Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: popeye on February 18, 2018, 11:50:19 AM
-
I would like to see a penalty for a suicide attack. If an attacker dies within 5 seconds of destroying a structure, object or ship, the downtime would be 5 minutes instead of the normal value.
-
hehe....all my sorties are "one way trips" resulting in murder or suicide. I would never get to play.
-
hehe....all my sorties are "one way trips" resulting in murder or suicide. I would never get to play.
The suggested penalty wouldn't apply to the player. It would apply to the effect that the player has on the game. The objects destroyed by a suicide attack would rebuild faster than if the attacker had survived. So you could still fly "one way trips" all day. :D
-
And how would u determine who is suicidind and who is not :noid
-
And how would u determine who is suicidind and who is not :noid
Anytime a player dies within 5 seconds of destroying the target, whether they auger or get killed by ack or another player, they decided to push the attack to the "bitter end". :D
-
Anytime a player dies within 5 seconds of destroying the target, whether they auger or get killed by ack or another player, they decided to push the attack to the "bitter end". :D
Not always. I have had a number of times where I hit a target, only to get killed by someone I didn't even know was there.
-
Not always. I have had a number of times where I hit a target, only to get killed by someone I didn't even know was there.
Yep. I've been de-acking a base only to get a PK by auto at random.
-1
-
There is already a penalty for death.
-
There is already a penalty for death.
I'm guessing that you are referring to a score penalty for the player. However, if the player is not concerned with score, it is actually more effective to make a suicidal attack than to try to survive since the player gets to immediately take off for another run without the delay of rtb. Just today I've watched half a dozen attacks that destroyed objects a second or two before the attacker crashed. I could name players that "make a living" with suicidal attacks to take out ordnance bunkers and radar.
Just seems like lame gameplay to me, but if no one else cares, then ok.
-
What if they don't care about score or downtime? Then they can do it more often. You might actually increase what you want to stop.
-
What if they don't care about score or downtime? Then they can do it more often. You might actually increase what you want to stop.
Not trying to stop anyone, just to mitigate the effectiveness of suicide attacks. But is seems that no one cares, so.... on with the show! :D
-
I would come from the other direction, meaning: give more reward for landing successful destruction of objects. I would argue for giving more reward for landing with damage too. Honestly though, after awhile rewards don't matter too much.
-
Anytime a player dies within 5 seconds of destroying the target, whether they auger or get killed by ack or another player, they decided to push the attack to the "bitter end". :D
Not necessarily, many a time I havedive bombed with 1/2 a wing and could not pull out :cheers:
-
Honestly though, after awhile rewards don't matter too much.
Exactly. :D
-
Turn it the other way around. For every minute alive after destroying something add 30s of additional downtime. When landing safely increase remaining downtime by 50%.
-
Half the posters in these forums want Hitech to punish the other half of the posters for not playing the game their way. If Hitech had implemented every wish for punishing players over the last 15 years for playing the game in their own manner. Today we would all be sitting in the tower unable to spawn anything while listening to the birds in the new back ground sound track.
What is with this urge to demand Hitech punish his paying customers for playing the game in good faith for their $14.95?
-
Most of these "pork runners" dont care about score, they are just there to drop what ever they are after at any cost. Dieing adds them as they just up a fresh ship for the next target.
The only thing that do care about is that there target is down. Take the "time" away from them by shortening the down time if they die and it will matter to them.
-
In WW2 pilots who performed deeds of this nature were usually awarded bravery medals, voluntarily giving their lives for the cause.
-
Half the posters in these forums want Hitech to punish the other half of the posters for not playing the game their way.
It's the goals, not the way it is being played. I doubt many likes to kamikazi just because. As a matter of fact it is the optimal strategy to deny attackers the tools they need with minimum time effort. This combined with time being the only limited resource in the game makes people kill themselves.
Fighting the religious zealots from bishops who regularly make use of this strategy sometimes there is no choice but to do the same. Even if I would prefer another kind of game play. Fighting for the country takes precedence over preferable behavior.
Adding an incentive (not in score or landed in messases - those are meaningless to win the war) would change everything. Especially for score potatos, who will have a much harder time picking porkers.
-
Fighting for the country takes precedence over preferable behavior.
Yikes.
- oldman
-
Mustng2 and I do a fair amount of attack runs.
These are WAG from experience.
The chances of losing a wing, wounded or other plane part dropping ammo bunker, Hanger, killing radar on the first pass. on a small field or town 1 in 10 due to auto ack.
The chances of losing a wing, wounded or other plane part dropping ammo bunker, Hanger, killing radar on the first pass. on a med field 1 in 5 due to auto ack.
The chances of losing a wing, wounded or other plane part dropping ammo bunker, Hanger, killing radar on the first pass. on a large field 1 in 3 due to auto ack.
The chances of blowing your self up because of dropping bomb error goes up dramatically if being chased.
-
Note that I am suggesting the "penalty" take effect if the pilot dies within 5 seconds of destroying the object. A pilot wound or aircraft damage will usually not result in death within 5 seconds.
-
A pilot wound or aircraft damage will usually not result in death within 5 seconds.
And the time it DOES? So I'm to be punished simply because auto ack though that my pilot should have a 40mm in the head an instant after destroying something? Not only no but...
(http://catplanet.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Oh-hell-No.png)
-
Just No. :mad:
Do no punish me because I'm "in the action"... You don't get to dictate to me, HOW YOU perceive i'm playing. Only if I survive an attack run is that run to be considered a valid attack run!? Awe heck no....
Part of the excitement of an attack run is trying to make it through; dying to auto-ack isn't a choice. Kamikaze isn't always the intent, just what you perceive.
Tell you what, when you kill me from any angle forward of the wing tips, it's a HO and I respawn mid-air with full ords/fuel... Ya know, because others didn't play the way I wanted/expected.... :bolt:
-
When I occasionally plow into the VH I am attacking, or fail to make the pull out let me assure you it is not due to kamikaze intent but just ordinary old lack of skill!
-
In WW2 pilots who performed deeds of this nature were usually awarded bravery medals, voluntarily giving their lives for the cause.
In the context of a computer game tactic, "bravery" is not the first word that comes to mind. :D
-
Anyone remember this is an open "Melee" arena with no rules other than the contract you accepted when you submitted your credit card or other form of payment?
-
Anyone remember this is an open "Melee" arena with no rules other than the contract you accepted when you submitted your credit card or other form of payment?
What was this part of the bbs called again?
-
Bustr,
There are plenty of "rules": arena settings and ENY to name two. Not to mention map layouts designed to encourage or discourage certain gameplay tactics. :D
I am only suggesting an "arena setting" that would mitigate the effectiveness of a particular tactic, but would not restrict any player from employing that tactic.
-
You want Hitech to use his force to make other customers play your way. To look reasonable, sugar coating your desire to have others forced to do what you want is transparent. Yes this is a wish list and he is "wishing" once again like so many do that Hitech will use force to make others do what they want them to do. What positive does this do for the customer who likes doing this action? We know what personal positive you believe it will do for you by making "you" feel better.
-
You want Hitech to use his force to make other customers play your way. To look reasonable, sugar coating your desire to have others forced to do what you want is transparent. Yes this is a wish list and he is "wishing" once again like so many do that Hitech will use force to make others do what they want them to do. What positive does this do for the customer who likes doing this action? We know what personal positive you believe it will do for you by making "you" feel better.
just wondering and a bit off topic sorry OP.
does hitech give you permission to speak for him or does he approve your posts before you post them? just wondering sorry and I am not trying to be funny but a lot of youre posts seem to directly speak for/from hitech and you answering may help some accept your replies
-
I am not trying to "force" anyone to do anything. You could say that the current MA settings "force" me to use ordnance to de-ack and WF a town when I might be happier if I could do it with a single KI-43. Most would agree that setting ack and building hardness so low that a KI-43 could destroy the town would "hurt gameplay" -- even though a few might think it was great. I just happen to think that losing radar for an hour to the Last Act of Defiance of a flaming Spitfire "hurts gameplay". Some will disagree. :D
-
You want Hitech to use his force to make other customers play your way. To look reasonable, sugar coating your desire to have others forced to do what you want is transparent. Yes this is a wish list and he is "wishing" once again like so many do that Hitech will use force to make others do what they want them to do. What positive does this do for the customer who likes doing this action? We know what personal positive you believe it will do for you by making "you" feel better.
What harm does it do for him to state something he wishes for? It opens up debate and gets members communicating with one another.
You appear to believe that anything you say holds weight with anyone here. The only reason why people respond to you is because we are tired of your hostile responses towards anything you don’t like.
Enough is enough Bustr, you are just a member of the community like the rest of us, unless HiTech has granted you MOD powers or are on their payroll.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk