Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: MANDOBLE on February 26, 2003, 04:41:44 PM
-
IMO, attrition should be included as a primary factor to win the war, just like taking bases.
Actually, the result of big air battles not oriented to take enemy bases has no impact at all on the war, no matter how many enemies your team has downed, no matter how many casualities your team has taken.
The rule is simple, too many looses and your country is forced to surrender.
-
uh no.
-
Not in the arenas. But "AH2: TOD", maybe yes. Depends on how it eventually will be designed.
Camo
-
So if a few N00Bs for a particular country keep upping incessantly on a vulched field the entire nation should be forced to surrender because of their actions?:confused:
-
That is the idea, implementation may not be so simplistic:
After a reset, each country gets a counter of 1. Each kill adds 1, each death substract 1. If a country reach -1000 (for example), it surrenders.
U need a ton of N00Bs to justify a -1000 only on their actions.
-
uh, no.
*you* fly the way *you* want. don't try and sneak your holy grail of "death penalty" under a thinly veiled guise of "you still can fly your way, but the war would simply be over sooner."
-
AH as the worst form of attrition. Moral attrition. One side uses silly numerical advantage to make it not fun to oppose thier mindless human waves. Denying them that would apperenlty wreck the game.
Very hard to think of a game design that would improve on it though. Limit total airframes...so some other guy gets killed in the plane that you would have had? Not very cool.
Move guys back a field towards thier HQ when they die? Well pretty easy for a skilled team to take a base then..not alot of vulches but fields changing hands like crazy cause they cant be defended.
One thing I would like to see is a defensive reset. You get someone down to 5 fields or so and you have one hour to finish it..Or they get the perkes and win the reset. Some countries very very rarely get to reset offensively. Encourage the hard fight for your country cause its not inevitable. You dont have to hold on all night till the knights numbers go back to normal..just for an hour.
-
For the MA, I am not for this.
However,
Realistically, attrition in the BoB was horrendous for the Germans, and they implemented the air raids to "force" the Brits to come to them in the air (a mistake of course, but ...) The threat of the Brit navy and air forces were the deterent to a German invasion. IF the Germans had been able to knock out the Brit air force through air combat attrition, they could then have bombed the brit battleships to oblivion and tried an invasion.
OK, lesson over....I dont even know what point I was tryin to make :p
-
Germany inflicted a staggering 15-1 casualty rate upon it's foes,but still was unable to achieve victory. Japan was the other way around,suffering a much higher casuality rate,to losses inflicted upon their enemies.Lesson to be learned,the casualty to losses inflicted seems to have little to do with the outcome of the war.You can do well,and still lose,or do poorly,and lose as well.
Dobe
-
That is true Dobe, but the losses of the luftwaffe were greater than they could replace with production of 200 odd fighters per month, while brits were pushin out twice that number and were able to replane downed pilots because the battle was on their turf. much of germany's losses were caused by the necessity of making bombing raids to force the brits to come up to them.
All this is from "The Art of War in the Western World" and it pretty much makes sense to me......not sure it has anything to do with a game though....might be cool to have in a CT type set up (and scenarios...like is being done on Niemen).
possibly;
limited planes of each type at a base with limited replacements with resupply. Make it possible to Xfer A/C by flying them in and landing (maybe with a lock option so that some goober dont come along and take it as soon as you land..hehe, but could if you unlocked it) A new factory might need to be added for this so you could bomb it and limit the enemies ability to resupply A/C numbers.
just my own thoughts there, it seems that there are so many possibilities to consider for game enhancements that there is no way they could all be included, even if they are good ideas.
-
Originally posted by BlkKnit
bombed the brit battleships to oblivion and tried an invasion.
OK, lesson over....I dont even know what point I was tryin to make :p
Hmm, you seem like a college professor!
-
In a way... he has a point. Why should a country benifit from it's hords of newbie suicide jabo's and not be penalized for it's newbie vultch bait?
As it is... a country uses suicide newbies as "strat"... they let the lemmings die over and over so long as the guy has enough dynamite strapped to his body to take out one ack or fuel or... worse... CV.
Might change the complextion of the fights. If it takes 40-60 deaths to take a field then maybe your country should be penalized.
How bout... no perk points for winning if your country incures more than 500 deaths say?
Gotta admit that I am kinda tired of a bse being taken by suicide raids that incur 200% or more casulties. Instead of encouraging such antics the "strat" guys might caution the newer guys against it and....
the attention starved vets that suicided would finaly get the attention they deserve.
lazs
-
we need a new stat on the score "death per structure destroyed" in some of them raids 60% will auger and maybe kill a fuel tank or vh. This is fine if that was it. But nope they come back 15 times.
or "deaths per capture"
Also ht should harden the fuel tanks and add more and spread umm out.
I watched 3 51 tards come in at 25 k dive at the fuel and auger then come back till it was 25%.
4 fuel tanks 6 deaths..........but hey they stopped 20 guys from having fun.............and thats what its all about.........
-
yes... something like "deaths per capture" is what I had in mind... then when the insipid get on here to brag about their "winning the war" .... we can point to the "deaths per capture" stat while we are laughing at them.
lazs
-
remove field capture all these problems go away
-
Didn't they do that? In the DA?
-
Personally, I dont look for a deaths/capture ratio. I'm just looking for an alternative way to end the war, just obliteraring the enemy, not necessary taking all its bases. If you are doing well, and the enemy is doing well, but lossing bases, ok, lets look for the reset in the traditional way. But if you are doing well and the enemy is just sacrifying hordes in the process but taking your bases, you are worth the victory and not the enemy.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
But if you are doing well and the enemy is just sacrifying hordes in the process but taking your bases, you are worth the victory and not the enemy.
It worked for the Soviets, so why not have it work for the Bish/Rooks/Knights?
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
How 'bout if we all agree to attack only clockwise next pizza map.......then we can see who attacks / captures fastest. :D
-
Have player deaths per 1/15/30/60 min., averaged against total number of players on that team, modify the perk modifier that is used for side balancing.
In other words, if your side has 100 players and they are suiciding like madmen, have it affect perk point costs and perk points earned.
To avoid unfairly penalizing players who aren't suiciding, modify the 'penalty' based on the individual player's k/d. The k/d 'breakpoint' would ideally not penalize someone who is 'doing well furballing' because they are knocking down 3 or 4 or 5 enemy per death. Suicide anti-fuel ground attack pilots are going to be around 4 deaths/kill (?, no personal experience here). So make the 'break point' somewhere in between. Remove all penalties for someone on a 2 week trial, within the first 30 days of account activation, etc.
Just an idea...
Mike/wulfie
p.s. Here's another idea - allow players to spend perk points to repair facilities faster - so lazs2 can fix the fuel tanks at an airfield almost instantly by spending some perks. If those fuel tanks remain undestroyed for 15 min. or so, his perks are refunded (a reward for effective defense of a facility).
-
An alternate idea to my p.s. above - allow players to spend perk points to get fuel, ammunition, etc. above what the current base has available - in effect you are turning your Yak-9U into a '15 perk fighter' because you are rolling with 100% fuel at a field that has 25% fuel available. And just like a perk fighter - if you land, you get the perks back maybe?
Mike/wulfie
-
Interesting concept MANDOBLE but you're talking about an entire new twist to the gameplay. You would need a new theatre for it as it would change the game play. Personally I like the field capture as it gives you another objective other than to shootdown as many planes as you can. It gives me a reason to up bombers and avoid the oposition to take out the infrastructre.
-
MotorOil. field captures are ok, but an outnumbered country has little chances to recover territory and win the war.
On the other hand, a very good deffense may cause enormous casualities to the attacker and this should have some kind of strategic reward for the defending country (not just useless perks). For example:
- Too much looses and you loose the war.
- Too much looses and some fields are closed until that country compensates the ratio.
- Too much looses and first line fields are restricted to 1942 or older planes until that country compensates the ratio.
- Too much looses and no more perk planes availables until ratio is compensated.
- Whatever else.
-
Yes, but, Mandoble....with this you institute the primacy of the Defense.....in a game that is basically all about offensive action.
How many would even try to attack an enemy base if its gonna be so costly?
I like yer thinkin though, just addin my opinion
-
Heck ... aircraft attrition. Even for unperked rides. Endless lives - throw them away as much as you want. The war goes on ... still need to wipe out someone for a reset. Start crossing off planes available when your side's k/d ratio reaches a certain point and even more as it drops. You'll all be forced to do it in nothin' but P40bs and SBDs eventually (after enough other rides got crossed off the list for the K/D hittin rock bottom - whatever rock bottom is).
-
Wulfie--
That is such a great idea you should start a new thread about it.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by Arlo
Heck ... aircraft attrition.
What you're suggesting would hurt the side that's already outnumbered and being vulched. Now you want them to only be able to fly SBDs? Oy!
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
aircraft attrition sucks.. it would not work for those who don't live online... the majority of the players would just log on to see more restrictions that they had nothing to do with... be a lottery for them.
wulfie had two great ideas... the first was great but complex. I would go for it in a second tho if it were possible.. the second...
"An alternate idea to my p.s. above - allow players to spend perk points to get fuel, ammunition, etc. above what the current base has available - in effect you are turning your Yak-9U into a '15 perk fighter' because you are rolling with 100% fuel at a field that has 25% fuel available. And just like a perk fighter - if you land, you get the perks back maybe?
Mike/wulfie"...
Is also very well thought out and simple. And... a way for perk points to have some value for most of us.
last night I watched the rooks hit 2 fields of ours... they came in in huge suicide jabo waves and died to the man but... each wave took out one or two "strat" targets. Heck... they were so bad that I upped an A20 and was shooting down their "fighters" so perhaps it is simply a lack of skill that makes em so insecure?
lazs
-
I'd like to see attrition set up per-player.
i.e. Each player gets x number of each of the 10-20 ENY planes per hour y number of each of the 20-39 eny planes, and z number of everything else.
I did a writeup of it some time ago maybe I'll dig it up.
-
You mean if you kill a bunch of enemy guys you should win the war? Its called "Tours of Duty" and was held on Friday nights. Its also called "Scenarios".
You guys are trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist.