Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: 27th on December 03, 2017, 01:33:14 PM
-
My wish is for the retraction of GV dar all together.
Real Game Scenario #1:
I took notice of a Knight GV dar at a spawn and drove east to base 115 about 2-3 sectors away. At the time, A115 was being attacked by a battleship and a CV but the cliffs are too high for an LVT. For then to up a goon would have been a 4-5 sector flight. So, I get it. The problem was that I see it coming from the tower. I spawned in with a M3 with field supplies to 115's town and I resupplied it. Next, I went east to meet up to the GV dar that I know in my gut was an enemy M3. Finally after the Knight drove about 3 sectors, I caught him with my M3 and killed it.
If I didn't have the GV dar, that player would have a awesome capture.
There is no strategy left in GV's.
Real Game Scenario #2
After WF a town, planes know immediately where the M3s are in small area. With the game having low numbers for most of the time. There is no way you'll be capturing bases unless its a horde of M3's and fighter suppression. The hiding aspect is gone. What is the trees use for now?
Furthermore,
With majority saying that the Tiger 2 and the JagPanther, etc are "hanger queens" I imagine now with planes and people in the tower know there's a tank coming because they see GV red dar box near their base from a spawn.
My request/ wish is to retract the GV dar. :salute
Thank you.
:salute
27th
-
-100
-
You will have a better chance of persuading him to remove the aspect of GVDAR that shows you the general area a GV is in and replacing it with a DARBAR for GVs that is none directional. Still, directional GVDAR removes how easy it is for tanks to get onto airfields made invisible by the trees. Unless you are advocating that tanks should rule the game and force the air combat players to spend their time hunting for invisible tanks and not playing air combat.
Since AH3 went live I see a lot of air combat screwed by players sneaking onto the airfield of origin versus upping a plane and fighting. It is vastly simpler just to drive invisible in the trees onto the airfield and de-ack and take away the ability to have air combat by 10-20 players. Even with my terrains where I place a 1\2 mile grass strip around the fields, they wait for all the air combat guys to head off to fight and start de-acking and taking everything down. That is a game imbalance if one person using one part of the game alone or in very small numbers, can force a larger number of players to not be able to enjoy the part of the game they logged in for constantly. Even when the air combat guys stick around and destroy the tanks, then head off to enjoy some air combat, that does not remove the one guy who eventually screws them out of their furballing with attrition. You can furball or you can in effect have your play time activities dictated by one grifer who knows, you can furball or you can stay at your field all night killing him. I suspect this has a bit to do with the directional part of the new GVDAR which I think can be reduced to a simple GVDARBAR instead.
I spend a lot of time watching combat on terrains to understand how to build them to promote combat. When the AH3 trees are painted right up to the edge of an airfield, it's a toss up if the auto ack will detect or be able to hit GVs. The GV's can move around the perimeter of the field at will essentially greifing the field and forcing groups of players to spend time hunting one grifer who they have to get rid of to keep their field. Many of those greifers will spend hours returning even after thier VH has been killed and rebuilds many times holding that field and it's players hostage with the greifing. That gives a single tank a disproportional ability to dictates outcomes from what a single fighter or single bomber can accomplish because this is a game. For those using the realism canard, single tanks in WW2 did not have this kind of ability regardless of Hollywood. Our Romulan teleportation spawn gives them that ability along with the Klingon Cloaking trees.
-
First of all, to Devil 505 needs to respond in full sentences and not give childish remarks. A person needs to give his or her thought of pro or oppose the request.
Second, for bustr, thanks for your response.
"You will have a better chance of persuading him to remove the aspect of GVDAR that shows you the general area a GV is in and replacing it with a DARBAR for GVs that is none directional. Still, directional GVDAR removes how easy it is for tanks to get onto airfields made invisible by the trees. Unless you are advocating that tanks should rule the game and force the air combat players to spend their time hunting for invisible tanks and not playing air combat."
Why try to fix what wasn't broken? Your warning was the blinking of the town individuality or base. Its up to the player in the tower of what to take to counter act the warning. Is it an NOE mission or a GV, right? Cant be lazy and let the game tell you what it is. :headscratch: Figure it out. Are you taking an IL2, A20, B25H or 109K4, Spitfire? :airplane: or counter with a tank.
Don't assume I have an underlying agenda other than to make this game better or point out its miss steps. Tanks don't rule anything. You're forgetting that numbers still tend to be low in large maps and people want to capture bases. There isn't a consistent amount of people to promote conflict all the time. This is not Aces High peak of 2005-2008 with 2 full main arenas of 500 cap and the 3 main arena halfway full.
Fact: the GV dar,that can be seen from the tower and plane in flight, has killed GV strategy. No disputing that. Some people are getting lazy to see whats making the town/base flash. Is that it? Is that what you're saying?
Since AH3 went live I see a lot of air combat screwed by players sneaking onto the airfield of origin versus upping a plane and fighting. It is vastly simpler just to drive invisible in the trees onto the airfield and de-ack and take away the ability to have air combat by 10-20 players. Even with my terrains where I place a 1\2 mile grass strip around the fields, they wait for all the air combat guys to head off to fight and start de-acking and taking everything down. That is a game imbalance if one person using one part of the game alone or in very small numbers, can force a larger number of players to not be able to enjoy the part of the game they logged in for constantly. Even when the air combat guys stick around and destroy the tanks, then head off to enjoy some air combat, that does not remove the one guy who eventually screws them out of their furballing with attrition. You can furball or you can in effect have your play time activities dictated by one grifer who knows, you can furball or you can stay at your field all night killing him. I suspect this has a bit to do with the directional part of the new GVDAR which I think can be reduced to a simple GVDARBAR instead.
The GV aspect in Aces High has always been part of the game going on my 17 years.
You're trying to promote furballing and not promote the main idea of the game of winning the war? People do whatever they want to do in the game.
Furball? Cool :aok
Bombing? Excellent. :aok
Going to pork an air field in a heavy fighter? Outstanging :aok
Going to deack a base with a group of friends to vulch? Have fun. :aok
But punishing players who like the GV aspect and having a GV darbar where a person in the tower and someone in flight can see in a dar bar because you're saying that person might kill a furball going on? What is wrong with that picture. :bhead
Having the just GVdarbar that gv's can see wont work either. That GV guy can tell the guy in the A20, "ya the gv dar bar is east of me." We have gone thru that period briefly.
I spend a lot of time watching combat on terrains to understand how to build them to promote combat. When the AH3 trees are painted right up to the edge of an airfield, it's a toss up if the auto ack will detect or be able to hit GVs. The GV's can move around the perimeter of the field at will essentially greifing the field and forcing groups of players to spend time hunting one grifer who they have to get rid of to keep their field. Many of those greifers will spend hours returning even after thier VH has been killed and rebuilds many times holding that field and it's players hostage with the greifing. That gives a single tank a disproportional ability to dictates outcomes from what a single fighter or single bomber can accomplish because this is a game. For those using the realism canard, single tanks in WW2 did not have this kind of ability regardless of Hollywood. Our Romulan teleportation spawn gives them that ability along with the Klingon Cloaking trees.
Bustr, I really do appreciate the hard work that it took to build those maps. :) :rock I agree that removing trees around the perimeter especially in airfield not only for GV attacks but I still see some trees blocking the runway at the end of it.
I'll point out a few things more. :cool:
-In some of the older maps since the inception of Aces High 3, over a year ago, the trees have killed tank town inside the large crater. That's a fact.
-People are in a uproar of players spawn camping the main spawn hanger in a V base. For those people do it, more power to them. There was time to react to the base blinking and take a GV yourself. But when no one react to the base blinking ,time has passed enough that is too late and there is a T34 killing anyone that spawns from the hanger.
I believe that only at a V base only, players should able to choose from any of the four hangers to spawn from to counter that enemy GV on base. Right? :aok
I don't have anything to add. I made my case. If you talk to people who play a lot of GV play and get their input, there is an obvious flaw.
Thank you bustr and my request still stands.
:salute
27th
-
I do have to agree that the new dar is a little too much... to be able to see dar when I am fighting on another front is a little ridiculous. Not sure of a solution but this one is quite a shocker really...Do I get frustrated looking for the GVer that is sitting under a tree flashing a base just waiting for some sucker to drive by...sure.... but the new Dar system is backwards .... can't icons be made to show through foliage for shut down GV's or something.
I actually takes a bit of fun out of the hunt for the hunter too....But then again....I have never really been into the easy kill thing.
-
Removing stealth from a combat sim is why I left.
Apparently, we are expected to fight like the redcoats of the revolutionary war and simply march straight in.
I also feel that friendly dar shouldn't apply to GV or planes below 60 feet.
-
The main point of the game is not about winning the war, that is an option to entertain people as one of many options to entertain many diverse interests. The MA is about balancing all of those options so an individual only has the ability to affect the game as an individual, not disproportionate to the outcome a single individual can express. Why you have to put together a large bomber mission or large group of players to do a proportionate amount of damage. One reason for no nuke or tallboy.
Balance is at the heart of the game because of all the competing interests. When you look at most of Hitech's out of the blue adjustments like the GVDAR from that perspective, it's obvious even if you want to argue till the cows come home he is stomping personally on GVs. Right now the GVDAR is addressing being able to dictate the whole night's outcome for a larger group of players with a single tank. Painting 1\2 mile of grass around every field and town would have solved most of this. Same kind of urge by the strat runners and the 49ers when they went ballistic over Hitech adjusting the HQ settings in AH2. They had discovered a way to dictate the fun of a larger group with a disproportionate effort to the level of the outcome. They can still attack the HQ in the same manner they once did, it will take a proportional amount of effort to over come the HQ change which means numbers of players.
GVDAR means a single tank no longer dictates the outcome for a large group of players because of the klingon cloaking trees. The game is not about 1 player dictating outcomes to many players unless that player is the pinnacle of possible skill like kappa taking on 5 planes and landing 5 kills. The trees making tanks assume an invisibility cloak grants a single tank a disproportionate amount of ability to the real ability of the individual player. In other FPS games you would be reporting that player to the MODS for finessing the game.
At one time Hitech changed the DAR minimum to 65ft from 250ft because everyone during the 400 player a night era avoided combat and attacked undefended feilds. I doubt sneaking around is something Hitech ever intended with his combat simulation. The MA is not a war simulation like FSO or other SEA arena WW2 events. If it was, the rules governing my terrain building would not be about balance.
-
Removing stealth from a combat sim is why I left.
Apparently, we are expected to fight like the redcoats of the revolutionary war and simply march straight in.
I also feel that friendly dar shouldn't apply to GV or planes below 60 feet.
Agreed. The tank symbols just clutter up the clipboard map. Can't even see the base/town icons a lot of time, because there's tank icons all over place.
At least the base/town icons should be layered on top of the tanks or aircraft icons for that matter.
Coogan
-
I think it works fine and should be left in game.
-
I understand what you are saying Buster...but I feel that the GVdar as it is now...is like the air dar not only showing that there is a con in sector..but also what alt they are and general direction.... now can you imagine the fall out from that...as it is now, I have played enough to have a good idea of direction and to some degree alt (from map watching) but these are guesstimates...and the alt can be way out at times.
For me it is what it is but I feel it is way lopsided now.... I no longer have to guess if there is an M3 coming in to resupply...I see a dar pop...and I'm off to the spawn to hammer it..... the other front is boring look around the map...oh look the town isn't flashing...but there is dar....I'm upping with my bombs and gonna nail him before he has the chance to even flash the town....
I do understand a need to combat the grievers...I just think it is bit heavy handed and a bit tooo easy......
-
.......For me it is what it is but I feel it is way lopsided now.... I no longer have to guess if there is an M3 coming in to resupply...I see a dar pop...and I'm off to the spawn to hammer it..... the other front is boring look around the map...oh look the town isn't flashing...but there is dar....I'm upping with my bombs and gonna nail him before he has the chance to even flash the town....
I do understand a need to combat the grievers...I just think it is bit heavy handed and a bit tooo easy......
Absolutely. That's a fact.
It's killing the gameplay don't you realize it?
:salute
27th
-
The main point of the game is not about winning the war, that is an option to entertain people as one of many options to entertain many diverse interests.
Winning the war is the main point of the game? :headscratch: If that was the case will maps ever change? :headscratch: Bishops will never get together as a team roll over the map most of the time. That's what they do and do it well most of the time.:headscratch: What are strats used for? :headscratch:
Yes, I understand that there is a lot aspects of this game and people do what they want to do. Have fun.
Again....
Furball. :aok
Bombing something :aok
Deack and vulch? :aok
Want to fly your goon and sight see the scenery? :aok
But neutering a big part of the game in ground vehicles? :headscratch:
GVDAR means a single tank no longer dictates the outcome for a large group of players because of the klingon cloaking trees.
No. You're assuming again.
If a single tank got the town for a couple reasons.
A) No one was paying attention to the town blinking and base blinking
B) Someone did notice and called out for someone to check it out but no one does.
C) People do up and do not have the patients to look for a tank on first couple of passes. You don't know hot to turn off your engine and listen. You don't know how to look in low passes.
D) No one ups a tank to counter the warning.
E) No patients of learning the ground vehicle aspect and listening for the enemy when you know either the enemy is coming for the town or the base.
F) You just simply don't care because you are doing whatever activity.
What has that resorted to? Laziness GVdar. There it is. Egged.
You know you complain of the trees as a cloaking device. You know that people had concerns, including GV'ers, too many trees right? I have mentioned that since the start of AH3, the map with the crater in the middle with tank town has been killed off with too many trees. It used to have a large town in the middle of it and almost a plain terrain around it. It used to be a hotspot for GV'ers.
Yes,some trees are dense and provide a good spot to hide.
But the person in a plane either have no patients to look in low level passes he or she should resort other options to deal with it. But to have 4-5 guys in A20's and IL2's, etc because
there is a big pointer sign saying where you are? :bhead
:salute
27th
-
Absolutely. That's a fact.
It's killing the gameplay don't you realize it?
:salute
27th
No, it's killing YOUR gameplay, but it should increase the overall quality of gameplay.
I have said it many times before, but what was needed is more low level air action to stimulate interaction(combat) by all players. By increasing the ability for aircraft to hunt and attack GV's, the new GV dar should result more counter-GV sorties with a resulting need for fighters to kill the counter-GV'ers.
My advice to you is to start making friends with us fighter pilots - it might just save your life.
-
No, it's killing YOUR gameplay, but it should increase the overall quality of gameplay.
I have said it many times before, but what was needed is more low level air action to stimulate interaction(combat) by all players. By increasing the ability for aircraft to hunt and attack GV's, the new GV dar should result more counter-GV sorties with a resulting need for fighters to kill the counter-GV'ers.
My advice to you is to start making friends with us fighter pilots - it might just save your life.
My advice to expand your ground vehicle skills and stop being depended on a aid to help you. There is training available.
You have no grounds for argument. You know why? You assume "...it should increase the overall quality of gameplay"
It's not. It has done the opposite. It has killed it.
If you can't see that, then your oblivious to the situation and suggest you cease to comment any further.
:salute
27th
Btw by saying this, " I have said it many times before.."
I don't consider "-100"as a response earlier to this post "many times before"
-
Well clearly the GV hunter's are having a better time, otherwise you would not be her crying about it.
-
So, why not place an observation post both in the towns and on the fields. If town starts flashing, someone could jump in to one of these observation posts and if they are able to physically see the enemy with the naked eye and/or through binoculars the direction dar pops but only as long as the observation post is manned and not destroyed. It would make it way more realistic and situational based. This would force more team work and embolden people to enter that low level game of seek and destroy,
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
So, why not place an observation post both in the towns and on the fields...
Because this is a combat game and people want to participate in the fighting not drudge around as an observer.
Besides, the standard dar bar is a representation of these observer types for aircraft. Now there is s system for representing ground observers as well.
-
Well, being an observer is participating, perhaps not in the sense that you would like but it would be an essential role at any rate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Well clearly the GV hunter's are having a better time, otherwise you would not be her crying about it.
As a part time GV hunter myself I actually find it boring now...... waaaay too easy....I still have the issue of being a rancid Jabo'er...but I lose interest now really...well not lose interst.... just stop doing it as I am a player who does doesn't like having too much advantage...makes me feel dirty.... just me..but It is how I feel
-
Participating in fighting would require being at some sort of risk of being killed. Observation does not cut it.
-
As a part time GV hunter myself I actually find it boring now...... waaaay too easy....I still have the issue of being a rancid Jabo'er...but I lose interest now really...well not lose interst.... just stop doing it as I am a player who does doesn't like having too much advantage...makes me feel dirty.... just me..but It is how I feel
Glad you are so successful at it.
How would you grade your ease with hunting GV's before the dar?
-
Observation has and will always be integral to combat.
I understand what you are saying but this game isn’t centered around anyone of our playing styles, likes or dislikes as is obvious by the GVdar business. All I’m stating is it’s a fair balance between the two ideologies.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I fly the Hurricane IID and hunt treetop level so sight is primary for me. With the addition of thicker foilage & reduced icons the job became a little more complicated but not impossible. Occasionally you just can't see them. After grid search for 5-6 minutes with no success and no activity from the enemy I begin to use the new GV dar. I will pop up to 1,000 feet pull up clipboard and reset my search. Even when I locate the vehicle, I still have to shoot the shells down into the top turret or engine deck to kill it. Not easy in the slightest.
-
Observation has and will always be integral to combat.
I understand what you are saying but this game isn’t centered around anyone of our playing styles, likes or dislikes as is obvious by the GVdar business. All I’m stating is it’s a fair balance between the two ideologies.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My point is that an observer would not be playing the game.
It's no different than if I had another player observing from my plane while I was flying. Is that guy useful to me? Sure. It it good for the game if he's not in his own plane or GV? No, it is not.
We need players actively playing the game. That means putting themselves at risk of being killed while trying to positioning them self to kill an enemy.
-
How is it not actively playing?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Because he's not able to kill or be killed.
-
Well clearly the GV hunter's are having a better time, otherwise you would not be her crying about it.
Clearly when you resort to childish insults shows you have no basis for your argument. Clearly you did not read nor comprehend the start of this post. It's not like I haven't dealt players like you going on my 17th year.
When I can clearly see whats going on when the game has been modified as a handicap for the players that are in the air just simply hunting GVs is skilless.
There is no reason to up a GV now.
There is no strategy.
There is no gameplay.
:salute
27th
-
Because he's not able to kill or be killed.
Sure he can, make the position like a field gun position (destructible) and if it’s a matter of the person being able to kill another player, what’s the difference between the resupply vehicles and an observer position? They all provide to the effort regardless of lethality.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Well clearly the GV hunter's are having a better time, otherwise you would not be her crying about it.
Clearly when you resort to childish insults shows you have no basis for your argument. Clearly you did not read nor comprehend the start of this post. It's not like I haven't dealt players like you going on my 17th year.
When I can clearly see whats going on when the game has been modified as a handicap for the players that are in the air just simply hunting GVs is skilless.
There is no reason to up a GV now.
There is no strategy.
There is no gameplay.
:salute
27th
Then you should know that until now that every change for GV's has made GV'ing easier and more accessible. Now in AH3, those advantages are too much of a problem and must be trimmed back to bring balance to the overall game.
If anyone is acting like a child it is you for overreacting and throwing a tantrum over the latest changes.
-
Sure he can, make the position like a field gun position (destructible) and if it’s a matter of the person being able to kill another player, what’s the difference between the resupply vehicles and an observer position? They all provide to the effort regardless of lethality.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The vehicle running sups is at least at the front where the action is.
Besides, the ability for a single player to find another should not depend on a 3rd party.
-
The vehicle running sups is at least at the front where the action is.
Besides, the ability for a single player to find another should not depend on a 3rd party.
So, is it not a good idea because it’s contrary to your personal preference in play style and what’s is a valued piece of the puzzle?
Reading both of these threads, it seems to me and probably many others that it’s a chest beating contest with no real constructive talking points. When someone brings up an idea opposite what not only you but some of the others think it’s automatically discarded as a waste of time. It seems as though very few of you actually want a resolution or common ground, you all just seem to be content beating your chests over a video game, let that sink in, a video game.
If nothing constructive can be said and no common ground can be reached, why even post?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
So, is it not a good idea because it’s contrary to your personal preference in play style and what’s is a valued piece of the puzzle?
Reading both of these threads, it seems to me and probably many others that it’s a chest beating contest with no real constructive talking points. When someone brings up an idea opposite what not only you but some of the others think it’s automatically discarded as a waste of time. It seems as though very few of you actually want a resolution or common ground, you all just seem to be content beating your chests over a video game, let that sink in, a video game.
If nothing constructive can be said and no common ground can be reached, why even post?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You misunderstand me somewhat.
Your idea is bad because it is not congruent with the existing methods for transmitting intel to the players. The aircraft dar bar has always represented spotters, intel gatherers, and combat controlers as well as their ability to relay that intel. No 3rd party needed.
The new dar is another tool that represents the same chain of intel gathering and distrobution, only pertaining to GV's.
My personal beliefs have little to do with it.
-
If nothing constructive can be said and no common ground can be reached, why even post?
Because I believe that the changes being made are to the betterment of the game. They are not only for you to see, but also HTC. Some complainers are acting like Chicken Little and I do not want them to dominate the debate with their overreaction.
-
I get ya man, for me I kind of like the GVDar but if it can be implemented in a way that gets most everyone saying “yeah, that’s cool!” Than it’s worth looking at all avenues to do so. Know what I mean?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Glad you are so successful at it.
How would you grade your ease with hunting GV's before the dar?
Far too ... that it has become a bore of sorts.... yes there were the grievers ( and as I have said...I would do my grid search for a good amount of time then go off to another area to get some action...all the while watching the town through the clipboard to see if there had been any changes)....but there were also guys who didn't run the straight line from the spawn...who made you actually engage in a battle of sorts.... this is now gone.... now there is no chance to fly a goon in and hide it close....now if the town is flashing and there is no GVdar then it must be an NOE or...some cheeky bugger has slipped a goon in...Yes there are still a few that do this....Now I know there is a GV and I know where he is basically... I didn't have to wait for a town to flash or a host announcement about my sheep... he is there...in no mans land but we are so awesome that we put an observer out there...
I do believe the no icon in the trees is a problem but there must be some other way round it to at least even things up a little for the ground pounder....
-
The main point of the game is not about winning the war, that is an option to entertain people as one of many options to entertain many diverse interests. The MA is about balancing all of those options so an individual only has the ability to affect the game as an individual, not disproportionate to the outcome a single individual can express. Why you have to put together a large bomber mission or large group of players to do a proportionate amount of damage. One reason for no nuke or tallboy.
Balance is at the heart of the game because of all the competing interests. When you look at most of Hitech's out of the blue adjustments like the GVDAR from that perspective, it's obvious even if you want to argue till the cows come home he is stomping personally on GVs. Right now the GVDAR is addressing being able to dictate the whole night's outcome for a larger group of players with a single tank. Painting 1\2 mile of grass around every field and town would have solved most of this. Same kind of urge by the strat runners and the 49ers when they went ballistic over Hitech adjusting the HQ settings in AH2. They had discovered a way to dictate the fun of a larger group with a disproportionate effort to the level of the outcome. They can still attack the HQ in the same manner they once did, it will take a proportional amount of effort to over come the HQ change which means numbers of players.
GVDAR means a single tank no longer dictates the outcome for a large group of players because of the klingon cloaking trees. The game is not about 1 player dictating outcomes to many players unless that player is the pinnacle of possible skill like kappa taking on 5 planes and landing 5 kills. The trees making tanks assume an invisibility cloak grants a single tank a disproportionate amount of ability to the real ability of the individual player. In other FPS games you would be reporting that player to the MODS for finessing the game.
At one time Hitech changed the DAR minimum to 65ft from 250ft because everyone during the 400 player a night era avoided combat and attacked undefended feilds. I doubt sneaking around is something Hitech ever intended with his combat simulation. The MA is not a war simulation like FSO or other SEA arena WW2 events. If it was, the rules governing my terrain building would not be about balance.
Let's break this down, shall we?
The main point of the game is not about winning the war, that is an option to entertain people as one of many options to entertain many diverse interests. The MA is about balancing all of those options so an individual only has the ability to affect the game as an individual, not disproportionate to the outcome a single individual can express. Why you have to put together a large bomber mission or large group of players to do a proportionate amount of damage. One reason for no nuke or tallboy.
The point of the game is to provide entertainment, in exchange for subscription fee's, is that not the case? And the entertainment is some variation of dogfighting WW 2 planes. We in agreement so far? Ok, so this "option" is something that is offered by the creators because, as you say, people have diverse interests. Is it acceptable, that one of those diverse interests, is continuity of the platform, whatever it is? You say you offer something, I agree to pay for that something. If you offer vehicles to affect the game, I do indeed pay to use those, be they Spit 16's or Sherman tanks. I don't care about your disproportionate damage, that is some factor that dovetails into YOUR need to sell subscriptions. All I can say is that it better work for me too.
Balance is at the heart of the game because of all the competing interests. When you look at most of Hitech's out of the blue adjustments like the GVDAR from that perspective, it's obvious even if you want to argue till the cows come home he is stomping personally on GVs. Right now the GVDAR is addressing being able to dictate the whole night's outcome for a larger group of players with a single tank. Painting 1\2 mile of grass around every field and town would have solved most of this. Same kind of urge by the strat runners and the 49ers when they went ballistic over Hitech adjusting the HQ settings in AH2. They had discovered a way to dictate the fun of a larger group with a disproportionate effort to the level of the outcome. They can still attack the HQ in the same manner they once did, it will take a proportional amount of effort to over come the HQ change which means numbers of players.
Balance is at the heart of the game, because judgement dictates games with disproportionate opportunities do not sell well. Stack this game up against similar platforms and the implication, based on the above truism, is that the game has disproportionate opportunities. The statement "the whole night's outcome for a larger group of players" requires an extreme leap of faith, specifically based on these "many diverse interests." Using myself as an example, I spent years flying my Sp16 to the biggest dar bar and was thoroughly content with that. No amount of gv's could have dictated anything beyond the fact that I might have had to take off from a different airfield.
So in the end, when we distill out all the other factors, we see that gv dar is affecting, maybe, the outcome of the war, one of "many options to entertain many diverse interests." Why then, is there this intense focus on gv activity, one of the many diverse options, to affect the outcome of the war, simply another of many equally diverse options?
Seems to me the old crow's got content and lazy ruling the roost, hell some of you haven't flown in years. Now this new fangled gv thing comes along that you can't lorde over, so you got to nerf it down. Fine, turn it back into a dogfight simulator, just keep using those bombs to vulch because I'm not going to be your killbait, duh.
-
I like to perform most every type of mission possible in the sim but I find less and less variety.
It's as if the sim caters to people who have been flying the same stale mission profile for 15 years and that the changes are starting to funnel the entire player base into the stagnent gameplay.
-
Because I believe that the changes being made are to the betterment of the game. They are not only for you to see, but also HTC. Some complainers are acting like Chicken Little and I do not want them to dominate the debate with their overreaction.
You sir and your concept of how the GV game should be are what is dominating this discussion.
-
On my new terrain I'm still at least a month from worrying about GV spawns. Still I really need to know if Hitech has presented his final version of GVDAR or is he still tweaking it. GVDAR as is kind of blows holes in the reasoning for GV spawn distances since GV's were first introduced. Distance was used to give defenders a chance to put up a defense against GV's and a chance to save their town. Without GVDAR I ended up with spawns 3 miles from the town or airfield map room as a good compromise for attackers and defenders. Painting a 1\2 mile strip of grass around the town and airfield leveled the playing field that was skewed by the invisible tanks.
I understand Hitech's position of wanting "combat" and not everyone playing protagonist roles in a game of GV Ninja Turtles all night.
Ask the question: if a panzer tank in real life goes off a road and drives across several feilds as a short cut to a town, will it leave an easy trail to follow?
The answer to that has verged on accusing you of being something Skuzzy would ban the accuser for if they used the real words. This means the GVers don't really have an argument they want to allow light to shine on. The gist of the overall "want's" is invisible tanks that can hide from planes with bombs and dictate outcomes as solo player's. Instead of like real life needing a group of well coordinated tanks and air cover from fighter bombers.
What I need to know in spite of all of this, has Hitech stopped tinkering with GVDAR or not? At this juncture I'm thinking to be fair I have to look at two scenario, and a third with bridges and a river.
1. - Move GV spawns in to two miles from town or airfield map room center. The unintended consequence, if you don't show up to defend as soon as the GVDAR shows, your field is gone. Then GV's will dictate everyone's fun by abusing the tendency to ignore flashing feilds.
2. - Move GV spawns 4-5 miles away from the airfield, move the town out one mile farther from the airfield to the original 3 miles(maybe 2.5) from the GV spawns. Then run a short GV spawn from the field to outside the town to be fair to the GV combat game. It would take the fighter bombers longer to setup while the inbound GV's would have to get at the town ASAP and setup to defend taking the town.
3. - When I do bridges over a river next to an airfield, now I have to look at do I design the spawn path so those feilds get a Spawn on both sides of the river as a Russian roulette? Attackers would want to capture the field on purpose that drops their GV's at the spawn next to the field. Do I keep the map room on the field and no town or, do I use a town and accept the evils of spawn camping at the bridges from the hills around the town?
What I learned with two terrains is the GV game is about time more so than the air combat game because a tank has to spend the long time investment traveling from the spawn which makes them vulnerable to bombs. GVDAR will shorten the time expended in general in favor of defenders with bombs. So shortening the distance to the town from the GVspawn and from the airfield GV hanger is fair to those protagonist GV game players while being one of several evils where planes with bombs are concerned. And a horrible choice of evils if defenders choose to ignore the GVDAR.
So I need to know what GVDAR will be to make my future design decisions.
-
So I need to know what GVDAR will be to make my future design decisions.
I would consult one of those magic 8 balls, were I you.
- oldman
-
I have to agree with 27th…
The GVDAR has shifted the balance in the game too far in the favor of other players. I understand the concerns that some have that a single tank can get into a field and do damage but in most cases before the GVDAR a single GV had a short life particularly when other GV players jumped in to defend. At the same time a single bomber/fighter with bombs flying into a tank town area also wrecks the fun for other GV players too, so in many respects the old features of the game was already in balance.
As for a GV getting onto a VBase and taking control isn’t that already part of the game that a GV base can be taken over by other GV? Look at the way the single GV bases are setup in maps to promote control of an area, now with GVDAR the air has a significant advantage in finding any attacker.
I think the changes in the GVDAR to the blocks has helped but it is still very directional so everyone knows where you are coming from and unlike airfield radar it is NEVER out…. The goal sure has been accomplished in protecting airbase as the new GVDAR prevents ANY attempts to get to an air field regardless of the number of GV who attempt to get to an airbase.
A couple of suggestions around the GVDAR if it is going to stay….
** Link it to the airfield radar…. No airfield radar no GVDAR either and keep it within the range of the airfield radar.
** Build some maps which would promote GV battles where GV would focus on GV fights (like some of the old AHII days) and air could go do their thing. Then if a squad wants to work together in a combine Air/GV mission they could.
-
if you are hunting a tank under a tree that aint doing anything you are not looking for combat you are looking for easy kills you want combat go hunt down a plane. GVs was already a sitting duck as it was now there is very little chance for one to live. instead of crying about the GVs setting on the ground with no where to go. cry about the 95% of the fighter pilots in game that wont fight unless they got the sure win and run and HIDE when they dont. maybe something needs done about fighters not engaging once you get within 6k you must engage that person within say 2 mins if not you just explode if you are the plane running then you are the one who blows up. if we are gonna put GVs in a box forcing them to engage then fighters should be the same
-
if you are hunting a tank under a tree that aint doing anything you are not looking for combat you are looking for easy kills
No, I'm looking to eliminate a threat to my base. He didn't spawn here to anjoy the countryside.
-
why is devil 505 even commenting here-he doesn't do any gv'ing
and as far as I know neither does waystin.
+1 on 27th's wish
the flyers want gv dar so they can bomb**** or kill them with cannon easier
and yes I have complained about it being hard to find a gv when his engine is shut down.
but all gv dar is doing now is promoteing the gv either sit under a tree for an hour or run away.
and I'm talking while I'm in a tank or a plane.
without gv dar the gv would keep moving until he/she heard or saw the plane/tank.
dump the gv dar-
some call this a WWII sim--I call it Flight Sim using WWII assets and information, in either case they never had GV radar and the planes never had radar that could pick up gvs..true the radar only shows an area where they are but even that is too much.
Dump the GV Dar please
-
why is devil 505 even commenting here-he doesn't do any gv'ing
Because I play this game.
GV'ing was never intended to be completely separate from the overall game experience, but it became just that because of the GV icon rules and the denser trees in AH3.
The GV Dar was implemented to increase interaction between aircraft and GV's. Unfortunately for you GV'ers, that puts a target on your back. But that target means that there are more low level aircraft looking for you, which means more planes in the air for guys like me to kill. Since most players still fly planes, this is a positive change overall.
-
The GVDAR has shifted the balance in the game too far in the favor of other players.
"Other players?" :headscratch:
-
For planes, does the gv-dar have an altitude floor at which time it's enabled? If it doesn't, it should.
Say for example, the gv-dar will not be enabled for planes flying 800' AGL. Once below 800 gv-dar would be turned on.
Coogan
-
You realize that hidden tanks can see planes out to 6k, right? And further that the osty and wirb can tag them with lethal hits at 1.5k out? And that 800 FEET is about 266 yards. Do you know how insanely short range that is? 266 yards? You realize that the lethal kill-range for wirbles ostys and others is 4500 feet of distance, right? Any such radar should be longer than instant-death-range. No matter what arguments you make, you can't have the detection range inside of the instant-death range. So either one or the other has to change, and currently all the coddling has gone to GVs and all the nerfing has gone to aircraft. It's a bad dynamic and it can't be sustained.
-
You realize that hidden tanks can see planes out to 6k, right? And further that the osty and wirb can tag them with lethal hits at 1.5k out? And that 800 FEET is about 266 yards. Do you know how insanely short range that is? 266 yards? You realize that the lethal kill-range for wirbles ostys and others is 4500 feet of distance, right? Any such radar should be longer than instant-death-range. No matter what arguments you make, you can't have the detection range inside of the instant-death range. So either one or the other has to change, and currently all the coddling has gone to GVs and all the nerfing has gone to aircraft. It's a bad dynamic and it can't be sustained.
I was using 800' for an example only. Increase it to fair, that's fine.
I'm saying a bomber at 32k should not be able to detect a gv's general location on the ground.
Coogan
-
I was using 800' for an example only. Increase it to fair, that's fine.
I'm saying a bomber at 32k should not be able to detect a gv's general location on the ground.
Coogan
What difference does it make? It's not like he's got an icon to aim at from up there.
Wiley.
-
Or.... Just up a Stuka and fly around at ~5k ft and let the wirbles reveal themselves by shooting at you, then drop down at them. With a bit of practice you can kill wirbles way more often than they kill you..
-
For planes, does the gv-dar have an altitude floor at which time it's enabled? If it doesn't, it should.
Say for example, the gv-dar will not be enabled for planes flying 800' AGL. Once below 800 gv-dar would be turned on.
Coogan
For planes or vehicles the distance at which the indicator lights up when another GV is detected is set to 10 miles. It is an arena setting.
The size of the area the indicator will show is set to 3 miles x 3 miles. It too is an arena setting.
You can confirm these values in the arena settings. Click on the "Range" tab and scroll down to the variables begging with the letter "V" to locate them.
-
Hi Skuzzy, what is 'VehicleRadarRange[Plane]'? That's currently set for 600. Was that the distance for the quadrant radar, when it was in use?
-
The terrain editor grid is 1mile x 1 mile, we set GV spawns 2.5-3 miles from the town or other target on average.
So the 3x3 mile coverage of the GVDAR is a black hole to hide in under the trees for a GV and not a very good indicator of the GVs movement most of the time. The only thing GVDAR does now is let people know where to find a GV fight. I usually went to a flashing town, field, or shore battery, got in F3 from the tower and looked and listened. Then upped an IL2 and slaughtered the tank or tanks. By that point my squad would get jealous and bring it to the attacking GVs if they kept upping. Without the GVDAR it took very little effort to find tanks from the air. And before GVDAR we had annual complaint posts that Hitech should make it harder for planes to find GVs because it was unfair. The PIEDAR before the GRIDDAR was "too easy" to use for pinpointing the direction of travel for a GV and locating that GV.
The only other reason for the GVDAR complaint is the equivalent of demanding Hitech raise the NOE minimum back to 200ft so airplanes can sneak around again and capture undefended feilds in minutes while avoiding combat like they did in AH1 and AH2. Yes once upon a time airplanes had invisibility cloaks in the game just like GVs today.
(https://s20.postimg.org/rjwz4vjkd/oceania278.jpg)