Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Lazerr on September 29, 2017, 12:28:39 AM

Title: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lazerr on September 29, 2017, 12:28:39 AM
see above...
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: viking73 on September 29, 2017, 01:18:21 AM
Ya it's not the m3. It's the easiness of upping a town with supplies from any vehicle. Troops with m3 is one of the most normal parts of the game.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Crash Orange on September 29, 2017, 02:53:32 AM
It isn't the end of the world, but if they're going to nerf base taking they ought to nerf resupply the same amount and remove field supplies from the M3 as well so the troop carriers are just as fast as the town supps.

I do wish Hitech or someone from HTC would weigh in on why troops were removed from M3s.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on September 29, 2017, 04:05:22 AM
I have to admit that I'm missing the point of that troops thing too.
Was it to get the goon back into play? Now, the demise of the goon wasn't caused by the M3 but by terrain design. Now it will just be the SdKfz instead of the M3 - slower and thus will be intercepted more often, but still advantageous over a goon as long as there's a convenient GV spawn around.

 :headscratch:
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: waystin2 on September 29, 2017, 07:17:39 AM
Sometimes you you give customers what they need not what they want. 
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: LilMak on September 29, 2017, 07:53:43 AM
I seem remember a thread a while back where HT eluded to reducing the number of troops in a M3 to potentially give the an advantage to actually taking a goon. Personally, it always bugged (still does) me that you can generally get to an enemy objective faster in a GV than you can in a plane. That and GV spawns across large bodies of water. Seems counterintuitive in an air combat game.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: EskimoJoe on September 29, 2017, 08:48:22 AM
I hope they add in the iconic deuce and a half for quick resupps now. Hooray for logistics  :rock
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Delirium on September 29, 2017, 09:16:53 AM
I seem remember a thread a while back where HT eluded to reducing the number of troops in a M3 to potentially give the an advantage to actually taking a goon. Personally, it always bugged (still does) me that you can generally get to an enemy objective faster in a GV than you can in a plane. That and GV spawns across large bodies of water. Seems counterintuitive in an air combat game.

I agree completely. In addition, there is absolutely no reason to use the roads in the game, in fact most of the time you don't to avoid getting knocked aside by the convoys. Lowering the overland speed of all vehicles would have fixed many issues.

Ok, don't give us what we want, give us what we need. This is akin to having a your stomach checked for ulcers by performing a colonoscopy and working your way up. Sure, we may need it but it doesn't address the problem, it is a backwards solution, and may just be a pain in the ***.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Wiley on September 29, 2017, 09:36:08 AM
I would respectfully submit that this change likely has nothing to do with the community grumbling about resupply.  It seems to be out of left field to me too.

Wiley.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: pallero on September 29, 2017, 09:37:42 AM
I would fly goons a lot, if it not ruins bomber scores.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Mister Fork on September 29, 2017, 09:44:29 AM
I'm wondering if he accidentally disabled troops when he meant to disable resupply... wouldn't be the first time Hitech did something unexpected...  :bolt:



:D - ya know I luvs ya Hitech.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: DubiousKB on September 29, 2017, 09:51:13 AM
I'm wondering if he accidentally disabled troops when he meant to disable resupply... wouldn't be the first time Hitech did something unexpected...  :bolt:

Until we get an explanation, i'm going with the above.  :noid  :huh
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Devil 505 on September 29, 2017, 09:56:42 AM
I'm wondering if he accidentally disabled troops when he meant to disable resupply... wouldn't be the first time Hitech did something unexpected...  :bolt:



:D - ya know I luvs ya Hitech.

Maybe, but that still begs the question of why only the M3? The real disease is any GV capable of delivering troops or supplies. Disabling either on only the M3 only treats a symptom but does not come close to being a cure.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Popeye44 on September 29, 2017, 10:00:51 AM
Would like to also know why? And why not remove troops from the Skd too? Took a base today with one. Does not make sense?
 :old:
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on September 29, 2017, 10:01:00 AM
Maybe, but that still begs the question of why only the M3?

Because someone, just like 90%* of the AH players, did not think of the SdKfz 251  :noid






*)yes, I made that number up
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: ACE on September 29, 2017, 10:01:40 AM
For sure a weird sure a weird direction...
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: DubiousKB on September 29, 2017, 10:02:06 AM
4 Jeep are WAY faster than 1 m3 anyways....  :devil   JUst try to recruit jeep jockeys though...  :bolt:
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Scca on September 29, 2017, 10:34:29 AM
I would fly goons a lot, if it not ruins bomber scores.
If you get the base take, it really helps bomber score
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on September 29, 2017, 11:35:01 AM
If you get the base take, it really helps bomber score

This.
A single base capture can be worth a dozen deaths in the goon, easily.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Randy1 on September 29, 2017, 12:01:52 PM
I can not believe HTC listened to a few whining players  that had very little to do with base captures.  Surely this is some sort of joke.

These same whining players would love to land numerous goon kills.

If true, this is a dark day for AH.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on September 29, 2017, 12:11:28 PM
I can not believe HTC listened to a few whining players  that had very little to do with base captures.


Name one player asking to remove troops from m3.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lazerr on September 29, 2017, 12:12:23 PM
I can not believe HTC listened to a few whining players  that had very little to do with base captures.  Surely this is some sort of joke.

These same whining players would love to land numerous goon kills.

If true, this is a dark day for AH.

Nobody is stopping you from taking bases randy.. lol.

Remember the answer you guys gave us for our resuupply whines?  Get more organized... kill the vh at the next field.. bla bla bla..

My response to you is now the same.. lol
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lazerr on September 29, 2017, 12:18:07 PM
I can not believe HTC listened to a few whining players  that had very little to do with base captures.  Surely this is some sort of joke.

These same whining players would love to land numerous goon kills.

If true, this is a dark day for AH.

Also the whiners you mentioned actually enjoy base taking.. we just enjoy the fights that used to go with it.

Rather than slithering around like a snake in the grass to destroy a maproom, or run supplies because they dont want to die defending.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: 1ijac on September 29, 2017, 12:22:09 PM
After the removal of troops from M3s, bases were still being rolled.  I'm all for keeping the resupply of bases, towns and strats with the M3.

one-eye
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Scca on September 29, 2017, 12:23:51 PM
Can't wait to see the Snail bar chart on this one
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: bustr on September 29, 2017, 12:27:37 PM
What all can carry troops now?

1. - SdKfz 251
2. - Jeep
3. - LVT
4. - c47

So what is Hitech testing by removing troop carrying from the M3, the jeep cannot carry feild supply's, and the M3 still can. While the SdK is an M3 by another name untouched. Is he trying to test player response before a major pending change to a defacto game institution so he doesn't drive players away? I bet almost everyone who uses the M3 for GV\base supply runs and troops has it in their favorites tab, and has to go looking for the jeep, LVT, SdK and c47 in the other tabs. If their response is to find the next equivalent in the list to do the same job, at this point when you are helping people to change life style habits, you add another small change. A larger change is easier to accept if you have been in the habit of change up to it.

The arguments in the forums over the M3 have been game play ideological to say the least, rancorous and divisive at other times. Major game changes or lack of in the past have been responded to by some players leaving the game. Hitech gets stuck balancing a both ends stick stinky from it's center, while hoping for good results and not having to grab either end.

Lazerr is in the ideologically rancorous camp as you can see. :O 

Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on September 29, 2017, 12:28:03 PM
Can't wait to see the Snail bar chart on this one

I can do that only when it has been on for a full tour.
Also, if things would stay like this, I doubt there would be any big change in my numbers. I can only discern between 'bomber' and 'vehicle' base captures, and most M3 captures will simply be replaced by SdKfz captures and not goon ones.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: SlipKnt on September 29, 2017, 01:45:32 PM
Take a bunch of the SdKfz 251s loaded with rockets and troops all over town...   and maybe a single M4...

Rocket the place then all let troops run from all different directions...   

Like a manifestation of red!!!
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: scott66 on September 29, 2017, 03:28:10 PM
See I knew Lazer got the point... It's the resupply that people are complaining about not the base taking but I don't have a problem with either just for the record
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: bustr on September 29, 2017, 03:46:39 PM
Take a bunch of the SdKfz 251s loaded with rockets and troops all over town...   and maybe a single M4...

Rocket the place then all let troops run from all different directions...   

Like a manifestation of red!!!

At least tell them how to use the rockets. I just tested them on a range, level ground to the target.

23 degree rockets - 1000yds.
45 degree rockets - 2250yds.

You can only fire them from the drivers seat. Zoom 100%, the aimpoint is the top of the first black band from the bottom of the pole seen through the drivers window. At 1000yds the rockets spread about 20-30ft. At 2250yds the rockets can spread up to 120ft. Rockets will hit short and long of the range given somewhat, they are not very accurate.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Scca on September 29, 2017, 05:15:14 PM
At least tell them how to use the rockets. I just tested them on a range, level ground to the target.

23 degree rockets - 1000yds.
45 degree rockets - 2250yds.

You can only fire them from the drivers seat. Zoom 100%, the aimpoint is the top of the first black band from the bottom of the pole seen through the drivers window. At 1000yds the rockets spread about 20-30ft. At 2250yds the rockets can spread up to 120ft. Rockets will hit short and long of the range given somewhat, they are not very accurate.
The distance changes a bunch if moving forward or backward. Do test yourself off line.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Dundee on September 29, 2017, 06:41:34 PM
As you can see there are quite a few players not happy with this move...... so it would be nice for the people we pay a subscription to to explain why this move.......really. as customers I think we would like to know
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: TheBug on September 29, 2017, 07:02:05 PM
As you can see there are quite a few players not happy with this move...... so it would be nice for the people we pay a subscription to to explain why this move.......really. as customers I think we would like to know

Pretty much your only right as a paying customer is you can leave.  You should learn some diplomacy.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Scca on September 29, 2017, 07:36:19 PM
Pretty much your only right as a paying customer is you can leave.  You should learn some diplomacy.
Sorry, I don't think he's wrong on this, and I don't feel his request is out
of line.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: EagleDNY on September 29, 2017, 07:38:23 PM
4 Jeep are WAY faster than 1 m3 anyways....  :devil   JUst try to recruit jeep jockeys though...  :bolt:

Not really - I find a jeep with to be especially useful when trying to take a vbase.  First off it gives you a fast scout that is hard to hit and easy to hide so you can run right up close to the vbase and let your GV buddies know what is coming out of the VH and where it is going.  A couple of boxes of vehicle supplies go a long way towards keeping your side's Wirbles going in the face of enemy air cover as well.  If you want some real fun, sneak onto the enemy vbase and hide out in the storch hanger - wack some storches, and the .50 cal on your jeep is perfectly adequate for killing guns if you are careful.

Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: EagleDNY on September 29, 2017, 07:39:24 PM
The distance changes a bunch if moving forward or backward. Do test yourself off line.

Anybody ever hit a tank with them?  Do any damage??
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: mustng2 on September 29, 2017, 08:47:28 PM
Removing the troops from the M3 is simply a bad idea.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Flayed1 on September 30, 2017, 12:50:44 AM
I for one am finding it interesting. I've used the 251 a few times back in AH2 but usually the M3 gets the attention due to it being a lil faster and as far as I can tell from the base taking efforts today. that is what people were most concerned with, the all mighty SPEED.   While I can agree that speed is a major factor when taking a base I did find the armor on the SK to be quite fun as plane after plane strafed me with little other effect than to kill my poor gunners. Bombs and rockets are another story of course.  :)
  I also found it interesting that many people had no clue what the SK was called or that it could even carry troops. Guys just kept telling each other to get the German thing or some such lol. 
  The worst thing I find about it is the gun sights. You can't see a thing, and I find it better to page up and lock all view angles above the armor and do my best with the tracers.
 One other thing that may be a lil bug.  I don't know how low slung the bumper is on this thing but it won't drive over the sidewalks in town. Maybe a collision box need to be tweaked?

 Anyway I really don't see what all the fuss is about and personally find it fun to try and adapt to a new situation and drive something that usually gets covered in dust in the hanger.
   <S> all and see you in the air or on the ground as the case may be.  :salute
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: wrench on September 30, 2017, 05:09:04 AM
Biggest impact I see is reducing the chance of the "1 man base take/sneak".
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Randy1 on September 30, 2017, 06:35:03 AM
Wow!  I really enjoyed the improved air to air combat last night since the deleting of the m3 troops.  We Rooks topped the Bish base and shot them down as they took off.  An hour later they come to our base and shot us as we took off.  You air combat whiners are right.  Your K/D goes nothing but up. 

The excitement level? 

The same as a warm, brown turd slapping the water of your favorite, white, porcelain receptor.

 :rofl
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on September 30, 2017, 06:46:22 AM
Your use of the word "whiners" is highly ironic.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lazerr on September 30, 2017, 08:42:10 AM
Wow!  I really enjoyed the improved air to air combat last night since the deleting of the m3 troops.  We Rooks topped the Bish base and shot them down as they took off.  An hour later they come to our base and shot us as we took off.  You air combat whiners are right.  Your K/D goes nothing but up. 

The excitement level? 

The same as a warm, brown turd slapping the water of your favorite, white, porcelain receptor.

 :rofl

You seem to be pretty confused about the whole topic in general.

The push was to remove supplies from m3s.. not troops.  You vulched last night?  Because no troops were available in a m3?  Was the c47 shop closed?  LVT?

YOU seem like the kind of guy that will complain about anything, regardless if it carries any legit facts.

Im sure hitech is running a few weeks of test with troops disabled in m3s, then a few weeks of it with just supplies disabled to see where the unbalance is with its use

You will likely still whine.. because you dont see a problem with how huge the % of use of the m3 in the melee arena really is.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: BHawk51 on September 30, 2017, 08:58:32 AM
I don't complain often but somebody needs to explain the logic behind this M3 ( no troops) idea. As of today nothing from HT, that I've hear of, as to why they decided to try this "experiment" as someone called it. Yes this Sim is theirs to do with what they want, but need I remind them WHO PAYS THE BILLS TO KEEP THE DOORS OPEN??   

We do, the loyal Aces High members, which is comprised of what 300 total? The Steam "experiment" sure turned out to be a flop, as the Xbox generation want immediate satisfaction and you cannot learn this Sim in 2 weeks.

So be careful and remember who your customers are, or this Sim will be going the way of Air Warriors.

BHawk51
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: TheBug on September 30, 2017, 09:01:19 AM
Sorry, I don't think he's wrong on this, and I don't feel his request is out
of line.

Let's see what kind of answer he gets then.  :salute
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: popeye on September 30, 2017, 09:10:03 AM
The SdKfz 251 seems to do the same tasks, except the radio channels suck -- nothing but Wagner.    :D
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Traveler on September 30, 2017, 09:32:18 AM
Surprised that everyone doesn't remember the last time HTC tweaked the game, remember about 10 years ago, he implemented base ordering to control and encourage combat by forcing the order in which bases had to be captured.   We suffered through that and did a full 360 turn around, in the end nothing changed except a lot of guys got pissed and left the game.  Here we go again.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on September 30, 2017, 09:41:53 AM
Surprised that everyone doesn't remember the last time HTC tweaked the game, remember about 10 years ago, he implemented base ordering to control and encourage combat by forcing the order in which bases had to be captured.   We suffered through that and did a full 360 turn around, in the end nothing changed except a lot of guys got pissed and left the game.  Here we go again.

Base capture order was a massive change of the game's fundamentals.
This one, so far, ain't.

By the way, the base capture order was only active for a very short time and only in one of the two LW main arenas.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: oakranger on September 30, 2017, 09:57:00 AM
Because someone, just like 90%* of the AH players, did not think of the SdKfz 251  :noid

That is the only GV i need to kill in the D-25.      :furious






*)yes, I made that number up
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lyme on September 30, 2017, 10:09:59 AM
I don't understand this move either.  Yes, the M3 with troops discourages flying a C47, but the M3 with supplies completely discourages combat as the best base defense is resupplying town rather than fighting.

I doubt we see any appreciable increase in C47 captures, and an extreme increase in the german M3 base captures

Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Volron on September 30, 2017, 10:36:49 AM
My guess: The thread about the M3's effectiveness had HiTech take a close look at how often the M3 gets used over the other vehicles for troops and sups.  From there, he opted to remove troops from the M3 because it is the pretty much the ONLY vehicle seriously used to bring troops in when there is a GV spawn to a base.  It was either this or a perk tag put on the M3.

The result: He has made the M3 less effective now.


Snail, would you be able to post a chart of the M3's usage over all other vehicles (that carry troops and supplies) and the C-47 before this change to the M3?  I'm going to guess that the use of the M3 is going a bit higher than all of them, and probably combined the GV's that carry troops and supplies won't top the M3.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Randy1 on September 30, 2017, 11:02:14 AM
Your use of the word "whiners" is highly ironic.

And it was meant to be.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on September 30, 2017, 11:05:03 AM
Snail, would you be able to post a chart of the M3's usage over all other vehicles (that carry troops and supplies) and the C-47 before this change to the M3?


If this thing would last for the full next tour, I could show any change in vehicle vs bomber base captures. And, of course, kills&deaths for all freight carrying vehicles.
There's no doubt that 251 deaths would go up almost exponentially, as before two days ago it was almost never used for anything in the MA.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: ccvi on September 30, 2017, 11:49:22 AM
If this thing would last for the full next tour, I could show any change in vehicle vs bomber base captures. And, of course, kills&deaths for all freight carrying vehicles.

You could take this month's numbers and substract previous months average numbers weighted on something that's not affected by the change to compute a rough estimate for the part of the month with M3 troops disabled. Huge error bars, but better than nothing. I doubt it'll stay like this for the complete next month.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Arlo on September 30, 2017, 11:55:32 AM
I actually heard a player on range last night so against the idea of using a goon that he suggested using 4 jeeps. After all ... a goon might get shot down and four players in jeeps would be so much better. Four guys in goons ... however.

(I'm thinking, once again, that it's not the game that's broken.)  :rofl
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Randy1 on September 30, 2017, 12:08:05 PM
Vox chatter today was blaming the m3 fiasco on Vinkman.  Word has it some of the HTC staff got into the Vinkman hooch.   In a drunken stupor, one of the staff accidentally disabled the M3 troops. :rofl

Must be true.  No other good reason to do that.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Slate on September 30, 2017, 12:09:11 PM
 Used an SdKfz 251  the other day to capture a base and win the war on my 2nd try. The first try I fired a rocket by mistake and blew myself up because I was near a Tree.  :noid
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: germ on September 30, 2017, 12:30:05 PM
Used an SdKfz 251  the other day to capture a base and win the war on my 2nd try. The first try I fired a rocket by mistake and blew myself up because I was near a Tree.  :noid

I captured a base last night with one as well. In fact, I scored a kill on an M3 attempting to resupply the town. They're just slower is all, so I suppose it's not the end of the world.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: The Fugitive on September 30, 2017, 01:17:47 PM
My guess: The thread about the M3's effectiveness had HiTech take a close look at how often the M3 gets used over the other vehicles for troops and sups.  From there, he opted to remove troops from the M3 because it is the pretty much the ONLY vehicle seriously used to bring troops in when there is a GV spawn to a base.  It was either this or a perk tag put on the M3.

The result: He has made the M3 less effective now.


Snail, would you be able to post a chart of the M3's usage over all other vehicles (that carry troops and supplies) and the C-47 before this change to the M3?  I'm going to guess that the use of the M3 is going a bit higher than all of them, and probably combined the GV's that carry troops and supplies won't top the M3.

My guess is he cant split the M3 usage supply/troop drop. By removing troop drop from the equation he can now see how often the M3 is used for supply runs. If it looks like the supply runs ARE an unbalancing issue then maybe he will change it. Im sure the troop cuts for the M3 are only temporary.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Volron on September 30, 2017, 01:27:32 PM

If this thing would last for the full next tour, I could show any change in vehicle vs bomber base captures. And, of course, kills&deaths for all freight carrying vehicles.
There's no doubt that 251 deaths would go up almost exponentially, as before two days ago it was almost never used for anything in the MA.

Let's hope it sticks around for at least a full tour then. :)

I captured a base last night with one as well. In fact, I scored a kill on an M3 attempting to resupply the town. They're just slower is all, so I suppose it's not the end of the world.

SDK has more armor than an M3 though, so it makes up for it.  I've survived strafes with the SDK that would destroyed the M3. :aok

My guess is he cant split the M3 usage supply/troop drop. By removing troop drop from the equation he can now see how often the M3 is used for supply runs. If it looks like the supply runs ARE an unbalancing issue then maybe he will change it. Im sure the troop cuts for the M3 are only temporary.

That is a good point.  That may mean the end result of this test will be; troops/no field sups for M3's, or, M3's stay as they were, but a perk tag is placed on it.  Maybe 1-3 perks. :headscratch:

Mind you, I'm not saying the M3 should be perked. :P
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: popeye on September 30, 2017, 02:12:03 PM
Used an SdKfz 251  the other day to capture a base and win the war on my 2nd try. The first try I fired a rocket by mistake and blew myself up because I was near a Tree.  :noid

 :rofl :rofl :rofl
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Mongoose on September 30, 2017, 03:25:26 PM
  Here is something else to consider.  This is not meant as criticism, or a vote either way.  This is just something that needs to be considered before a final decision is made.

  A couple of weeks ago, a group of us were about to capture a base.  I noticed an LA headed for the town on the deck, but then no one could find him.  We all figured he had crashed. Our C-47 dropped troops, and the troops ran all the way to the map room, but didn't take. 

   I figured the pilot of the LA had bailed, and was in the town waiting for the troops.  So I bailed out over the town and went looking.   Sure enough, I found the pilot running around.  I mentally congratulated the pilot for being so sneaky, then I shot him. We made a second troop drop, and captured the base. 

  A pilot on the ground has no icon, and is nearly, if not totally, invisible from the air.  In AH2, you could run into the map room, and wait inside for the troops.  In AH 3, you can't enter the map room, but there are many places you can hide.  If you strafe the map room, there are still many places a pilot can hide out, and still intercept the incoming troopers.  In the aforementioned story, we did strafe the map room, but the pilot survived to intercept our troops. 

  Now, I like dropping troops from a C-47.  But from this experience I concluded that it would be preferable to run an M3 all the way to the map room and release troops there, so I could guard against a lone pilot hiding in the rubble.

   Again, not a vote either way, just something to consider.

Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: ccvi on September 30, 2017, 05:42:19 PM
If it looks like the supply runs ARE an unbalancing issue then maybe he will change it. Im sure the troop cuts for the M3 are only temporary.

The problem is not in the number of the runs. It's the instanteneous magic at an inconvenient moment. 9 minutes left, troops running, and suddenly everything is back up because some supply package hit the ground somewhere 2 miles out (loading hint says up to half a mile, but it seems to be more than that). Same as in Mongoose story - a tiny incident deciding the outcome.

The other extreme would be fields bombed slowly into uselessness, not changing sides immediately, but being neutral/destroyed, then needing resupply before being usuable again, by which ever side manages to get supplies in (old owner or new, or 3rd party). Of course, in such scenario the horde would always win - and no tiny detail could ever turn the tides for the side with low numbers. On the third hand, larger numbers provide more opportunities for small magic to happen to save the day, so in the end details don't matter because numbers always win.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: asterix on October 01, 2017, 03:18:10 AM
Whatever the reason I like the change done to the M3. Slower troop delivery or more people needed for faster ground troop delivery (jeep) is a good thing in my opinion. Actually I would like troops gone from a Jeep as well.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: icepac on October 01, 2017, 12:04:24 PM
Simple......make the M3 only spawnable from the vh.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Scca on October 01, 2017, 12:10:35 PM
Simple......make the M3 only spawnable from the vh.
-1
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 01, 2017, 05:24:43 PM
In game there's quite a bit of extreme reactions about it, most of it accusing "BBS whiners" for being the reason of this measure. And again, mostly in a very (unintended) ironic way.
However, none of them (so far), told me what's really SO bad about it, other than "IT SUCKS". I mean, what's factually so bad about it for the whole game and your personal play that you (and so many people you claim to know) are about to leave AH? Some are totally refusing (or ignoring) the fact that the SdKfz is still there ("A25 WF, but we cant get troops there, no m3s anymore, thanks HT!"
Yes, I do get it that you don't like it. But what exactly is now "breaking the game"? It's not that a particular aspect of gameplay has been removed. It's nothing like the Capture Order experiment, or the Arena Caps, or even the splitting up of the central strats.
Bases still get captured. Wars are still being won. (I did not even note a slower rate of captures yet). You can still drive troops to the maproom, even just one player. You are not being FORCED using four Jeeps or the dreaded goon. The tactics used are essentially still the same.

So what is really "breaking the game" at the moment? What does really make the game near unplayable? Seriously, what is the thing I am missing?

Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lazerr on October 01, 2017, 05:32:08 PM
In game there's quite a bit of extreme reactions about it, most of it accusing "BBS whiners" for being the reason of this measure. And again, mostly in a very (unintended) ironic way.
However, none of them (so far), told me what's really SO bad about it, other than "IT SUCKS". I mean, what's factually so bad about it for the whole game and your personal play that you (and so many people you claim to know) are about to leave AH? Some are totally refusing (or ignoring) the fact that the SdKfz is still there ("A25 WF, but we cant get troops there, no m3s anymore, thanks HT!"
Yes, I do get it that you don't like it. But what exactly is now "breaking the game"? It's not that a particular aspect of gameplay has been removed. It's nothing like the Capture Order experiment, or the Arena Caps, or even the splitting up of the central strats.
Bases still get captured. Wars are still being won. (I did not even note a slower rate of captures yet). You can still drive troops to the maproom, even just one player. You are not being FORCED using four Jeeps or the dreaded goon. The tactics used are essentially still the same.

So what is really "breaking the game" at the moment? What does really make the game near unplayable? Seriously, what is the thing I am missing?

Your not missing anything.. its the just the same babies that would cry if you took away their spit16 or la7.

I wonder what 800 people online did back in the day besides run troops and supplies around in a m3.  OH YEAH..they had huge battles for bases.

I really hope the supplies get nerfed next.. you will notice a huge jump in the ease of kicking up fights on bases because folks will be forced to defend and not supply.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: horble on October 01, 2017, 05:46:34 PM
Change?  In my game!?  Rabble!  Rabble Rabble!
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: ACE on October 01, 2017, 06:29:46 PM
People being so scared of change is what drove the numbers down IMO
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: 1stpar3 on October 01, 2017, 06:37:54 PM
Your not missing anything.. its the just the same babies that would cry if you took away their spit16 or la7.

I wonder what 800 people online did back in the day besides run troops and supplies around in a m3.  OH YEAH..they had huge battles for bases.

I really hope the supplies get nerfed next.. you will notice a huge jump in the ease of kicking up fights on bases because folks will be forced to defend and not supply.
Leave my Spit alone! You..You Lazerr, you :x When its in the air too :furious :neener:
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: DmonSlyr on October 01, 2017, 07:28:06 PM
Your not missing anything.. its the just the same babies that would cry if you took away their spit16 or la7.

I wonder what 800 people online did back in the day besides run troops and supplies around in a m3.  OH YEAH..they had huge battles for bases.

I really hope the supplies get nerfed next.. you will notice a huge jump in the ease of kicking up fights on bases because folks will be forced to defend and not supply.

I have to say that Lazer is correct. At this point. We need more players fighting in combat, than players doing stupid resupply.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: scott66 on October 02, 2017, 12:28:20 AM
You want more players in the air?! Then prove it.. Let the defenders up off the runway... You can't vulch someone over and over and not let them get in the air and then complain when they don't up and jump into an M3s.. Especially when you come in 15. + Strong and defenders are 4... It maybe fun for cappers but I assure you it's not for the defenders
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: SirNuke on October 02, 2017, 09:43:10 AM
You want more players in the air?! Then prove it.. Let the defenders up off the runway... You can't vulch someone over and over and not let them get in the air and then complain when they don't up and jump into an M3s.. Especially when you come in 15. + Strong and defenders are 4... It maybe fun for cappers but I assure you it's not for the defenders

why get a fighter when I can man an ack in safety, or run supps to nullify the efforts of multiple players on my own?
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: molybdenum on October 02, 2017, 09:59:05 AM
I don't complain often but somebody needs to explain the logic behind this M3 ( no troops) idea. As of today nothing from HT, that I've hear of, as to why they decided to try this "experiment" as someone called it. Yes this Sim is theirs to do with what they want, but need I remind them WHO PAYS THE BILLS TO KEEP THE DOORS OPEN??   

We do, the loyal Aces High members, which is comprised of what 300 total? The Steam "experiment" sure turned out to be a flop, as the Xbox generation want immediate satisfaction and you cannot learn this Sim in 2 weeks.

So be careful and remember who your customers are, or this Sim will be going the way of Air Warriors.

BHawk51

Yup. I already know of 4 players who say they'll leave the game if this turns out to be permanent. How much of that is knee-jerk reaction and how much if it is steely resolve I don't know. But I'm one of the 4. This sucks.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lazerr on October 02, 2017, 10:02:12 AM
Yup. I already know of 4 players who say they'll leave the game if this turns out to be permanent. How much of that is knee-jerk reaction and how much if it is steely resolve I don't know. But I'm one of the 4. This sucks.

Lol that is funny.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: molybdenum on October 02, 2017, 10:26:05 AM
You want more players in the air?! Then prove it.. Let the defenders up off the runway... You can't vulch someone over and over and not let them get in the air and then complain when they don't up and jump into an M3s.. Especially when you come in 15. + Strong and defenders are 4... It maybe fun for cappers but I assure you it's not for the defenders

That nails it scott. The people who complain about m3 resups detracting from the combat aspect of the game are in large part the people who lurk in numbers over runways and vulch hapless uppers. And/or they have been playing many years and honed their flying skills to a knife's edge, people against whom poor fighter pilots like myself have little chance of defeating. I want to help my team, but I'm not upping into that. I'll resup or try to get the bad guys' VH; usually resup, because the need for speed is critical.
Let me make this clear though: I have no problem with people vulching a runway in association with a base take try. It's a legitimate aspect of the game. But defenders need an option if they want to save their base. Resup is key in that regard. If the vulching crew doesn't like it then one of them should tear himself away from the joy of easy kills and kill the VH from which m3s spawn instead. Not try to deny to people like me the parts of the game we find engaging. Or whine that we're slithering around snake-like because we're not upping and giving them easy kills.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Volron on October 02, 2017, 10:37:47 AM
Guess what everyone, troops gone from M3 means you cannot take a base since it was the only thing that could carry troops!  AH is DOOMED!!!

Because that's what some of these arguments look like to me. :rolleyes:
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lazerr on October 02, 2017, 10:42:44 AM
That nails it scott. The people who complain about m3 resups detracting from the combat aspect of the game are in large part the people who lurk in numbers over runways and vulch hapless uppers. And/or they have been playing many years and honed their flying skills to a knife's edge, people against whom poor fighter pilots like myself have little chance of defeating. I want to help my team, but I'm not upping into that. I'll resup or try to get the bad guys' VH; usually resup, because the need for speed is critical.
Let me make this clear though: I have no problem with people vulching a runway in association with a base take try. It's a legitimate aspect of the game. But defenders need an option if they want to save their base. Resup is key in that regard. If the vulching crew doesn't like it then one of them should tear himself away from the joy of easy kills and kill the VH from which m3s spawn instead. Not try to deny to people like me the parts of the game we find engaging. Or whine that we're slithering around snake-like because we're not upping and giving them easy kills.

Lol i figured your post was directed at me..the last line confirmed it.  I dont vulch people for the hell of it.. kills mean literally nothing to me in this game anymore.  I do vulch after i help WF a town and all the dweebs come out in their 5 ENY aircraft.

Im sorry you arent very good at defending a base.. maybe bombing strats is something better for you.  What i can tell you is when this game was heavily populated.. resupply wasnt even an option.  People fought.  Fought to keep a cap off their base.  Fought to get to get off the field and kill a goon.


There are hundreds of options for you to participate in this game,   id like to think you can figure it out.

FYI.. the supplys are still available in m3s so you dont need to create a shade ID and tell us you quit,  not yet anyways.

You sound like babies.  "Im going to quit if I dont get it my way."

All i am doing with my posts in these threads is make an argument for things that unbalance gameplay and really dont make sense to me.  I have yet to see any response rather than a form of saying " i dont want to fight".

I have never once mentioned quitting if those things dont change.  Believe me, i can pop m3s with the best of them, i can adapt to gamey tactics and pop m3s right as they spawn, but if you think new younger folks are going to come here and pay14.95 to shoot your Fed-Ex truck.... you are sadly mistaken.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Becinhu on October 02, 2017, 10:46:11 AM
Vulching isn't going to go away. The bigger issue is when you have People who lift off from a contested field and are not vulched. You let them climb out untouched and as soon as you try to engage they dive straight back to their ack. Rinse and repeat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Arlo on October 02, 2017, 10:50:12 AM
... but if you think new younger folks are going to come here and pay14.95 to shoot your Fed-Ex truck.... you are sadly mistaken.

(https://i.imgur.com/29syjel.png)
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lazerr on October 02, 2017, 10:51:19 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/29syjel.png)

Lol  :D
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: mbailey on October 02, 2017, 12:29:10 PM
Been gone a few weeks, and don't feel like reading the whole thread....Can someone give me the cliff notes version?
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Wiley on October 02, 2017, 12:45:08 PM
HT disabled troops via M3 for reasons unknown, and a bunch of people have given their speculation on what's going on and why he did it.

It sure seems odd to me because I don't see a problem it solves, and it barely changes gameplay.

Wiley.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 02, 2017, 12:46:51 PM
Been gone a few weeks, and don't feel like reading the whole thread....Can someone give me the cliff notes version?

M3 has temporarily lost its troop carrying capacity, leaving SdKfz, LVT, Jeep, C-47 for that job. "Forum whiners" getting accused for this. Multiple threats to leave the game with about no substantial complaints, just a lot of "it sucks, because of the whiners". Forum lights up with the same old 'furballers' vs 'basegrabbers' nonsense.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 02, 2017, 12:48:06 PM
It sure seems odd to me because I don't see a problem it solves, and it barely changes gameplay.

Which makes the "I quit" threats even more puzzling to me. So far, nobody of them pointet out  real, substantial problems with it.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Wiley on October 02, 2017, 12:53:04 PM
Which makes the "I quit" threats even more puzzling to me. So far, nobody of them pointet out  real, substantial problems with it.

The tone I've seen is because they're Paying Customers(tm) and they want to know why!

Or they believe the vast furballer conspiracy (or better yet the anti-their-country conspiracy) got their way at their expense.  From what I've seen out of HT I've never once seen him cave to a forum whine for no good reason, but arguing that point is futile.  People have their opinions and that's that.

Wiley.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 02, 2017, 12:55:48 PM
Or they believe the vast furballer conspiracy (or better yet the anti-their-country conspiracy) got their way at their expense.


I think it's just that.
For days I have been asking what the real problem is, only to get "I can't drive m3 with troops" as an answer - at best. Most of the time it's along the line of "I'm angry because HT gave in to the forum whiners". Which didn't ask for troop removal.


And sorry, I don't believe there are so many players who came to AH just to drive the iconic M3, and nothing else.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: JunkyII on October 02, 2017, 02:21:00 PM
Heard in tower when I logged on today...."what is a 251?" :rofl

When HTC posted those percentages of how often all the planes/GVs are used I don't think he knew what the percentage was for m3s as far as troops vs supplies and maybe this is the only way he can test it. Wouldn't be surprised if he is using this to make his decision of whether or not to change it or maybe by how much it should be changed.

And people who keep talking about the "whiners about M3s" we were all talking specifically about the field supply
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: mbailey on October 02, 2017, 02:23:05 PM
Hmmm...seems odd for sure

Thanks for the heads up, appreciate it Wiley and Snailman   :aok


Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Zener on October 02, 2017, 02:37:13 PM
I'm sure I'll be sandblasted for saying this but I find the M3/no-troops thing kind of refreshing.  If for no other reason, it requires a change in tactics to get the same job done, makes game play a bit less formulaic or stale.  And who doesn't love driving a jeep?

I don't think it's valid to task the vulching hordes with hunting down the resupp M-3s if they don't like it, then be upset when a game changes requires the M-3 troop drivers to do the very same thing.  Just play with what the game gives you to play with.



Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Arlo on October 02, 2017, 02:46:28 PM
This may be an opportunity to experiment with all kinds of things ....

.....like.....

Troops on motorcycles!

Troops on ice!

Ice!

Troop trains!

Troop tunnels!

Jet-pack troops!

Capture by dog pack!

Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Volron on October 02, 2017, 04:05:17 PM
This may be an opportunity to experiment with all kinds of things ....

.....like.....

Troops on motorcycles!

Troops on ice!

Ice!

Troop trains!

Troop tunnels!

Jet-pack troops!

Capture by dog pack!

You forgot:

Moon Troops!

Moonraker Laser FTW! :rock
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: bustr on October 02, 2017, 04:10:11 PM
I know, when the field supply box goes poof, the Swedish bikini team pops up with magic wands and runs all around the place fixing things. And they replace the troops so we can watch them all run to the map room. When there, they first line up on top doing the Macarena and blow kisses, then one at a time hop down and run in. Now I will leave it to your imagination how they will act as paratroopers.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Mister Fork on October 02, 2017, 05:29:01 PM
Here's the difference - troopers get little respect for their Hogwarts skills to magically fix a base, like bustr said, with their elderwood wands.  Paratroopers get absolutely no respect for their ability to jump out of a perfectly fine airplane (except the pilot may be a bit nuts) and then clean the enemy drunks out of the map room (which also double's as our O-club in case you didn't know) and then make it their own, even putting up their own flag on the pole.  Magic I tell ya.  Magic.

 :cheers:
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: scott66 on October 02, 2017, 05:50:04 PM
I took 47 with sdk it's a little different kinda driving..m3 will roll over anything just about my sdk wouldn't even jump a curb in town strange I must say..I had to take actual roads in town to map room.. My Peterbilt can roll over the curbs in town but not a military vehicle... Bit odd. . Still works tho.. Now about vulching.. If you vulch me cause you are actually trying to take the base then nothing I could say war is war all is fare and such... But if you want to fight at MY base and let me up then you will have your fight but however... If you make a pass at me just when I get my wheels up and my auto ack takes you out Don't snivle to me about hiding in my ack... Don't forget you are at a enemy's base and if you engage me before I can climb out and away from auto ack then that's on you and I'll tell you this... If they're are 15 of you and 5 of us and all my guys got three people on there 6 then auto ack is my equalizer.. But generally I'll head towards the water or away from AA so my base won't steal my kills... As an attacker you choose when to engage give be a min to get clear and it's on
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Oldman731 on October 02, 2017, 08:54:24 PM
And sorry, I don't believe there are so many players who came to AH just to drive the iconic M3, and nothing else.


In your comprehensive records, do you have the date that AH introduced the M3?  Seems to me that the world got along just fine before that happened.

- oldman
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Arlo on October 02, 2017, 09:08:54 PM
Here's a thread from 2000:

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,2706.msg34412.html#msg34412
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Devil 505 on October 02, 2017, 10:18:18 PM
Troops on ice!

(https://s6.postimg.org/mqs4k3d81/hammerzeit1.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: 100Coogn on October 02, 2017, 10:35:09 PM
What if this is only a psychological experiment and we are the test subjects... 
You know, just to see who freaks the first/most...

Coogan    :O
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 03, 2017, 04:00:22 AM

In your comprehensive records, do you have the date that AH introduced the M3?  Seems to me that the world got along just fine before that happened.

- oldman

M3 was introduced with the first vehicles, in tour 5.

However, just to clarify, my point wasn't along the line of "get out of GV", "stop running supps" or something like that. It's the notion that people quit the game just because they have to drive the troops in something else (while the gameplay mechanics have stayed just the same), the extremely emotional reaction about the m3 that really puzzles me.


But then, I still did not get any anwer on my questions about that, neither here nor in game (just more rage).
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 03, 2017, 04:01:37 AM
What if this is only a psychological experiment and we are the test subjects... 
You know, just to see who freaks the first/most...

Wait until HT disables supplies instead of troops in part two of this experiment...  :uhoh
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Randy1 on October 03, 2017, 05:49:31 AM
Wait until HT disables supplies instead of troops in part two of this experiment...  :uhoh

I have given up on base captures for the most part since the m3 removal.  I was ranked number 2nd tour before last with 23 captures by m3 and 6 by goons. 

This tour, I am trying to master air combat by being the best vulcher and picker like most of the current high ranked fighter pilot players.  It is boring but it takes very little planning, setup and skill.  :rofl
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 03, 2017, 06:18:10 AM
I have given up on base captures for the most part since the m3 removal.

Why? Bases are still being captured, and not only by air.

  I was ranked number 2nd tour before last with 23 captures by m3 and 6 by goons. 


The change is the same for all of us. No reason you could not repeat that rank this tour again.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: viking73 on October 03, 2017, 05:37:29 PM
Most of this can be corrected by reducing what supplies do for a town...say by half. But if we're honest with ourselves it's up to the attacking country to look out for M3s. Do need to reduce the area that supplies take. Make them drive all the way into town.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 05, 2017, 05:40:04 PM
A very early stats check 4 days into the new tour:

There is almost no measurable change in the capturing department yet. There's a very tiny increasy in bomber captures - They are at 19% so far, but that's still well inside the usual range of previous months. I also can't spot an unusual decrease of overall rate of base captures, played hours/capture is also still in the same range it has been all during 2017.

So far, the SdKfz didn't cause any significant changes.

Stay tuned!  :old:


Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Arlo on October 05, 2017, 06:12:29 PM
Besides, if we had jet pack troops then that's all everyone would do. Rocketeer.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: wil3ur on October 05, 2017, 06:52:43 PM
Besides, if we had jet pack troops then that's all everyone would do. Rocketeer.

One of my favorite all time movies, and sadly underrated.   :old:
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Zoney on October 05, 2017, 07:01:30 PM
One of my favorite all time movies, and sadly underrated.   :old:

+1
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Arlo on October 05, 2017, 07:15:19 PM
One of my favorite all time movies, and sadly underrated.   :old:

Mine, too.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: ghi on October 05, 2017, 09:03:54 PM
Sometimes you you give customers what they need not what they want.

Quote
As you can see there are quite a few players not happy with this move...... so it would be nice for the people we pay a subscription to to explain why this move.......really. as customers I think we would like to know
Dundee

Quote
I don't complain often but somebody needs to explain the logic behind this M3 ( no troops) idea. As of today nothing from HT, that I've hear of, as to why they decided to try this "experiment" as someone called it. Yes this Sim is theirs to do with what they want, but need I remind them WHO PAYS THE BILLS TO KEEP THE DOORS OPEN??   

We do, the loyal Aces High members, which is comprised of what 300 total? The Steam "experiment" sure turned out to be a flop, as the Xbox generation want immediate satisfaction and you cannot learn this Sim in 2 weeks.

So be careful and remember who your customers are, or this Sim will be going the way of Air Warriors.

BHawk51


Quote
Surprised that everyone doesn't remember the last time HTC tweaked the game, remember about 10 years ago, he implemented base ordering to control and encourage combat by forcing the order in which bases had to be captured.   We suffered through that and did a full 360 turn around, in the end nothing changed except a lot of guys got pissed and left the game.  Here we go again.
 Traveler

 :aok :cheers:
Agree with you above, i feel same way; as much as i love this game i'm not fun of HTC's attitude towards loyal customers , what about  some "perks" after 1,5,10, 15  years?! but won't even bother to answer or give an explanation. Hmm, 2 weeks ago, i've seen them on light blue text in MA , first time in 10 years maybe,welcoming the Steam influx, but those paying for 10-15 years are ignored.
 Yep, house courtesy , ask for water and get fire.
Having fast m3s still loaded with field cargo and slow troop carriers crawling  makes bases  even more difficult to capture  the "defenders" can drive invisible ninja m3s with loaded with field cargo rebuild the town  , another step towards stalled fights front and maps.
This was the trend with every new version and patch, just looks at the size of the bases, towns, ports, v-bases from AH1 --->to---->AH3 ; everything was made bigger and bigger only the number of players got smaller and smaller. The towns used to have 1 gun, was easy to take it down with a P-47-D25; now are 8 guns, you need a set of lancs and the large fields you need all the MA average population to WF;  The   V-bases  was 1 vh and 1 gun, now are 4 VHs+FH+, all kind of guns.
 On top you got the invisible combatant GVs, the dweeb with .45  , AWACS radars denies NOE raids .  HQ is worthless spot on the map, HQ raids were the best fun.

There are 3 kind of players in this game, maybe not a single one 100% in one category, we all have genes from all  groups, i mean enjoying every aspect of the game.
 
1.Team vs team
2. personal score
3. very smaller group of furbalers. 

The main core used to be the  first category , i've seen squads with 2-3 wings, more players than average  MA population today, most focused on team vs team clash. Since the beginning the game has been riding on 2 horses/ rewards; Team vs Team/Win war  and personal score rank;
  This changes in game dynamic i mentioned above are shifting the game towards score only,  but  doesn't make the game appealing anymore for first category, so they leave  and in this vacuum there's a visible higher concentration of second category populating  the MA today. 





Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 05, 2017, 09:39:13 PM
Having fast m3s still loaded with field cargo and slow troop carriers crawling  makes bases  even more difficult to capture  the "defenders" can drive invisible ninja m3s with loaded with field cargo rebuild the town  , another step towards stalled fights front and maps.


I would have thought along similar lines, but for now data shows there is no significant change in base capture rates. See my earlier post.
And then, the disabling of the troops is a temporary measure, HTC is gathering data about m3 usage.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: VuduVee on October 06, 2017, 04:13:30 AM
there are plenty of troop carriers in AH. an M3 isnt the only way. ...Lazer, do you care about base takes?
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lazerr on October 06, 2017, 09:38:13 AM
there are plenty of troop carriers in AH. an M3 isnt the only way. ...Lazer, do you care about base takes?

I do.  Quite frequently actually.

Whats your point?  My comments in these couple of posts are this disabling of supplies.  You should read the threads before you reply.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Arlo on October 06, 2017, 10:14:25 AM
I think HT is about to add:

(https://amcmuseum.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/C-47-World-War-II-Transport-and-Troop-Carrier.png)
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Randy1 on October 07, 2017, 05:56:58 AM
A very early stats check 4 days into the new tour:

There is almost no measurable change in the capturing department yet. There's a very tiny increasy in bomber captures - They are at 19% so far, but that's still well inside the usual range of previous months. I also can't spot an unusual decrease of overall rate of base captures, played hours/capture is also still in the same range it has been all during 2017.

So far, the SdKfz didn't cause any significant changes.

Stay tuned!  :old:
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Randy1 on October 07, 2017, 06:02:39 AM
A very early stats check 4 days into the new tour:

There is almost no measurable change in the capturing department yet. There's a very tiny increasy in bomber captures - They are at 19% so far, but that's still well inside the usual range of previous months. I also can't spot an unusual decrease of overall rate of base captures, played hours/capture is also still in the same range it has been all during 2017.

So far, the SdKfz didn't cause any significant changes.

Stay tuned!  :old:


Our squad did a lot of base captures.  This tour,  the long drives to carry troops is not very fun so we are cutting back.  I think it will have some impact on the numbers by the end of the tour.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 07, 2017, 07:40:50 AM

Our squad did a lot of base captures. 

1.68% of all recorded vehicle and 0.93% of all recorded bomber base captures.  :old:
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: BBQsam on October 07, 2017, 02:03:10 PM
I think HT is about to add:

(https://amcmuseum.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/C-47-World-War-II-Transport-and-Troop-Carrier.png)

WHOOT          A  new Plane!


(http://s1.dmcdn.net/itnBW.jpg)
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: rvflyer on October 09, 2017, 12:42:25 PM
Does not make any sense to take a vehicle that was officially know as a personal carrier and take the personal from it. That is what they were designed for armored personnel carriers.


What all can carry troops now?

1. - SdKfz 251
2. - Jeep
3. - LVT
4. - c47

So what is Hitech testing by removing troop carrying from the M3, the jeep cannot carry feild supply's, and the M3 still can. While the SdK is an M3 by another name untouched. Is he trying to test player response before a major pending change to a defacto game institution so he doesn't drive players away? I bet almost everyone who uses the M3 for GV\base supply runs and troops has it in their favorites tab, and has to go looking for the jeep, LVT, SdK and c47 in the other tabs. If their response is to find the next equivalent in the list to do the same job, at this point when you are helping people to change life style habits, you add another small change. A larger change is easier to accept if you have been in the habit of change up to it.

The arguments in the forums over the M3 have been game play ideological to say the least, rancorous and divisive at other times. Major game changes or lack of in the past have been responded to by some players leaving the game. Hitech gets stuck balancing a both ends stick stinky from it's center, while hoping for good results and not having to grab either end.

Lazerr is in the ideologically rancorous camp as you can see. :O
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Arlo on October 09, 2017, 01:13:42 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/P5yhIZV.png)
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 09, 2017, 01:16:21 PM
Does not make any sense to take a vehicle that was officially know as a personal carrier and take the personal from it. That is what they were designed for armored personnel carriers.

It would sense if you want to see how much the m3 is being used for resupply.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: JunkyII on October 09, 2017, 01:54:59 PM
It would sense if you want to see how much the m3 is being used for resupply.
This is what I hope their reason is, still seeing plenty of M3s being used to resupply towns.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: wil3ur on October 09, 2017, 04:01:59 PM
I'm going to start doing 20 sorties a day with the 75MM on it just to really skew HTC's numbers and watch you people cry more.    :neener:
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 09, 2017, 05:19:16 PM
I'm going to start doing 20 sorties a day with the 75MM on it just to really skew HTC's numbers and watch you people cry more.    :neener:

I doubt your 600 additional sorties/tour would 'really skew' the numbers for the m3.  ;)
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: wil3ur on October 09, 2017, 05:37:43 PM
I doubt your 600 additional sorties/tour would 'really skew' the numbers for the m3.  ;)

You could always help...   :devil
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Dundee on October 15, 2017, 10:57:32 PM
Because someone, just like 90%* of the AH players, did not think of the SdKfz 251  :noid

we have thought about it and............. It's slow and the gun radius is only 180°, and it's only a 7.62




*)yes, I made that number up
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 16, 2017, 06:28:21 AM
I would appreciate if folks would not put their own words inside the quote.  :old:
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Randy1 on October 16, 2017, 06:40:42 AM
It would be nice if htc would state what test results he was looking for in removing troops from the m3. 

A lot of bad press here and other forums and everyday and night during game play since the yanking of troops from the m3.

Treating paying members like mushrooms is not a good business plan for  a video game.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: ACE on October 16, 2017, 06:44:04 AM
It would be nice if htc would state what test results he was looking for in removing troops from the m3. 

A lot of bad press here and other forums and everyday and night during game play since the yanking of troops from the m3.

Treating paying members like mushrooms is not a good business plan for  a video game.

“I don’t like change. This is my vague threat to quitting.”
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 16, 2017, 07:45:43 AM
In a few hours I will present updated numbers about base captures.
But for now, I'm going to enjoy the fabolous October sunshine with my son  :banana:
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Wiley on October 16, 2017, 09:57:15 AM
It would be nice if htc would state what test results he was looking for in removing troops from the m3. 

Um... that would kind of affect the test results he'd get.  Of course, if your motivation is to find out what he's looking to change so you can skew it in your favor, it's a logical question.

Wiley.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: JunkyII on October 16, 2017, 10:45:21 AM
Um... that would kind of affect the test results he'd get.  Of course, if your motivation is to find out what he's looking to change so you can skew it in your favor, it's a logical question.

Wiley.
I promise I haven't been running any M3s with town supplies I swear  :devil
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Becinhu on October 16, 2017, 11:04:58 AM
The funny thing is I see all of these quotes about people complaining on country channel about no troops in m3s. Yet other than the first couple of days I haven’t seen anything on knights country channel about it. Maybe the other two countries have been more vocal about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Wiley on October 16, 2017, 11:07:40 AM
The funny thing is I see all of these quotes about people complaining on country channel about no troops in m3s. Yet other than the first couple of days I haven’t seen anything on knights country channel about it. Maybe the other two countries have been more vocal about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Most Bish base take attempts have more troops involved in them than you see moving on the Knights side in a week.  That's likely why you don't see a lot of complaining on Knights. ;)

Wiley.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: JunkyII on October 16, 2017, 11:26:50 AM
Been less of it on Rooks as well.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 16, 2017, 12:30:49 PM
Now we are two weeks into the tour and have two weekends behind us. How's the capture data looking now?


(https://i.imgur.com/Sl1vRs2.png)

Yes, there are less captured bases per hour played than in the tours just before. But then, the effort (=hours) per capture been at an 7 years low before the m3 troops were disabled. There are still way more bases captured/time than in all the years before. Furthermore, you can also see the recent increase being still within the bounds of the usual fluctuations.
For comparison, just look what impact the (then) new, larger towns in 2010 had on the rate of captures and thus on gameplay!
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Delirium on October 16, 2017, 01:16:47 PM
Is there a correlation between the number of players (displayed by kill per hour?) and the method of capture? Some are determining the war winning concept has impacted overall gameplay and numbers online, I'm curious if that is entirely accurate.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 16, 2017, 02:27:21 PM
Is there a correlation between the number of players (displayed by kill per hour?) and the method of capture? Some are determining the war winning concept has impacted overall gameplay and numbers online, I'm curious if that is entirely accurate.

I'm a bit confused ... number of players displayed by kills/hour?  :headscratch:

Nevertheless, if I read the general meaning of your inquiry right you want to know if there are any kind or correlations between base captures (methods).
No, I can't see anything like that. Player numbers basically have been declining at a relatively steady pace since early 2008. The trend of an increasing share of captures by m3 is way older than that, essentially ever since vehicles were introduced.
Furthermore, I can not see any connection between captures/player and captures/played hours, those have been varying substantially in all directions depending on changes to gameplay mechanisms.

On a somewhat  related note: It is my own, subjective opinion, that teams (=chesspieces and squads), the ability to wage war in a persistant arena, to employ different strategies (opposed to just aerial combat tactics) and social features are the (potentially?) main strength's and unique feature of AH these days. I think those features should have been strengthened long time ago.
I don't know if I'm right, though ;)
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Randy1 on October 17, 2017, 07:10:20 AM
My WAG guess is htc disabled troops on M3's so they could measure M3 use to resupply. 

This is an effort to see if the M3 resupply whiners have a case.
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Delirium on October 17, 2017, 08:18:00 AM
I'm a bit confused ... number of players displayed by kills/hour?  :headscratch:

I just wanted to see if there was a negative correlation between M3 increased use and decline in players. Hard to say, unless it is compared upon kills per hour because the data isn't available for a direct comparison.

Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 17, 2017, 08:24:35 AM
I just wanted to see if there was a negative correlation between M3 increased use and decline in players. Hard to say, unless it is compared upon kills per hour because the data isn't available for a direct comparison.

There is.

I track player numbers by
Sampling actual numbers online during various times of the day, over the years.
Counting all indivdual pilots from the stat pages, whose scores are used
Totaling played hours for all those 'active' pilots for each tour.

Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Lusche on October 17, 2017, 08:27:45 AM
This is an effort to see if the M3 resupply whiners have a case.


Every change HT was/is ever making to the game is imposed upon him by "the whiners" I suppose.
Which makes me wonder why "the whiners" never managed to get rid of ENY limiter, the collision model, country switch limitations or perk the Spit 16 and La-7.

But maybe he's just going for you personally ;)


But beware we would argue by facts or reason instead of constantly blaming someone else for some vague injustice and constantly throwing the "whiner" phrase around in a unintentionally ironic way...
Title: Re: m3 without troops.. you missed the point
Post by: Randy1 on October 17, 2017, 01:41:33 PM
Lusche it wass just my wild guess.  I can not think of another reason for the htc interlope.