General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Mister Fork on June 13, 2018, 02:38:28 PM
Title: Navy Combat
Post by: Mister Fork on June 13, 2018, 02:38:28 PM
I know haters are going to hate with comments like: - "We need old models updated before we make any significant changes like this!" - "This is an airplane MMO, not a naval - go play Worlds of Warships!!!" - "I hate it. I hate it Sam I am! I don't want no ships and subs! I don't like them Sam I am!"
But then, we have PT boats. Tanks. Jeeps. Troop carriers. Tanks with rocket launchers. CV's and Battleship groups.
So, here we go, haters or not...I think this would add a level of extended gameplay options to the MA to be a true WWII MMO game like no other out there. Especially because of submarines...
LST's with mannable AAA (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/LST_Sicily.jpg) LST's that when beached, turn into a VH. Any version (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landing_Ship,_Tank) will do but I'm more partial to the Canuck version. Came with free maple syrup and poutine with good beer in the junior mess. Where can they spawn: from any BB, CV group, or port Perked ride: possibly but depends on impact to gamplay. Interface: same as any naval vessel, with way-points but you need to pick a spot to beach the ship. Unless of course HTC uses the PT boat type of interface and you simply pilot it and jump to the AAA guns when needed and drive it to the beach.
Fletcher Class Destroyer (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/USS_Fletcher_%28DD-445%29_off_New_York%2C_1942.jpg) A player controlled Fletcher (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher-class_destroyer)class destroyer with mannable 5" guns, lost of mannable AAA similar to any existing destroyer in a CV. Prefer an interface similar to that of the PT boat and the options to fire torpedoes - but more like a 5' gun mount. Of course, you can have destroyers without... Where can they spawn: from any port or base with a boat spawn or from a CV/BB group. Perked ride: possibly. To avoid having a CV show up only to be slammed with 20-30 destroyers charging your CV group. Depends on impact on gameplay. Interface: preferred PT boat style interface, but can live with one similar to that of a CV/BB.
Gato Class Submarine (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/USS_Gato%3B0821201.jpg) As a start to our submarine warfare in Aces High, I propose the introduction of the Gato class (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gato-class_submarine) submarine as a player-controlled vessel. A couple of simple interfaces like found in Silent Hunter II is all we need to start. Heck, I'd take a Silent Service I interface if it'll work to start. Spawn points could be different than those of LST's and Destroyers. Besides, what force could possibly stop field/port spawned destroyer invasion of an approaching CV than a couple of well placed subs in front of the carrier at periscope depth? And of course, Hitech's dad served on one - I'm drawing upon an idea that has a personal connection to the owners and an idea first brought forward in early 2000. Where can they spawn: from any port or base with a boat spawn point or from a CV/BB group Perked ride: if Destroyers are available, no. Interface: preferred that of Silent Hunter II, but willing to take anything.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Wiley on June 13, 2018, 03:40:07 PM
You know what the best part about the haters is? You don't need to convince them. You just need to convince Hitech to completely retool everything to build you a submarine game, or an FPS, or whatever other type of gameplay you want to shoehorn into the game.
Wiley.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: CAV on June 13, 2018, 08:21:18 PM
Give the ships we have now realistic damage models first.........
There was reason CV's wouldn't go near an operational land bases.....
CAV
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: BuckShot on June 13, 2018, 11:27:19 PM
Yes!
Depth charges
BV138 I can land near a sub and top off the tanks.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: pembquist on June 14, 2018, 10:36:44 AM
As a first step maybe we could make it easier (or possible for that matter, I don't know how you even do it,) to land a PT boat.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: bustr on June 14, 2018, 12:05:40 PM
"IF"....
If you could get Hitech to separate the MA terrains into specific themes so that some terrains were NAVY combat dominant. The terrain could be loaded up with things like this with toys biased towards NAVY combat and nothing else. Then our 90-140 numbers every night would be concentrated into fighting NAVY or those would be slow nights until a different map rotated. You are sort of asking Hitech to invest in boutique toys on the outside chance they would get use commiserate with the development investments. With our lower numbers, toys like this will add to the thinning of available players for air combat and ground combat.
Another direction could be to convince terrain builders to build the smallest NAVY combat pond possible to keep all of these toys close and quickly in combat. After my first two terrains, my current one I'm testing that concept like I tested moving airfields closer and layouts for GV spawns to help players find activity quicker and not hide in corners of the map. World of Warships combat arenas will fit in one of our sectors and the action is hot and fast. They also allow their ships to get very close to shore to hide behind rocks and small islands since no land locations are captured.
The closer you can present things when they start, the less thinning of the activity density at any active location. With low numbers on average, this matters. Or so two terrains experimenting with the concept tells me. My next terrain you gents will be euphemistically furballing with CV task-groups while terrorizing airfields. Those three toys in this post would really heat things up in such a small task group furballing pond and not be wandering around forever wasting our human resources necessary to promote and sustain activity.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Mister Fork on June 14, 2018, 01:41:33 PM
The closer you can present things when they start, the less thinning of the activity density at any active location. With low numbers on average, this matters. Or so two terrains experimenting with the concept tells me. My next terrain you gents will be euphemistically furballing with CV task-groups while terrorizing airfields. Those three toys in this post would really heat things up in such a small task group furballing pond and not be wandering around forever wasting our human resources necessary to promote and sustain activity.
Interesting thoughts Bustr. Thanks for sharing. I'm making the assumption that Naval warfare will draw in a large crowd from the subsim.com group - in the hundreds (maybe even bigger). No one has tied in a good flight combat model into Naval combat. Aces High does a good job on the CV to CV or CV to BB or CV to field engagement. I'm just thinking about adding that extra layer of excitement... We don't want to compete with World of Warships ... we just want to offer a different experience.
Throw subs into the mix, and boy, you got a whole new world opening up - maybe adding ship supply convoy's... etc.
More targets for the Flyboys. :x
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Arlo on June 14, 2018, 02:12:26 PM
^ This, in itself, could transform water play in AH (without taxing resources to develop or modify).
Simple steps are usually better. :D
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: FESS67 on June 14, 2018, 06:35:27 PM
Wwiionline models air, ground and sea combat and it is not great at any of them.
Better to be really good at one thing than mediocre at many things. I would rather see effort put into making the air combat experience more consistent rather than the gang or be ganged conditions that often exist now.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: bustr on June 16, 2018, 01:15:04 PM
I've played since 2002, and some longer than me who confirm what I've seen for 16 years, and the MA has been always an imbalanced group slug fest. The structured game play aficionados or, more polite aerial jousting society was given the CT\AvA and the DA. The MA is and has always been a back shooting, crotch kneeing, cage match between bare knuckle gang fest brawlers. That was what has sustained the numbers, and the aerial jousting society has always complained and harangued Hitech about the lack of quality in the MA. Their dream MA ends up being described suspiciously like a giant function and CM controlled DA. That imbalanced, disorganized, impolite, back-shooting and ganging is what has kept the doors open all of these years. Not the DA.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Mister Fork on June 18, 2018, 01:02:09 PM
I've played since 2002, and some longer than me who confirm what I've seen for 16 years, and the MA has been always an imbalanced group slug fest. The structured game play aficionados or, more polite aerial jousting society was given the CT\AvA and the DA. The MA is and has always been a back shooting, crotch kneeing, cage match between bare knuckle gang fest brawlers. That was what has sustained the numbers, and the aerial jousting society has always complained and harangued Hitech about the lack of quality in the MA. Their dream MA ends up being described suspiciously like a giant function and CM controlled DA. That imbalanced, disorganized, impolite, back-shooting and ganging is what has kept the doors open all of these years. Not the DA.
Yeah, totally agree with that assessment Bustr. I leave the wounded rabbit chasing by the dog pack to those who enjoy it.
The gameplay engine hasn't changed much since 2002- has it gone stale?
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Oldman731 on June 18, 2018, 03:06:15 PM
Yeah, totally agree with that assessment Bustr. I leave the wounded rabbit chasing by the dog pack to those who enjoy it.
The gameplay engine hasn't changed much since 2002- has it gone stale?
You say "stale", I'd say "that's the game." Changing it much from what's there would pretty much make it a different game, and most that I see suggested would make it something I wouldn't want to play. HT's made his decisions on what he thinks the best decisions are for an open world melee game. I may quibble on a couple details, but for the most part his decisions make sense.
Wiley.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Ramesis on June 18, 2018, 03:36:45 PM
You know what the best part about the haters is? You don't need to convince them. You just need to convince Hitech to completely retool everything to build you a submarine game, or an FPS, or whatever other type of gameplay you want to shoehorn into the game.
Wiley.
+1
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Mister Fork on June 18, 2018, 04:58:34 PM
Fleet tactic DD mod - forcing fleets to stand off (modeling difficulty unknown)
(https://i.imgur.com/umXiWxv.png)
Operational DD torpedos
This would be the maximum I would dare ask for at one time. Any one of these would be fantastic (though I feel the last one would have the most impact).
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: The Fugitive on June 18, 2018, 05:23:05 PM
I dont think the game needs more toys in the sand box. Sure it would be nice to have some of the things mentioned but look at the time needed to add some of them. We are talking major re works for some of them.
The game already has plenty of toys to play with, the trick is to get players to USE those toys. Maybe a bonus for using the hanger queens, maybe a cut using the late war monsters. Bonuses for joining and helping in a mission. Make defensive missions like capping or stopping an attack mission worth something more than just lone wolfing it. Add bonuses for shooting and moving in a GV and take them away for sitting still too long (spawn camping). Same goes for vulching, take points away if plane is downed before 1 minute or so elapses from wheels leaving the ground.
We have plenty of toys, but most players either ignore them or bastardize their use. If they were to tweak things to bring these toys and activities back into play mmore people would have fun and less would get bored.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: bustr on June 18, 2018, 06:18:02 PM
The game has not changed in terms of what you describe loosely as negative game play impacting some imaginary better game play. You, and others have all gotten older and less tolerant of the core attraction for the MA. No rules of engagement, just kill the other guy any way you can and land your kills to crow about it on range and 200. Not much different than the kids playing Fortnite. An open world, no structured game play. Work with friends or solo and take out the bad guys any way you can. Where are all those new players we have waited for as the next generation? Fragging each other in Fortnite in a kiddy sand box with no inebriated grand fathers screaming in bubba to turn the galdern ship.
We both know that once you hit the spawn button and are in the unfriendly world of AH, you knew the moment you pressed the button what could happen to you. It's a great equalizer and attractive for this game since at that moment, a one day newbie can claim a KOTH champion's scalp for being stupid. And why the HO has always been popular. If you want fairness and congeniality, there is the head to head match arena.
This post seems to be another player who has grown tired of the venue because of his years of being in the game. Just like you want Hitech to add tiny little function limitations to actions to force congenial game play. At least two of the toys asked for would require a change in the game play dynamics to make them usable versus something to fight for command of.
Younger players who still love back stabbing and fragging each other in the MA, are not in here demanding Hitech change the core game. Just the older players who want a more congenial game or a different game.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Wiley on June 18, 2018, 06:52:01 PM
I've posted my ideas several times. I just don't feel the need to hit the wishlist with them on a bi-weekly or monthly basis like some do (not you).
The short version, more detailed damage model. A part shouldn't function factory fresh after 99 bullets, then fail completely when the 100th hits. I'd like to see more details to the damage zones on the plane. More smaller areas to take damage, the ability for flaps to be shot off if they're in any position other than "up" instead of always getting stuck. Ability to detonate the ammo boxes in wings if you hit them right, control cables able to be damaged/stuck. Things like that.
With tanks, it seems a bit odd that you can stack 100 rounds on the same location and if the angle is not a penetration angle, it will never, ever penetrate. IMO successive impacts in an area should weaken the armor based on how close to penetration angle they're at. Sure, if it hits at near parallel angle, it can do that all day, but if it hits at 87 degrees and the penetration angle is 90, it seems to me a few of those in the same location with a substantially damaging round would compromise that area somewhat over time.
More planes. The scenarios/FSO have some glaring gaps that should be filled. There are also a few worthy additions to the MA like the G.55 among others.
But all of those things have been asked for, I know HT disagrees with me at least with the aircraft DM wish above, so I haven't bothered harping on it. With the addition of new vehicles, I think he's making the right move upgrading the old models rather than adding new ones. Once the old ones are done, I'm hopeful for some new vehicles.
As far as the MA core gameplay, it is what it is. Adding FPS gameplay or cloning Silent Hunter is a massive undertaking for highly questionable benefit.
Wiley.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Arlo on June 18, 2018, 08:09:33 PM
The game has not changed in terms of what you describe loosely as negative game play impacting some imaginary better game play. You, and others have all gotten older and less tolerant of the core attraction for the MA. No rules of engagement, just kill the other guy any way you can and land your kills to crow about it on range and 200.
We both know that once you hit the spawn button and are in the unfriendly world of AH, you knew the moment you pressed the button what could happen to you.
If you want fairness and congeniality, there is the head to head match arena.
Younger players who still love back stabbing and fragging each other in the MA, are not in here demanding Hitech change the core game. Just the older players who want a more congenial game or a different game.
Not all older players. ;) Though I pared your post down, I can relate to it, entirely. :) The only reason I ask for any new toys now is just to make a great game better. I can certainly live with what's already there. :) (And I wouldn't want any more coded restriction on anyone.)
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Arlo on June 18, 2018, 08:10:38 PM
This post seems to be another player who has grown tired of the venue because of his years of being in the game.
Appreciate your input, Bustr. Game is fine, no need for any changes. Got it.
- oldman
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Mister Fork on June 19, 2018, 10:25:35 AM
Leave it to the sensibilities of Bustr and Wiley to put common sense into the Wishlist. :salute both of you.
Dang it. I thought I was onto something here. Us :old: farts just want some excitement...
Dare to dream. Dare to chase that star. :airplane:
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Wiley on June 19, 2018, 12:59:02 PM
My general opinion is just that there's room to improve what's already here. I think improving what's here into something that's truly polished would give a lot more bang for the buck as opposed to adding other types of gameplay, particularly when it would be a ton of work.
The one I find most silly is the idea that they could just slap FPS in here. Eject and take a walk around town. Then take a look at any half decent FPS game from the last 5 years. There is a subtle difference in level of detail, and people who tend to be attracted to FPS gameplay are among the most demanding on detailed graphics. It's good enough for vehicle combat, not so much for FPS.
Now one thing I will admit colors my opinions a fair bit- I am an open world game junky. Games that have things available to do but don't hold your hand are my crack. That's why I'm here as opposed to one of the other options. Short round-based gameplay like WT or WoT or the others just doesn't do it for me. I see clearly it's a more popular style of gameplay because there's actually more of a "game" there as opposed to the ongoing battle in the MA here, where you're free to do whatever you like as opposed to "Go here. Do this. Get a reward for a 20 minute investment of time. Repeat." Not to say I don't play those kind of games, but when it comes to simulators, this is what gets its hooks into me hard, and something like WT just pales in comparison for me. I enjoy FSO and Scenarios too, but those are once a week things.
Edit: Forgot to make my point on the last paragraph. The problem with the MA style gameplay is it's what I want for the most part, but it puts HTC between a rock and a hard place. For the people like me that like it, nothing else is the same. It just doesn't have mass appeal, people generally want stuff that plays more like WT etc.
Wiley.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Arlo on June 19, 2018, 01:09:25 PM
Good post, Wiley. :cheers:
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Ramesis on June 19, 2018, 02:43:54 PM
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: TheBug on June 19, 2018, 02:50:25 PM
Add more depth/strategic level to the base taking aspect of the game that better intertwines the different elements of the game that people choose to play, would be an improvement I would like to see.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: bustr on June 19, 2018, 03:00:32 PM
Nothing wrong with new toys period! Never stop wishing!
Until Hitech changes the MA and it's game play format, I'm stuck working with it's limitations to help players have more opportunities to create activity. This means accepting we have limited numbers now, and cannot spread out feilds or create situations that allow half of your players to self segregate and ignore taking part in the larger initiatives. Time kills happiness when it is over balanced towards getting to the fight versus fighting, but, numbers attract numbers becasue of the activity. We will always have individuals who solo off on their own adventures as that should be available to serve those customers. So the more toys the better.
I'm laying in the final country's area wide road network on my new terrain now. I've got about 7 days, maybe less of work running the dummy roads between feilds in the last country following the terrain. All to hide the convoy spawns instead of having a bunch of roads to nowhere running off from feilds. Running roads and adjusting them to the terrain is an irritating time consuming PITA task. Especially with 28 rivers.
All of this to compress distances to shorten the time to a fight. Including the pond for the CV task groups to be constantly fighting each other. Time\distance and how it's managed is the big difference between our game and the competitors turn based match ups. This is about all the compression I can get pushing the MA rules for field distances.
Imagine laying in a road network for each country on this terrain.
(https://s20.postimg.cc/k0a7bwc4t/medtst819.jpg)
Paths are in blue for both rivers and roads. It's easy to tell where the bridges are.
The red segment is the active convoy road, you can see why I'm laying in dummy roads to hide the active road so you have to sit around waiting to see which roads the convoy actually run on.
(https://s20.postimg.cc/wjv85psx9/medtst814.jpg)
(https://s20.postimg.cc/oiog3w8cd/medtst806.jpg)
(https://s20.postimg.cc/l7imnyf3h/medtst818.jpg)
(https://s20.postimg.cc/bzqe790bh/medtst817.jpg)
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: icepac on June 19, 2018, 06:45:05 PM
That's some amazing stuff.
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Volron on June 20, 2018, 04:33:22 PM
ALL those flak batteries around the strats really has my attention. :x I'm wondering what the puffy thickness will look like. :D Looking really good. :aok
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: bustr on June 20, 2018, 05:26:47 PM
I'm not sure, I just wanted to add some protection to this complex while giving strat raiders and bombing missions a good target to invest their time in. The comples is 16 miles diameter. I set the train track starting points close together in two locations at each complex so a strat raider might get lucky. All trains spawn at the same moment. I've completed the roads and tracks for Countries 1 and 2 and I'm working on Country 3 right now.
Country 1 strat complex. Ran a dummy road up to it if the lower field is ever captured.
(https://s20.postimg.cc/jz5bfp3st/medtst823.jpg)
Country 2 strat complex.
(https://s20.postimg.cc/9p2wgfyhp/medtst821.jpg)
Country 3 strat complex, you can see it's waiting for me to work on it. I'm about 1\3 finished with Country 3 at this point. The auto populate lays the resupply roads and tracks east. I have to re-position all of them to fit the terrain.
(https://s20.postimg.cc/65gyqmo25/medtst822.jpg)
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: Volron on June 21, 2018, 12:12:47 AM
:rock
Very nice! :aok
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: lunatic1 on June 21, 2018, 04:58:51 PM
Interesting thoughts Bustr. Thanks for sharing. I'm making the assumption that Naval warfare will draw in a large crowd from the subsim.com group - in the hundreds (maybe even bigger). No one has tied in a good flight combat model into Naval combat. Aces High does a good job on the CV to CV or CV to BB or CV to field engagement. I'm just thinking about adding that extra layer of excitement... We don't want to compete with World of Warships ... we just want to offer a different experience.
Throw subs into the mix, and boy, you got a whole new world opening up - maybe adding ship supply convoy's... etc.
More targets for the Flyboys. :x
we don't need or have a use for subs---unless they subway samiches I can eat them all day heh gimmie gimmie-- Online Wiley <--this knows the score and is right
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: lunatic1 on June 21, 2018, 05:05:39 PM
dang it Bustr why you always gotta try to make a post about you?
Title: Re: Navy Combat
Post by: lunatic1 on June 21, 2018, 05:13:41 PM