Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Innominate on December 28, 2002, 05:15:01 PM
-
Not "Suicide Jabos", well not entirely, they're part of what I'm talking about The complaints about suicide jabos always bug me, since they leave out all of the other suicide crap.
What I'm talking about are the people who crawl up a buff formations six, knowing that they'll probably kill one of them before they go down. Or the people who dive into a huge swarm of enemies and field ack to vulch someone taking off before running into the ground. Every action where the pilot says to himself "Well doing this will get me killed, but I'll bring one of em down first!".
Comparing planes in AH to real life often seems very wrong, and planes often seem to be better or worse than they were. Survival is a secondary goal(often not a goal at all) to getting the kill. The planes which are best at getting the kill, tend to be the ones most used. Survival is pretty much irrelevent. Some planes (primarily the LW planes, which is probably a lot of why there is so much whining about them) are very good at survival, but lack when it comes to getting the kill.
AH is about getting the kill, survival is secondary. The lack of any reason to survive, and every reason not to bother is the root cause of much of the suicide tactics in AH.
So the question is, How can you encourage flying to survive, over flying to inflict damage? If you do, how can you avoid hurting the newer pilots, still learning the ropes? Or should it remain the way it is?
(http://www.innomi.com/suicidedbug.gif)
-
Innom: Flying just to survive does not make a fun game.
Think of it this way, if living is the primary goal why ever take off.
HiTech
-
Both of Ye have good points, this is why I'm going to love the "MT" when it comes out.
PS HT, hows the B25 coming? :D
-
bah, it wouldn't need to be JUST flying to survive, merely adding some practical reason(i.e. not stats) to land instead of crash into the ground. Though I'm mostly just pointing out that the whole suicide "problem" isn't restricted to jabos. The same suicide tactics are used everywhere.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Innom: Flying just to survive does not make a fun game.
Think of it this way, if living is the primary goal why ever take off.
HiTech
LoL, you don't really believe this do you? I mean if you do then why you even bothering to do the Mission Arena for folks like us that want to keep streaks and try to stay alive?
I am hoping to remove this piece of iron hook from my mouth soon:eek:
Booky
-
HT has a point you dont want a main that catters to 1 type of flying alone. We would get an arena of mustangs cruising at 25k looking for aerial strafing kills.
The problem with suicide types in not that they get killed its the impact they have on others. Like Bomber divebombing CVs and suicide jabo raids against an airfield.
When the objective swings the other way, as I feel it has. When the focus of the main gets away from a2a combat and replaced by "war winning" then you have a boring main as well.
I would hope the main and folks who fly there would be about aircombat and land grabbing would be secondary and developed to to enhance the air war.
-
Originally posted by Wotan
We would get an arena of mustangs cruising at 25k looking for aerial strafing kills.
But the 190's would still be furballing down low right, doin' that T&B thing like they are now?
See, cheap shots are easy. :D
When the objective swings the other way, as I feel it has. When the focus of the main gets away from a2a combat and replaced by "war winning" then you have a boring main as well.
Yeah, IMO since Beta it has slowly but steadily moved away from A2A into a "war winning" mode. For several valid reasons, too. As bombers were added, GV's were added the requests for "strat" increased in volume. People wanted something to accomplish with these new items. So, obviously, as these various elements were added, there was a trend away from pure A2A.
If we were still at a planeset that had ONLY fighters, it really wouldn't have changed much. But that's not what the clientele seemed to want.
All that being said, I think one can still find what he's looking for in the MA.
For example, I like A2A almost to the point of exclusivity. I really don't care who wins "the war". I fly fighters and I'm always able to find interesting fights somewhere on the map.
So what changed for me? Not much, really.
The Main is what you make it. IMO, of course.
-
But the 190's would still be furballing down low right, doin' that T&B thing like they are now?
See, cheap shots are easy.
I would only consider that a "cheap shot" if it applied to me. But even so the 51, which is already the most used a/c in ah, would be the perfect aircraft for a main as described in the original post. Its fast at that height, it dives really well and has a good gun package. In the main where only "surviving" would be the goal it would be the plane of choice to do so.
If you felt that to be a cheap shot well get thicker skin. I think its pretty accurate.
As for the rest there has been numerous posts about how the main has changed some like the change some liked it better before.
When the objective swings the other way, as I feel it has.
As the quote implies its just mho. Ofcourse YMMV.
-
Originally posted by Innominate
So the question is, How can you encourage flying to survive, over flying to inflict damage? If you do, how can you avoid hurting the newer pilots, still learning the ropes? Or should it remain the way it is?
Delay accumulation of perk points during a sortie. Make it an adjustable setting on the arena. Default it to, say, 30 seconds, with a valid range of, say, 0 seconds (instantly) to 300 seconds (five minutes). If you get a kill or destroy/damage a ground target (depending on your sortie type), and die before the expiration of the perk delay time, you don't get any perks for that kill.
-
I think it would have to do with something about giving clear and simple objective at hand to the people who fly.
In the days of the war, winning the war was the first and largest objective, but also as a living being, using one's military forces to fight a fight where your soldiers survive, and the other side's don't , was an absolute necessity. Smack-down, head-to-head, frontal-collision type of game of attrition was a costly move which even the sure winners would hesitate to play.
In actual tactical combat, it seems there were also other type of objectives at hand which kept the pilots struggling to survive and yet, chained to combat. Surviving was necessary and yet, you can't just grab alt alone, ignoring all your squad mates in the dumps. You can't just run away screaming leaving others to get shot down and die. In other words, no matter how good a pilot is he was bound to his mates by duty. If one chooses to run and leave all his friends, being the only person to survive everytime, he'd probably face the military court. People were given a mission as a group, and aborting it was an option to be chosen only when there was no other option.
So, I guess real life was a mix of factors of "survival" and "forced duty" which, in the MA, there is nothing that has to do with both. No lives are stake so no need for flying to survive, and no forced duties so one can ignore everything and everyone if he chooses to do so. Thus, the only objective in the MA that is remotely worth something is winning the war. People couldn't care less about flying smart, or carrying bombs in a flaming kamikaze. Nor do they care about group tactics or have concerns about the safety of their team mates. I guess we can't really expect that in the MA, and that's why probably mission theater is in plans.
All I can hope for is a some sort of a management system which judges the pilots of the new Mission Theater which accounts for more factors than required in MA - "survival" "forced duty" "cooperation".. etc.
Accomplished the mission, but failed to survie - low points
Survived, but abandoned the mission - low points
Accomplised mission and survived, but all your squad died - low points
Acomplisged mission, survived, and lot of squaddies also alive - high points
...
-
I personally hate attacking bombers at any alt, but I have to or else my base might be gone or badly damaged the next time I up from it. If HTC got rid of bombers, damaging bases, and base captures altogether, I don't think I'd really miss them. But he won't, so I'll have to go against B17's tearing me apart from 1.3k out while I have to wait till 600' before I can do any damage with the same ammo type.
-
Originally posted by TheManx
I personally hate attacking bombers at any alt, but I have to or else my base might be gone or badly damaged the next time I up from it. If HTC got rid of bombers, damaging bases, and base captures altogether, I don't think I'd really miss them. But he won't, so I'll have to go against B17's tearing me apart from 1.3k out while I have to wait till 600' before I can do any damage with the same ammo type.
Bombers are way too easy to kill now. Climbing up their 6 isn't the way to do it though.
-
Originally posted by Wotan
But even so the 51...would be the perfect aircraft for a main as described in the original post. Its fast at that height, it dives really well and has a good gun package. In the main where only "surviving" would be the goal it would be the plane of choice to do so.
Yeah. The D9 is maybe 10 slower, climbs ~ 200 fpm less, and has 4 cannons that make a quick kill much easier. In short, there are SEVERAL aircraft that would be excellent for "surviving" but of course there's always one planeset that has an unfair advantage isn't there?
As for the rest, it would seem obvious that once you go beyond a pure fighter planeset, the focus of gameplay will drift away from pure A2A engagements.
-
above 23k the d9 suffers in manuverability and it compresses before the 51 will. A 51 can turn and if it gets in trouble it can get lo faster and get away. Try it out.
Also the 50 cals on the mustang have a greater effective kill range then the 190. Would all the faster planes get more useage in a main that revolved around survival?, yes.
"Unfair" thats your word. A few of you on the board like to insert your words and meanings into the mouths of those you may disagree with. I never said unfair and I never directed any comment at you nor do I see that anything I said was a "cheap shot". I made a post about a game. You felt slighted and you tried to "get me back".
Anyway my point was that going to far one or another can have the equal effect and diminishing the focus more away from a2a then some of us would like. Ofcourse this is only a "main arena" phenom and in the ct theres still the a2a focus. We will see what the mission arena brings.
Any other meaning you want to infer is up to you.
edit
Where can I get my other 2 cannons on the d9 ;)
-
Bombers are way too easy to kill now. Climbing up their 6 isn't the way to do it though.
Yeah, I'm just really bad against bombers no matter what position I'm in to attack. But my point was more to state the only reason I attack bombers is to prevent the base from getting knocked down. I do something I absolutely hate, in order to preserve a more enjoyable aspect of the game for me later. I'm more justifying why people would do outlandish things to maintain a good fighting area over why people do outlandish things to attempt to restrict it.
-
No, I didn't feel slighted in the least. I just find it extremely humorous when the P-51 is singled out as the plane "cruising at 25k looking for aerial strafing kills" as if there are no other types doing that. In fact, I'd wager of several types good for that purpose, the P-51 isn't the leading choice by a ways.
BTW, since you bring up the CT as still having an "A2A focus" it would then seem that the majority of the player base is getting what they want in the Main, don't you agree?
The move away from a focus on A2A was inevitable once they introduced vehicles other than fighters. It is, apparently, what the majority of the player base desires.
Nonetheless, those who want to focus on A2A can easily find what they seek in the MA. It's there, it's nearly instantly accessible and it's continuous.
-
and has 4 cannons
Toad can u show me the 2 i dont find ? :) :)
-
The only practical reason that would have me flying to live would be some sort of cash back program based on how many planes you landed.
Anything short of cash (ie anything score related, or even perk related) and I will be unmoved.
-
Not even for ur EGO ?
-
Originally posted by hitech
Innom: Flying just to survive does not make a fun game.
Think of it this way, if living is the primary goal why ever take off.
HiTech
Un-Freeking-Believable!
Not saying it's not true... just never thought I'd hear this from this source. Speaks volumes to where this games goin.
-
That's hardly anything new. From the beginning they have always taken the stance that given this is mainly an online air to air simulation, they are going to be very hesitant to introduce anything that discourages air to air combat.
-
Originally posted by Fatty
That's hardly anything new. From the beginning they have always taken the stance that given this is mainly an online air to air simulation, they are going to be very hesitant to introduce anything that discourages air to air combat.
Right... Air to Air combat as opposed to Air to Air foolishness. Big difference Fatty. You don't enter into combat expecting to die (normally). You enter into combat expecting to kick someone's bellybutton and continue the fight.
Doesn't really matter, Hitech's statement reeks of MA as it has been anyway. Maybe a Mission Theatre will NOT bring that sorry attitude with it. If in fact it does... I won't participate in either. I came here looking for a combat flight simulator... NOT winged kiddie Quake.
-
I came here looking for a combat flight simulator
And that is exactly what you have.
What you are trying to promote is less combat and more running.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Tumor
Right... Air to Air combat as opposed to Air to Air foolishness. Big difference Fatty.
hand a man a beer, and he will drink it. Teach a man to make beer, and he will have much of it to drink. :D
follishness comes from ignorance of ACM or what ever. hell, it comes from beer when you have enough of it. blah blah blah.
hrm, give a man a wing, he'll get messy. give a man a frydaddy and a house, and you've got Fatty's House of wings!!
-
Originally posted by hitech
What you are trying to promote is less combat and more running.
HiTech
Hardly HiTech.
-
The fastest way of combat, very common in AH, is two planes flying at eachother, both firing their guns, usually one or two of them going down. The better fights last 30 seconds. In extremely rare cases it can take 15 minutes - till the fuel modifier makes one plane run out of fuel. Climbing to combat alt is usually reached at the enemie's rear fields with half the fuel gone.
AH is a funny game, not a simulation. Everyone plays by his own rules (only restricted by very few build in limitations). Although there is, according to the manual, a common goal for all - winning the war. On the other hand scoring does not reward playing to reach that goal.
Imagine your favourite board games, each player at the same table playing a different one. And the one who scores most penalty kicks wins.
A common understanding of what it is is needed. Some things don't fit into the same arena. And there's no way to enforce non-suicidal behaviour (except a limitation of lives, e.g. 1 live/2 hrs, which for obvious reasons is no option for the MA).
-
Sorry but you can never win a point in a thread like this. You say this is a war sim and in real life you would never find pilots taking off if they knew they would die...but they did. Japanese suicide pilots knew they weren't coming home, so did the pilots at Midway when they climbed into their brewster buffalos to fight against zeros. You can say this isn't a war sim, its just a2a combat..but many players would quit if it wasn't for the base grabbing because after a while straight a2a is boring. Win or lose it's usually over quickly, only once in a very long while do you find a real challenge, other than that you kill or die in seconds.
The posts that really bug me though are the whinners who claim that someone else is "restricting" their fun because they are playing by different rules. Believe me no one really cares enough about you to only focus on ruining your day, people are just trying to get their money's worth out of the game. In MHO.
-
Bombers are way too easy to kill now. Climbing up their 6 isn't the way to do it though.
Very true. It's the worst way to do it. I like head-on passes the best. Aim for the cockpit. I can blow through a formation from their 12 o'clock at high speed and leave two bombers vapourized. After that, it's all about patience. NEVER attack from the bomber's six. Climb up in parallel with them, 3k out or so. Make them sweat a little. Wait until you're above them and in their forward quadrant, and then make high speed slashing attacks, aiming for the pilots, or the wings. Done properly, a single formation is not a problem at all.
Big, tight boxes of 9 or 12+ bombers with alert gunners, like Revvin's squad flies, will be a problem at any angle. :)
-
LOL nothing personal but.. wrong answer. Mostpilots never expected to come home. certainly they all hoped and tried their best to, but none really expected to. Remember the life expectancy of a WWII pilot wasnt all that great. Nor was it in any other branch either and they knew it. Average age in the armed forces at the beginning of the war was 25. By wars end it was 18.
And wasnt the whole idea of going after the bombers to keep them from hitting their targets even if it meant the fighter pilot had to die in the process?
Besides times and mindset was different then.
These tactics were thought up byt he same people who came up with the idea of sending a patrol out to find the enemy and if they didnt come back they knew they were there. Lives were sacrificed.. intentionally for the good of the whole.
Originally posted by zipity
Sorry but you can never win a point in a thread like this. You say this is a war sim and in real life you would never find pilots taking off if they knew they would die...but they did. Japanese suicide pilots knew they weren't coming home, so did the pilots at Midway when they climbed into their brewster buffalos to fight against zeros.
-
In the MA I often do stuff thats suicidal ................ trouble is I do not realise it until afterwards.............
This is down to crap SA, poor gunnery, and a total lack of skill.......
I get up there swear I am not going to do that stupid thing again ....... and then the red mist falls......
Watched a B17 formation dive bomb A1 the other night...... it was done so smoothly the guy had obviously been practicing........
-
Originally posted by Innominate
So the question is, How can you encourage flying to survive, over flying to inflict damage? If you do, how can you avoid hurting the newer pilots, still learning the ropes?
Shame (copy write BB) = stick
Glory = carrot
-
Perk every thing but the MG only planes.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Innom: Flying just to survive does not make a fun game.
Think of it this way, if living is the primary goal why ever take off.
HiTech
To go out and huntdown the enemy and kill their sorry arse. I would say 90% of every sortie I go on my intention is to kill a bunch of bad guys and then get home in one piece.
I think I can honestly say that 100% of every single fighter sortie I have ever flown, I never took off with the intention of being shot down.
----
The intention of any game is for someone to win. It is the criteria for winning that determines how most people will play and what is considered fun.
When people play paint-ball, the goal is to survive and to shoot the other players / team. If you are shot, you sit out for a while (depending on the game). I don't think many people who play paint-ball consider it boring, and I don't think very many play it so they can suicide themselves every time.
AH, like every other game, has a set of rules which poeple must play by. Like any game, rules can be exploited by some.
AH has a newly implemented "life counter" that can know be used in scenarios. I would love to see the same counter used in the MA. Give a player a maximum life count per hour that resets every hour. I think 6 lives per hour would be a good number. If you can't last an average of 10 minutes per sortie, you are most likely being killed intentionaly by suicide bombing or being a vulching target.
-
Midnight I disagree with your life counter theory. Some of us will actually TRY to get up from a base getting ready to be captured. I might up a few times and die but sometimes I will get up and be able to help defend the base. So in this situation there is absolutely NO reason to up only to be relegated to the sidelines for then next 50 minutes. NO THANKS.
HITECH...I like the way the game is modeled now.
And for all you guys that are against JABO missions...ITS part of the game and a fun part that alot of the people in the arena like. I think they just dont post here. SO flame away. Im a target....hit me with your best shots but as I have said before.
This game is NOT all furballing. It has strategy that some of us like. I personally dont intend to die on a jabo mission and I dont consider it suicide. I do my damndest to stay alive.
Anyhow my 2 cents....
-
I think we should have a death counter. If you haven't died in over 20 minutes, you're flying around with your panties in a bunch and wasting all of our time.
-
Originally posted by guttboy
Midnight I disagree with your life counter theory. Some of us will actually TRY to get up from a base getting ready to be captured. I might up a few times and die but sometimes I will get up and be able to help defend the base. So in this situation there is absolutely NO reason to up only to be relegated to the sidelines for then next 50 minutes. NO THANKS.
HITECH...I like the way the game is modeled now.
And for all you guys that are against JABO missions...ITS part of the game and a fun part that alot of the people in the arena like. I think they just dont post here. SO flame away. Im a target....hit me with your best shots but as I have said before.
This game is NOT all furballing. It has strategy that some of us like. I personally dont intend to die on a jabo mission and I dont consider it suicide. I do my damndest to stay alive.
Anyhow my 2 cents....
Guttboy
People re-upping to be vulched continuously is EXACTLY the reason the MA is a huge mega-horde JaBo suicide raid party all the time.
Why? Because a small well organized group of players cannot succesfully contain and supress an airfield, no matter how good they are. The defender (even just one or two) can just keep spawning over and over again in LA7s and other uber turning planes. The result is that the attackers eventually run out of ammo, or some lucky dweeb (who was already shot down 6 times) gets off the ground and manages to kill the C47/M3 or one of the troops.
So how does the MA counter the insta-spawn threat? HUGE Jabo raids that destroy the entire field and vulch like there is no tomorrow. Why do so many die on these Jabo raids? There is no incentive to try and survive, so they learn no skills and end up crashing.
----
Originally posted by HiTech
And that is exactly what you have.
What you are trying to promote is less combat and more running.
Hitech, this is still supposed to be a war. Why do people think that making survival a requirement to win will just make everyone run away instead of fight? You, by the very creation of the "top pilot" contest have contradicted yourself.
TODs have been 'one life' events since they began, there is never a shortage of fighting in those. Nor do people run every time they see the enemy coming. In TODs, players get their adrenaline pumping, because once the fighting starts, it really does matter. In the MA, it's just another fight...
-
Well Midnight I can only attest to a person who has always been a ROOK....It sucks when you are outnumbered (90%) of the time and are left with only a few bases to up from. At that point just what do you propose we do? All up and then die only to watch the other sides go at it. I think not. My opinion though.
Another thought....If the TOD's are so great and you dont like the play in the MA...perhaps its time for a change and head over to the DA or the CT?
Not a slam just a thought. Some people actually enjoy the MA combat. I know it does get very frustrating at times but I adapt to it.
-
I've been rook for almost two years now (switched 04/12/2001) so I know about loosing and being left with only 2 or 3 fields.
The DA? what am I going to do there? That's not a war and there is no strats, etc.
The CT is the same as the MA, except less players and axis/allies setup. You can still insta-spawn all day long.
And to answer the question, yes, I would rather limit the number of spawns when the reset is so close. At least then the war would get over, rather then having 50+ guys insta-spawning every couple minutes and prolonging the inevitable.
Aside from that, the win the war conditions should be changed anyway. With a real supply system and attrition, the war could be won differently.
For that matter, we have had situations where no one could fly at all. We had three fields, a V-base, a port and an airfield. All FHs and VHs were destroyed at every base. The only thing available was bombers, and only the ones that could fly with no ords, becuase ords were gone too.
-
After years of playing Aces High since the very first days it came out as a real Beta Test, I have to admit that I am becoming a bit bored with the game. No I have no thoughts of quiting or cancelling my acount yet. I'm not complaining or threatning to quit, but I am quite bored at this time. I'm bored with the lack of a real mission. I don't feel the excitement of trying to complete a mission, and return to base alive.
I would very much like to see it be at least a little more realistic in the way of only rewarding pilots if you could actually return to base or ditch in friendly territory. If pilots enjoy flying into impossible situations, or using suicide tactics, then by all means let them enjoy themselves. On the other hand I don't think they should be rewared with points, perks, etc for doing such things. If they can't get home to tell about it, then they shouldn't be rewarded for that action.
At the present time I find myself having more fun on another online sim that is no where near as well written, but does have a more exciting mission oriented design.
This is very different from taking the position that I just want to "survive". Hitech is right, if I just wanted to survive there would'nt be any reason to take off.
I want to complete my mission, whatever that may be, and then get home to survive. Just like our fathers and grandfathers had to do.
Just some thoughts,
Ranger Bob
-
now suicide dweebs get their own mousepad and hat!!
http://www.cafeshops.com/cag15
-
HT, I fear that if you are not hooking us (I hope you are) , we can just start with planes at 5K, excluding so a futile manouvre as upping a plane from a field...... so we can dogfight without waste of time ,maybe:rolleyes: :eek: