September 02, 2012, 05:59:56 PM
The strats are still all consolidated together.  There seemed to be a  more strategic approach when they were all separated. 
This of course is just my thoughts and opinions of the strats placement.
I'm happy to see that HTC is even working on the strats technicalities.

Coogan
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: chris3 on September 03, 2012, 05:30:10 AM
moin

give it a time, im sure we will see hardcore strat devenders too as we have now hardcore strat atteckers now. there are alot of people arund uping a 410 to fly for houers to find some sneaky bombers, thats the way thay fight there fight. the others are not realy disturbet in there way of fight.
and if a big darbar goes to the strat always a big group of defenders is searching them, its always a big fun.

so its realy a good change, because all kind playstyles winn, normaly everyone should be happy?!

cu christian
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Debrody on September 03, 2012, 06:19:22 AM
Spending hours in a 410 only to find a straight-flying bomber, not much fun in my book.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: chris3 on September 03, 2012, 07:08:17 AM
moin

you dont need to do that, there are other players for that job in the comunity, maybe your interests are in other aereas.

maybe you will up if the 410 spots a large mission and gives you the heading and altitude.

cu christian
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Scherf on September 03, 2012, 07:24:07 AM
Spending hours in a 410 only to find a straight-flying bomber, not much fun in my book.

It is in mine, and it don't take hours.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Noir on September 03, 2012, 07:33:22 AM
This HQ puff ack is deadly to fighters, but harmless to bombers.

Please fix it.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Debrody on September 03, 2012, 07:46:31 AM
Allright, Chris and Scherf, if you think so... i just cant get the logic behind that. True, my brain has only a handful of working cells remaining...
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: chris3 on September 03, 2012, 08:01:00 AM
hi debrody,

the logic is that in game are a lot of diverent interest and playstiles. These change ofers a new playground for people who don t like furbals or base taking stuff much. now the people which like to do strategig stuff are happy too.  thats one of the best things in aces high, the wide variety in how you can play the game.

cu christian
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: uptown on September 03, 2012, 08:23:25 AM
The strats are still all consolidated together.  There seemed to be a  more strategic approach when they were all separated. 
This of course is just my thoughts and opinions of the strats placement.
I'm happy to see that HTC is even working on the strats technicalities.

Coogan
I too would like to see the factories spread out more.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: chris3 on September 03, 2012, 08:35:07 AM
moin

im not sure if that will help, i think the big strat desing at the moment suport the devending because everyone nows the enmy target. if you spread out all the factorys it will more suport the old milk runs.

cu christian
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: thndregg on September 03, 2012, 09:35:45 AM
if you spread out all the factorys it will more suport the old milk runs.

One big (documented) reason they consolidated them to begin with, if I recall correctly. I would have to find where I read it.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: SmokinLoon on September 03, 2012, 09:48:29 AM
One big (documented) reason they consolidated them to begin with, if I recall correctly. I would have to find where I read it.

The thing with consolidating them is that it essentially wiped out what was a major source of headaches for defenders: low level attacks made my attack aircraft, i.e. no more Mossi Mk IV, 110G-2, or other such attack specific aircraft.  When the factories were spread out I often took a Mossi in NOE, hammered the target, and was able to retreat out of there before the proverbial La7 showed up for an intercept.  If I tried that at the industrial complex I'd get an introduction to buht secks.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Debrody on September 03, 2012, 10:16:27 AM
Sir,
the 110, for example, was a close support attack aircraft (and a bomber interceptor of course) instead of being a long range factory-killer. Those were the bombers, historically.
Title: Re: change to strats?
Post by: Rob52240 on September 07, 2012, 01:46:50 PM
 :old:  Not if you're based in occupied France.

Sir,
the 110, for example, was a close support attack aircraft (and a bomber interceptor of course) instead of being a long range factory-killer. Those were the bombers, historically.