Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Urchin on April 14, 2003, 08:53:02 PM
-
I know a lot of people get off on trying to keep other people from having fun. It is human nature, perfectly understandable. But when every single base along a border is fuel and supply porked, it gets old. People log off. One person has fun, sure- he's probably creaming his pants as he takes off again and again and again and again and again until he finally porks EVERY field, but many many more people get pissed off and stop playing. If this happens often enough, people start cancelling.
Please rethink the way fuel is distributed.
-
Fly a resupply goon Urchin.
-
No matter how it is 'redone', as long as people sneer at the thought of having to up goons actively and take the time to resupp something, the fuels are always gonna stay porked.
Come to think of it, Trinity is currently the only map with a scale and strat system that even remotely has the possibility of bringing on 'real life situations' in the chaotic MA battlegrounds, no? Destroying fuel capabilities and preventing the enemies from attacking in humongous numbers, is the single most effective tactical move a defending country can take.
Think it in the aspect of logistics - if there are only hotshot fighter pilots around, and nobody to bring in supps to fuel them, it is pretty obvious they're not going to be able to fly for long. Destroying the logistics line is the basics of military tactics.
....
Sirloin's right, participate in resupp gooning, Urch. It may take as many as 12~14 goons to reup a base with its strats honked. The more a certain side has people willing to actively participate in resupping, the better that side in its logistics capabilities - thus, better chance to keep the attack going.
-
I agree with Urchin and its one of the reasons I rarely fly. I like early birds, ones that already have limited fuel especially on the big maps.
They suicide fuel porker is much like the old "fluffers" before the new bombsite. Back then they would kill the fhs and ruin the fun. Now they just pork all the fuel in suicide runs.
You can as many fuel tanks to a field as you want. I say oput about 30 of umm at a large field. 20 at a med field and 10 at a small field. Put revetments around umm so it takes a direct hit to kill um, then up their hardness.
I have seen pic of German and Italian airfields where they laid 50 gal barrels on their side in rows. Each row was seperated and the whole thing was covered with a camo net. From the air it looked like a graded or plowed field.
I believe the us did this as well.
I never could understand the guy that looks at the map sees a good fight going on between 2 bases, where lotsa folks are having fun, then thinks to himself. "I can have that......." and goes on his pork and auger raids.
-
it's the same to them, to win by air to air fights or "outsmart" the other guy and KO him in the fuel nads.
Then those guys' gripe is that the furball guys are madly vulching the runways while they are alone circling town asking for the last building to be dropped or asking for a goon to come sneak the town they shaved behind the lines.
-
You have a point there Batz, and it is sometimes an irony to me as well. Since there is no concept of 'attrition' in the MA, the limitations in fuel capacity is rigged to the field in crude percentage per building left standing that represent the resource. Destroy one or two barrels of oil and suddenly the field is knocked out woppin' 25% of its total fuel capacity. Also, since the field is unlimited in numbers of planes, people can literally throw away unlimited amount of planes in a suicidal attack, until the job gets done.
Thus, the very reason behind hard training - limited life and limited equipment - is lost, and a job which in real life took careful planning and execution, can just be done with sheer numbers of planes upping in unending suicide runs.
However, in the broader aspect, that is a problem with overall funkiness in strat concept of the MA, rather than a single problem concerning how fuel reserves are implemented in the game. As it is, I don't think there's any other option than people to actively participate in resupplying attempts - frequent enough to quickly rebuild what has been lost.
If something in the strat system has to be changed, it can't just be the fuels.. it literally has to be everything - all or nothing! ;)
-
The root cause of field-porking is the whole arena reset system, combined with the perk system. Countries try to reset each other, which means a good run of perk gain in process and a larger award upon victory. To get the reset, you have to capture fields, and to capture a given field you usually have to pork the adjacent nme fields so they can't provide defending reinforcements. This means 3-4 fields get porked for every field under actual assault. Thus, the natural result of the whole arena reset/perk system is field-porking on a massive scale.
It seems to me that it's impossible to separate field-porking and resets. I doubt there'd be much, if any, movement of the front lines without the ability to pork fields. And what movement did occur would be due solely to one side massing utterly overwhelming force to just overrun the defenders. No strategy, just brute force, like in DOS AW.
So, the real question as I see it is, are you so annoyed by field-porking that you'd sacrifice the whole reset system to be rid of it? Do you like resets better than the old DOS AW system of fixed country fields and just a few capturable fields in the center of the map, and no strat system to speak of? (strat didn't work at all, and thus there was no porking, in the DOS RT arena for most of its existence).
I doubt many would choose to go back to the old DOS AW arena rules. Always the same thing, everybody in the arena fighting over the same couple of fields all night and little or no changes of possession. It was fun when that was all there was, but times have definitely changed.
So, looks like we're stuck with field-porking in AH. That being the case, can it be improved in either cause or effect? We can dispose of the effects issue easily because there are only 2 real options. The porkage can either limit the missions a plane can perform (due to shorter range, no bombs, no troops) or can lower the performance of planes. AH does the former, AW did the latter. AW's system utterly sucked, so AH has got it right on this score. That leaves the causes of porkage as the only area open for possible improvement.
There's a lot of whining about kamikaze porkdweebs, in all their forms from divebombers who don't pull out to unescorted B17s coming over at 300' AGL. How big a problem this really is, compared to the number of legit pilots, is open to debate. But for purposes of debate, let's assume that it's a big problem. Kamikaze porking is, after all, the most efficient porking method under the arena rules. The faster you die after doing your damage, the quicker you can get back up and do more damage, so your side advances to the reset faster.
The big problem with combating the kamikaze porkdweeb problem, assuming it's big enough to really worry about, is that kamikazes use the same game mechanics as legit players. How can the game know what type of player dropped a given bomb? And it has to be able to tell this, because prophylactic measures can't be applied here. If you make the targets harder, or shorten their downtime, or whatever, you make it that much harder for legit players to pork fields, which in turn makes it less likely that fields get captured, leading to a more static front line and no real arena-wide goals to achieve.
So, how can the game tell if the bomb was dropped by a kamikaze? IMHO, it can't look at any given case in isolation but has to look for trends over a number of sorties. Simple reason for this. The guy we want to punish is the type who takes off with the intention of doing a kamikaze attack, and who does this on a regular basis. But everybody who takes off with the intention of making a legit attack sometimes finds themselves on a suicide run, due to bad intel or changes in the situation while they were en route, or just being the 1st guy into the ack at a cherry field. To the defenders, both guys look like intentional kamikazes, but one of them will do it again next hop while the other won't. Any anti-kamikaze system must be able to tell the difference.
This all means that HTC will have to decide on a number of parameters and track them for all pilots over several sorties. Assuming this is possible without bogging down the server, it still won't be perfect. Legit guys with a run of bad luck would get caught by it on occasion. And in the meantime, the real kamikazes will know that they have a couple of freebies before the system cracks down on them, so there won't be that much of a decrease in intentional kamikaze attacks on the average.
So at the bottom line, I don't think there's much hope of ever getting a system that automatically weeds out all intentional kamikaze porkdweebs. That being the case, I guess the best defense is for us to keep notes on the porkdweebs ourselves and report them to HTC.
-
the only prob i have is the whole fuel burn of the planes is......
NOT AN LW whine!!!! but there is no LW plane that can be effective with 25% fuel... yet almost all allied planes can go sectors on 25%.
for our squad (being LW only) we cant up at a base with 25% this makes us unable to help in time to defend some bases.
its a bummer to see somone call out for help @ a base and we have to fly in from more then a sector away.
oh well my 2¢
-
The problem isnt fuel burn rte but fuel tank capacity.
If the point is to reduce fuel to 25% as a means to show damage to fuel supply and indicate a limited quantity available then I think we should rethink how it is done.
For example 25% fuel on a P51D is a hell of alot more fuel in gallons/liters than 25% fuel in Bf109 or Yak9. So when fuel supplies are reduced the planes with huge gastanks get an automatic advantage for no reason except that they have large fuel capacity. This does not refelect the shortage of gas.
I think we should not have the straight 25% of a full tank rule but something that actually reflects a shortage of available fuel.
-
I like batz idea:
put more fuel tanks on the fiels.
a tiffykaza can't usually get more then 2 tanks on one run, and if you have over 10 tanks on a small field it means more then 5 augers - quite some time for a single kamizazi.
having lots of fuel tanks laying around will also give carpet bombing the base a better effect.
Bozon
-
An interesting thread. I think that fuel porkage is only one element of the total pork equation. I think we are all agreed on that. The real difficulty is the kamikaze nature of any such attack, and the immediate re-uppage of the pilot responsible, who can then return to the scene with inside knowledge of its status.
Fuel porking is just one type of kamikaze flight of fancy. My personal pet hate is the suicide runs to the CV - buff formations at 300'. Of course, those are great for scoring points and earning perks if you're up off the CV in a F4U-1C. There are also the divebombers. I once saw 5xP47 dive on the CV. Only one landed a hit, and all died except one who escaped with a smoking engine. Pure unadulterated dweebery and bulltoejam.
As Kweassa points out, the strat has to be on an all or nothing basis. It's an enormous nut to crack, and goes a long way to explain the rumours that AH2 won't be ready until Q3 of this year. I shudder to think of all the BBS whining we're going to see after its introduction.
But I am optimistic. And here is why. Remember how, in 1.10 (or was it 1.09) that whenever you got a kill, a message came up, eg. "Victory 1 by Beet1e of No.9 Squadron". The issue of those messages was discontinued. Then, you got a message only if you landed at least 2 kills. Most of those messages had been Victory 1 messages, some Victory 2, or even much higher for the vulchers. For about the first week, I saw very few messages of 2 or more kills being landed. Many people were still in their old ways of fighting to the last ammo round, then augering in a blaze of glory. The transit time back to base would impinge on the cherished but oh-so-gamey stat of k/t, so they were happy to simply re-up a new plane. But when they saw guys landing 2,4,6 kills or more, they wanted a piece of that action, and became more careful and started landing kills.
And my point? Many players can be motivated by the scoring system, and the score board itself. A guy likes to see his name come up with 6 kills landed. A guy likes to be in a good position on the scoreboard - hence all the BBS whining when the scoreboard pages are not available. Well, AH2 is going to revolutionise the way we get scores. The precise details are secret, but I think we all know that there will be specific missions, which must be LANDED in order for your efforts to be credited to your scoreboard stats. The suicidal fuel porkage dweebs will score zero points. The 300' LANC pilots ib to the CV will score zero points. The P47/P38/110 kamikaze-the-CV pilots will score zero points. And best of all, they won't simply be able to re-up in their erstwhile "rinse-and-repeat" mode. They'll have to wait for the next mission.
Yes, kamikaze fuel porkage is just one symptom of a general malaise we are currently seeing in the game. But rather than treating the symptoms, HTC is working on a brand new multiple vaccine, and AH2 will be the cure.
-
You all dont seem to relize the main facts about this argument about fuel and such.
Firstly, you are given a field with an infinite fuel comsumption and also ammo cunsumption. You are given a field that you can take off when the fuel porker appears. You are given a field with radar, ack and mostly everthinkelse.
Just because sombody lurnches an attack on your field doesnt mean you cannot defend against it!. If you want to defend grab a la7 head to 20K feet and sit there waiting for the Typoon who is going to hit your fuel.
Until then, stop complaining because you'r to slack to get off your bellybutton and do somthink about the situation instead of complaining!
Now some may write in saying that its allmost impossible to stop a person in a typoon from getting the fuel at your base. Read above, grab an la7 and sit there!
You do not need to add more fuel tanks at a field, you need to teach the players how to defend them.
-
Let's see, so far our choices are:
A) Fly a resupply goon
B) Fly a La7 to 20k and sit there
Man it just don't get any more fun than that...... NOT!
IMHO strat should be kept more seperate. Make it where if ALL the fuel is porked at a field (ea. fuel should take 2k eggs to kill) then fuel is reduced to 75%. That way it will take alot of effort for little effect. If you take out all the fuel at the refinery then it should take 1 hr instead of 30 mins for the field to return to 125%.
-
I think Grunherz and Batz have it...............
Multiply and scatter the fuel targets by a very significant factor that make multiple level bombings a must for significant fuel attrition.
As fuel suffers share out the fuel by gallons/litres per AC.
If 125% field fuel = 500 galsper ac then 25% field fuel = 100 gals per ac, not 25% of what ever your nominal tank capacity is.
-
You guys are missing another reason for porking front line fuel capacity:
to limit the number of LA-7s, Yak9Us, Spitfires, and N1K2s.
Other planes have the capacity to cross 2 sectors, engage in a fight, and return home.
P-51B and P-51D with wing tanks from secondary field.
P-38 with wing tanks from secondary field.
P47 with wing tanks from secondary field.
F4U with wing tanks from secondary field or carrier.
F6F with wing tanks from secondary field or carrier.
Or, if you have a tv next to your computer and want to catch a new episode of "Wings": FM2 with wing tanks, or A6M2 and A6M5 with belly tanks from secondary field or carrier, (but you better bring friends if you want to get out of there alive).
My use of the Mustang is directly proportional to the distance I have to go to find a fight - usually a result of porked fuel levels or an expanding battle front. On the other hand, my use of the F4UD is directly proportional to the distance I'll probably have to fly to hit an enemy air base or town because my front-line field is either capped or porked.
Or take a GV, which isn't fuel-level dependent.
-
either make the fields catured or not... no porking em. I don't care if there is a majic spot that the kamakazi can just dive into to capture the field. I don't care if it is captured by a tank touching the runway...
make it so as soon as there are 5 pee 51's or tiffies overhead it changes hands... I don't care but don't make it pssible to pork it...
let's get things moving. fields are far enough apart as it is without bunch of em being useless.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Bullethead
It seems to me that it's impossible to separate field-porking and resets. I doubt there'd be much, if any, movement of the front lines without the ability to pork fields. So, looks like we're stuck with field-porking in AH.
I agree. There's no winning a war w/o destroying your opponent's ability to wage war.
keep notes on the porkdweebs ourselves and report them to HTC.
so a pork-police eh? pork monitors? "Sukzzy, Urchin came over & porked our base & now it's all broken whaaaaaaaaaa." LOL
As it stands now, AH offers much for $15 . . . furballin', strat runs, winning a war (what % of pilots do you belive strives to win war & knows how strat works?) Its a barrell of fun. All of it.:)
-
So at the bottom line, I don't think there's much hope of ever getting a system that automatically weeds out all intentional kamikaze porkdweebs. That being the case, I guess the best defense is for us to keep notes on the porkdweebs ourselves and report them to HTC.
You have to remember It all comes down to one thing.People play the game for diffrent reasons.The Kami base porkers probebly feel the same way twords the furballers who show little intrest in base capture.Whos right whos wrong?Who cares.As long as your paying the fee you play it your way and expect nobody but your squadmates to go along with you.Personaly I think if you have issues with porkers do like it was said.Cap the base,but dont expect everyone to want the same thing as you.Its just never going to work that way.
-
beetle is on to something :
A guy likes to see his name come up with 6 kills landed
then how about this:
if a player kills a fuel tank and dies within 15 seconds, a messege comes up from the server:
" BoneHead porked the fuel and augered like a dweeb of 9th dripping noses squadron "
Bozon
-
Originally posted by bozon
beetle is on to something :
then how about this:
if a player kills a fuel tank and dies within 15 seconds, a messege comes up from the server:
" BoneHead porked the fuel and augered like a dweeb of 9th dripping noses squadron "
Bozon
ROFLMAO!!!!! That would be worth paying to see. :)
I don't see any major changes being made to this release - unless they are changes that can easily be carried over into AH2. HTC is in AH2-press-ahead mode now, and won't want to be distracted by what could arguably be described as the whims of a small nucleus of players.
-
I agree fuel porked along an entire front is unacceptable with insane feild distances and resupplies on maps such as Trinity.
And suppllies don't do anything from what I've seen lately.
-
but the question is.......
how do you keep the ROOKS from reaching there 20k + perch.....
how do you keep the cherry pickers from reaching there 20k + perch......
Hit there damn fuels....thats how
ain't no fun in seeing Lufftweenies or Pee shooters at 20k......
they cherry pick all day long.....get to same alt.....they run home to mommy.....
keep cherry picking and I'll keep hitting your forward fuels.....
and BTW not all tiffie drivers are suiciders.....some of us can actually kill all the damn fuels at a base.....its the damn lazer acks that get us in the end:D
but I do understand you urchin...your 1 who is not afraid to fight....with adv. or not.....but most RUN all day long as fast as they can.....limiting there fuel is like cutting half there running distance:eek:
-
either make the fields catured or not... no porking em. I don't care if there is a majic spot that the kamakazi can just dive into to capture the field. I don't care if it is captured by a tank touching the runway...
make it so as soon as there are 5 pee 51's or tiffies overhead it changes hands... I don't care but don't make it pssible to pork it...
let's get things moving. fields are far enough apart as it is without bunch of em being useless.
lazs
I agree 100%. To hell with "war winning". The main aint a war, and theres nothing to "win". The main strat system isnt complicated enough for a "real" war. 4 or 5 token fuel in the open is hardly what they do in a "war".
Slo
No one mkes you fly to 20k to fight, when the fuel gets porked it makes folks log or fly a plane they dont want.
Hell I'd before a dot command .please lemme have a41 and bing 41 gets captured. Atleast we wont have to suffer through 40 min flight times.
Theres a simple fix just add more fuel tanks per field, distribute them so you cant get 2 with 1 bomb and make their rebuild time 7 min.
-
The problem is that to cater to the person metaphorically coming off the street into the game is that the action has to be easy to find, and plentiful. Historically a lot of combat flights failed to even find the enemy, and victories for most pilots were rare.
With limited strategic goals (still mostly
capture the flag) and people wanting to
see results relatively quickly then there
are going to be distortions. This having
been said, hitting fuel dumps was a
perfectly valid WW2 tactic, as was vulching.
If you want to get rid of over the top
fuel porking and vulching you probably
need a long term campaign-type ethic in
which the front lines are populated by
ground troops and change slowly over a
period of weeks. I suppose that is more like
WW2 Online, although I think in that
case it is much too slow.
The question is - would you get enough
players catering to those prepared to
fly over a boring map for 2 hours before
15 minutes of intense action over the
target, and then a two hour flight back?
I think you can run scenarios on that
basis (and I enjoy them) but everyone,
at least sometimes, wants to just get
online, into action, and have some
relatively instant fun. And HTC needs
the revenue generated by that.
I've never played in an AH scenario,
though. I must check to see if there is
one coming up!
-
Originally posted by Manedew
I agree fuel porked along an entire front is unacceptable with insane feild distances and resupplies on maps such as Trinity.
And suppllies don't do anything from what I've seen lately.
They are historically short distances! They are only long compared to how long people are prepared or able to stay online.
I suppose an option might be to have more fuel dumps around that can resupply a field, plus a 'convoy commander' option in the same way that you can control fleets. I.e. someone can order up a convoy of fuel, in addition to the goon resupply. Given the speed of trains or trucks, you are still talking about the best part of an hour for resupply, perhaps, and of course hitting the fuel dumps or convoys then becomes an option. I don't know how important the convoys are now, but perhaps it would make them more important and add spice?
Perhaps a fun option would be for convoys to run to a schedule (i.e. regular deliveries) unless the convoy commander is used to vary it, but the timing of the schedule, sizes, etc., be different for each field and each reset of the arena. This would mean that recon missions would have to be flown to establish the presence of a convoy, or the schedule. Or perhaps by parachuting an agent into the area, and then recovering them you could also find out the schedule. This would mean we could have agents, Lysanders, Storches, covert nighttime landings, etc.
-
Here's a simple idea... make it so that after you die, you have to wait 3 mins before you can reup another plane... Yes this afects the Legit Pilots too but it'll help a little with the Kamikazee and add a small amount of relative realism
-
Keep it the way it is there is nothing wrong with it.
-
Porked fuels is actually my first concern about gameplay.
1 - Fuel load should not be limited to %.
2 - Drop tanks could be filled up with more or less fuel, but not eliminated.
-
Maybe Trinity should be modified to include a Furball Valley to the east of Tank Town. That way, the Bishops could capture all of those bases the same way they capture all of the Tank Town bases.
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
Fly a resupply goon Urchin.
Resupplying hardly does anything at all... and I really doubt resupplying bases in a goon is urchin's idea of a good time.
-
Im not sure but that may well have been scarcasm.:rolleyes:
-
Can't say I've noticed all the forward fields having the fuel porked before. If it is all porked then I'll run a resupply M3 or take a goon in there. Quite often our entire squad will do a supply run and the field is back up pretty quickly. It just takes cooperation and spending 15 - 20 minutes isn't much if it's helping everyone. If you can't resupply then either fly a plane that's good on 25% or 50% fuel or take off from another field that does have 100% fuel. You may not be able to do many attacks but you should at least be in a position to defend. Additionally you can always rearm at the porked field having flown there from somewhere else. I think people forget that!
Having more fuel targets would be quite interesting. I fly the Tyhoon primarily and you always need 75 or 100% fuel if you're planning on going anywhere and RTBing successfully.
However, if I'm constantly defending from the invading rascals (;)) then of course I'm going to go and pork their fuel to give me a bit of breathing space! Very rare for me to make a suicide run, I always intend to RTB.
-
Originally posted by wetrat
Resupplying hardly does anything at all... and I really doubt resupplying bases in a goon is urchin's idea of a good time.
Simply ask for help, afterall the game is all about cooperation. If everyone chips in then the base will be back up in no time.
It might not be everyones idea of a good time, but you have to take the rough with the smooth. Just need team work that's all.
-
Originally posted by gofaster
Maybe Trinity should be modified to include a Furball Valley to the east of Tank Town. That way, the Bishops could capture all of those bases the same way they capture all of the Tank Town bases.
I havn't seen Bish in control of Tank Town in Weeks!
-
Originally posted by Replicant
Simply ask for help, afterall the game is all about cooperation. If everyone chips in then the base will be back up in no time.
It might not be everyones idea of a good time, but you have to take the rough with the smooth. Just need team work that's all.
/sarcasm on
>gasp< you mean people are suppose to actually use TeamWork in this game???
/sarcasm off
There ya go... your base got porked... you and a couple of buds up some goons or M3's from nearby and resupply... it's not that hard
-
I'll say it again.. The answer to everything in this game is...
No perk points awarded unless a sortie is landed successfully. People will reconsider their one way trips, people will consider using ACM versus HO attacks ect....
(attack at will)
-
Batz has it, make fuel harder to kill. We have the same "fuel targets" for the MA that we had versions and versions ago. May have been ok when there were 100 online max, not when there is 500+ online.
Just make it tougher please.
-
Originally posted by wetrat
Resupplying hardly does anything at all... and I really doubt resupplying bases in a goon is urchin's idea of a good time.
I disagree wetrat. I have run many supply sorties, both M3 and C47, and they do make a difference.
If anyone is looking for perkies to get themselves a ride in a Tiger, then resupplying a base with an M3 is a quick way to get them. I have, at times, gotten more than 5+ perks for a single resupply run. You have to shoot down a lot planes and buildings to get that many perks in one sortie.
I don't know of anyone that really thinks that resupplying bases is their idea of a "good time", but some of us do it to help out the country/friends, some just whine.
-
Who told this game is about cooperation?
We get our cooperation by joining squads. Both Urchin and wetrat were and I were in a squad. Cooperation to us meant clearing each others 6, draggin etc.....
It has nothing to do with the land grab.
-
cooperation does not directly correlate to "land grab".
If you all are fighting hard/furballing from a base that gets porked and you want to continue to fight from that base, then a cooperative effort by some could put the base back together again.
-
Rresup goons are fine but give points for it .75 for risking you prettythang isnt woth it
IMHO
-
cooperation does not directly correlate to "land grab".
Sure it does. Folks are using the "land grab" and "war winning" as reason to justify pork and auger. Playing c47 delivery boy is a counter to that.
If folks enjoy bombing stationary objects then they should love it if ht gives umm a few more.
Adding additional fuel tanks isnt hard. We get more fuel, pork and auger gets more things to collide into.
Sounds fair to me.
-
The problem is, as I said 'all or nothing', the same line of argument can be done for Fighter, Bomber, Vehicle hangars.. barracks and towns! It doesn't makes sense a field is removed of its aircraft/vehicle capabilities by just destroying a few structures.. it also doesn't make sense that the ground troops available for capture attempts rely on two three base structures.. it also doesn't make sense just 10 troops in a dead town can capture it.. etc etc..
If the 'change' in the line of what Batz suggests is done, then so should it be done with everything. We're talking about a huge scale change/modification to the current strat system here.
So, if such a large scale change should be done, it might as well be changed into something far better. Obviously some more ideas are needed than to just increase the number of structures.
...
The MA is not a 'realistic' warfare by anymeans, but it is undeniably a fantasized/simplified form of clash between three hostile nations. You can't deny that whatever you choose to do with one's 15$ amount of time in the MA, the environment which it is done is inevitably a part of the 'grab-the-land-and-win' type of war game.
One can always go into the DA for pure combat purposes. Why people don't do that much, is pretty obvious - there aren't many variables and factors in a preset, small scale engagement environment like the DA - people can meet different(though still limited vis-a-vis 'MA nature') situations in MA, and that's why they like it. It also gives a collective purpose for a number of people to why they are flying.
So IMO, this small debate about the fuels, when digged into deeper, inevitably has to touch the surface of the debate on the overall strat system of Aces High Main Arena! :eek:
-
IMO, if some one wants to negate the fighters at a field, he should go there and destroy the fighter hangars. Same for bombers, same for vehicles. Not just negating half the planeset by suiciding against fuel depots.
If we want to add a realism note: can you see the fuel depots when you refuel your car at a gas station? not, of course, it is underground. Same may be applied to medium and large air bases. Visible fuel depots at these bases may represent less than 25% of the total available fuel. Underground fuel depots are not marked saying "BOMB HERE", but carpet bombing (with BIG bombs) a field may destroy some of these underground depots.
Small fields may have a single underground depot with 50% of available fuel, and the rest into normal (visible) fuel depots.
-
Kind of a good idea mandoble.
-
I can't believe that the same people who complain that their planes/vehicles aren't modelled realistically enough want a quake arena where you never get low on fuel or never have to resort to taking off from a base that isn't on the front line. This game is about simulating air combat and a large part of air combat is denying the other side resources. If you don't like someone porking your bases, try defending them rather than just looking for furballs...
-
Defending and competition winning dont mix real well.
Plays merry hell with the kills/time thingy.
IMHO, leave it as it is, or maybe add more fuel tanks per field.
-
i kinda think your on to something with that more fuels idea. instead of 4-8 fuel tanks make alot more fuel tanks to hit. i think we are stuck with fuel loadouts in 25% increments so you couldnt have 90% avalable to use but still i think fuel porking should be made harder. if i remember right hitech had i post about if you die 30 seconds after you drop bombs the bombs dont count, what happened to that idea?
bigsky
-
.
-
Originally posted by SunKing
I'll say it again.. The answer to everything in this game is...
No perk points awarded unless a sortie is landed successfully. People will reconsider their one way trips, people will consider using ACM versus HO attacks ect....
(attack at will)
I second that motion!!!:D
-
How about no perk points period.
-
Some excelent ideas from this thread and more:
-No perks if you die.
-Fuel availability drops in liters/gallons available, not % of each plane's fuel tank. This way the long distance bombers and fighters would suffer first and all would be equal when base fuel is at 50% or 25%.
-Scatter the fuel depots or form them in few groups (not too tight) and place acks close to them.
-Add a separate "Fuel" category to C-47 and M-3 cargo options. No fixes to hangars and acks with that load, but more fuel instead.
-Refuelling should give you only what the base can give, not what you had when you took off the first time. It would also be nice to get a small window for selecting diferent bomb load or different fuel load on the refuelling pad.
-
Has someone mentioned specific loads for c47's? Like a fuel drop, or munitions drop, to supply fuel or ammo quicker. Just a thought.
-
Again, all interesting ideas, but none of this is ever going to happen. Think of it this way. If you were a car maker, and you'd been making the same car in various marques, and it had been successful for five years. But in that fifth year, the decision had been taken to produce a new marque, which was a total redesign of what went before. What would you say to the customer who walks into the showroom, and says it would be really great if it (the old marque) could have the dash trim in brushed aluminium instead of walnut veneer?
I'm not saying that HTC will no longer support AH1 - of course they will. But I think that some of the excellent ideas for changes that have been advanced in this thread may involve a considerable amount of programming effort. And all the time that programming effort is deployed on AH1 means programming effort not deployed on AH2.
If I were moving house next week, I don't think I'd be spending my time installing new lighting in my loft.
-
The fuel problem does suck 1 guy can eliminate 30 fighters uping from a base if he kills 3 fuel barrels at a small field. I like the idea of haveing them spread out. then you can acutally use all them small bombs in bombers, or carpet bomb. why killfhs when you can kill fuel, fuel stays down longer too
-
Originally posted by mia389
The fuel problem does suck 1 guy can eliminate 30 fighters uping from a base if he kills 3 fuel barrels at a small field.
I think that statement is a little OTT. You can still defend a base quite easily with 25% fuel. Okay, you're not going to climb to an great altitude but 25% is enough for defence. The P51 seems to be able to fly quite a long distance on 25% too, perhaps no loiter time over target but just enough to fly to the nearest base and back.
If we all want realism then the hangars would stay down a lot longer. Aircraft would be ferried in. The runways could be pepper potted so no one could take off. At least we have a happy medium.