Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: JimmyD3 on February 12, 2025, 04:20:40 PM
-
Anyone have any suggestions on how to arrange
(https://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=406252.0;attach=37938)
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/0jvWvyn8/dwnundr-map.jpg)
the blue arrows are were Id remove land and the blue zone in the north Id add land. The red dots the depots, the green tank town. I think the real setup is going to be more due to the bases your going to place. They are set to how close/far apart they are to be. If you need 40 bases per side your only going to be able to fit so many on those islands in the north so the horizontal liine may have to move south some.
-
WTG!
Ya, I'm kinda agreeing with Fugi, but maybe just leave the main center land mass. Unfortunately, unless someone sees what I don't, islands could throw balance off.
Very kewl you're doin this one.
I think a new rule should be to add a map to rotation a map must be removed.
Thanks for another new map.
It will be done and in rotation by morning?
<runs>
-
Where is New Zealand?
-
Where is New Zealand?
\
You could use the islands for strats and uncapturable including New Zealand and have all the capturable bases on Australia itself.
-
Where is New Zealand?
\
You could use the islands for strats and uncapturable including New Zealand and have all the capturable bases on Australia itself.
Do you realize how far New Zealand is from Australia? It's over 1000 miles at the closest point. And Australia is only about 2500 miles wide. That's a ton of water in between them at any scale. On the map shown here, it would be about 4 sectors of open ocean. No thanks.
-
Do you realize how far New Zealand is from Australia? It's over 1000 miles at the closest point. And Australia is only about 2500 miles wide. That's a ton of water in between them at any scale. On the map shown here, it would be about 4 sectors of open ocean. No thanks.
Yeah, that's the thing. Do we really need these maps "at scale". It's seems they are already too big, IMO for most of the days players #s. We need to have larger dars in the mid afternoon, not small ones scattered all over the place where it looks like no or very little action is taking place. I feel like max 20 bases on each side, but also close enough together so it creates fights. These long sorties to an attack field can be tough when it takes 10 minutes each time and then flying back or even doing it over and over again gets tough spending 10 minutes just flying there. Then you get ganged by the defenders because your friendlies haven't returned yet or go somewhere else because the flight is to far.
-
Yeah, that's the thing. Do we really need these maps "at scale". It's seems they are already too big, IMO for most of the days players #s. We need to have larger dars in the mid afternoon, not small ones scattered all over the place where it looks like no or very little action is taking place. I feel like max 20 bases on each side, but also close enough together so it creates fights. These long sorties to an attack field can be tough when it takes 10 minutes each time and then flying back or even doing it over and over again gets tough spending 10 minutes just flying there. Then you get ganged by the defenders because your friendlies haven't returned yet or go somewhere else because the flight is to far.
How dare you suggest we have smaller maps! :furious
-
Here is a 128 x 128 version, I think its to small.
(https://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=406252.0;attach=37940)
-
Here is a 128 x 128 version, I think its to small.
(https://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=406252.0;attach=37940)
Yup, that is too small, half of the map is water. The placement of bases is what makes or breaks a map. Too far apart, or big mountains in the way or large water areas to cover all add to that "10 minute flight" some people complain about. This map looks like 20 bases per side, figuring about one for each sector, but if you bump it up to 25 or 30 per side your going to have to tuck them in closer and it will give you that small map feel. Im not sure how close a base can be to another base to fit into HTC rules for an MA map, but pushing that limit can make those flights shorter.
-
Yup, that is too small, half of the map is water. The placement of bases is what makes or breaks a map. Too far apart, or big mountains in the way or large water areas to cover all add to that "10 minute flight" some people complain about. This map looks like 20 bases per side, figuring about one for each sector, but if you bump it up to 25 or 30 per side your going to have to tuck them in closer and it will give you that small map feel. Im not sure how close a base can be to another base to fit into HTC rules for an MA map, but pushing that limit can make those flights shorter.
I agree, as stated on the other forum. 256 may work snd still be nice and tight.
Remember, we’ve all been begging for smaller maps to condense battles. 512 might be too big for what we’re asking for.
Isn’t it like 1 base per sector rule? Asking
-
The current rotation has only 2 maps that are 512 x 512, that is bowlma and buzzsaw. All the other maps are 256 x 256.
-
Yup, that is too small, half of the map is water. The placement of bases is what makes or breaks a map. Too far apart, or big mountains in the way or large water areas to cover all add to that "10 minute flight" some people complain about. This map looks like 20 bases per side, figuring about one for each sector, but if you bump it up to 25 or 30 per side your going to have to tuck them in closer and it will give you that small map feel. Im not sure how close a base can be to another base to fit into HTC rules for an MA map, but pushing that limit can make those flights shorter.
Yeah i agree that the base placement definitely makes map better or worse. I think placing VH bases in between fighter bases works really well, maybe 12 miles apart. I know these "paths" worked really well on Festers map. I'd also limit FT and TT, it takes players away from a real battle and point of the strategy to the game. If the base layout is good. No need for a FT or TT.
My point about the 10 minute thing. Its not the first sortie that matters. Its the second and third sortie. Are your friendlies flying back to the fight? Am I going to get ganged as soon as I enter the enemy field because I don't have enough friendlies? Should I spend the time to fly back to that field and will it be worth the time? Those are some of things I tell myself when considering if I want to roll again. When there's a lot of folks in the battle, it's much easier to want to roll and spend that time flying to field over and over again. So if you have an area that's really bullding up big battles, not only are you going to have more fights in the off hours, people will also stick around longer in the evenings prolonging the battle.
The current rotation has only 2 maps that are 512 x 512, that is bowlma and buzzsaw. All the other maps are 256 x 256.
Oceana too? I'd give anything to have all 3 of those maps gone. That stretch of the rotation is painful and old for me. Or perhaps just a re-randomizer of the map rotation.