Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: hgtonyvi on January 08, 2017, 12:31:01 PM

Title: Who thinks this
Post by: hgtonyvi on January 08, 2017, 12:31:01 PM
Who thinks thos extra large airfields should be eliminated from the game. This isn't modern war, it's ww2 lol. I don't recall having them in AH2. Keep thos fields or trash em!!! ??
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: Randy1 on January 08, 2017, 12:42:42 PM
They have a use for sure by providing a hard spot in the map taking portion of the game.  They are very difficult to capture.
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: The Fugitive on January 08, 2017, 12:45:14 PM
I'd like to see the zone strat come back and these large bases be the zone base.  :devil
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: hgtonyvi on January 08, 2017, 12:50:38 PM
They have a use for sure by providing a hard spot in the map taking portion of the game.  They are very difficult to capture.
Again this is WW2, we are not dealing with Air to ground missles....Everything in here is done manually.
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: Chalenge on January 08, 2017, 12:56:01 PM
I'd like to see the zone strat come back and these large bases be the zone base.  :devil

This, as I wished for.
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: The Fugitive on January 08, 2017, 12:57:01 PM
If I remember right, Waffle modeled that large field off a picture of a WWII field in England.
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: hgtonyvi on January 08, 2017, 12:58:03 PM
If I remember right, Waffle modeled that large field off a picture of a WWII field in England.
Really?
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: The Fugitive on January 08, 2017, 01:50:47 PM
Really?

Im not sure which one, but I seem to remember it when he first posted it as a tease picture during the Alpha. Google "world war ii british airfields" and you should be able to find it.
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: DmonSlyr on January 08, 2017, 02:33:39 PM
What's the point of having a large map if you are going to put a TT in the middle of it?

Base distance and base placement strategy is the bigger issue!
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: rvflyer on January 08, 2017, 03:00:35 PM
That would be a great improvement to AH3.

I'd like to see the zone strat come back and these large bases be the zone base.  :devil
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: EskimoJoe on January 08, 2017, 11:01:50 PM
Again this is WW2

And here I was thinking it was just a game, huh
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: Bruv119 on January 09, 2017, 01:29:43 AM
I love them, just wish my PC didn't chug to a slide show everytime I am anywhere near one.   I refer to them as "stalingrad"  because the usual joes who steam roll field after field are not capable of coming up with a feasible plan to capture them swiftly.   Even with just one person defending them.

Needs at least 5 guys all working together who know what they are doing to bring a successful attempt.     
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: Scca on January 09, 2017, 08:08:47 AM
I love them, just wish my PC didn't chug to a slide show everytime I am anywhere near one. 
Same here...  I am usually over 50 fps, but when I get near an extra large field, 12-17... unplayable...
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: Lazerr on January 09, 2017, 08:45:46 AM
I love them, just wish my PC didn't chug to a slide show everytime I am anywhere near one.   I refer to them as "stalingrad"  because the usual joes who steam roll field after field are not capable of coming up with a feasible plan to capture them swiftly.   Even with just one person defending them.

Needs at least 5 guys all working together who know what they are doing to bring a successful attempt.   

Bingo
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: Zimme83 on January 09, 2017, 09:44:13 AM
(http://www.invisibleworks.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/RAF-Attlebridge-%C2%A9-Nick-Stone.jpg)
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: Squire on January 09, 2017, 12:27:39 PM
Frame rates for me are almost unplayable when the AAA opens up.
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: ONTOS on January 09, 2017, 12:53:05 PM
Eliminate the  extra large airfields with extreme prejudice.
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: hgtonyvi on January 09, 2017, 02:01:26 PM
Yes frame rates drop to 55 for me and feels like I'm I the matrix.
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: BBQsam on January 09, 2017, 02:23:40 PM
Google "world war ii british airfields" and you should be able to find it

Ok I did      here it is:
   

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22world+war+ii+british+airfields%22&rlz=1C1NDCM_enUS695US695&oq=%22world+war+ii+british+airfields%22&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 (https://www.google.com/search?q=%22world+war+ii+british+airfields%22&rlz=1C1NDCM_enUS695US695&oq=%22world+war+ii+british+airfields%22&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)

Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: bustr on January 09, 2017, 02:26:49 PM
You could always wish list that they be limited to being the un-capturable fields near the HQ.

The river and village attached to the airfield would make a good town2 object offering like we have three GV base type objects. The question you should ask about frame rates is: if the airfield was a separate object, would players have the same FPS hit flying around in it's ack?

How many of you have similar FPS hits flying in the ack while furballing low over strats? Your FPS hits may be due to a density of building objects coupled with a density of ack.

If a greater number of the super large airfield were placed on terrains forcing them to be needed to win the war, that fact would force players to discover the quickest way to capture them. Just like we have become experts at the 1x1 mile town object attached to the normal three airfields. As of now, the super large airfields on maps are an irritating curiosity to be avoided as capture targets if possible.

So this post may be more important as a player feedback from real MA combat testing to the effectiveness of a new base object for creating combat and fun. It appears unless forced to capture it, the base requires more effort than the average players are willing to expend to over come it's size and complexity. The few times I've been in fights over one, it is extremely chaotic on either side of the fight and very few players have any clue what other players are trying to describe in terms of the local terrain. Even though there is a bridge just back of the map room for an M3 to sneak in if the attackers had enough experience attacking and suppressing the setup.

It would have been perfect for the days when NOE hoards ruled the arena to have a large scale conflict against a field that could hold it's own against a hoard. It is like one of the normal large airfields was placed on a strat along with a map room.   
Title: Re: Who thinks this
Post by: 1stpar3 on January 09, 2017, 02:55:48 PM
Have yet to see a reason for the "This is WW2...not dealing with AA misiles" posts! :O Is the complaint about the Auto Puffy? As far as frame rates, YEP, mine take a hit as well :( Ports are just as bad, if not worse for my FPS. Its rare that I ever see an attack on one of those larger Air Fields. Just dont see why they are a problem :headscratch: More than enough other bases to take or attack, and a lot more pertinent issues to work on, IMO :old: