Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Sixpence on May 18, 2003, 05:26:56 PM
-
OK, I like the strategic part of the game, but I am seeing why players are complaining about it and I have to agree. I'm seeing one F6F take fuel down to 25% for a large airfield. They come in and take all the fuel down and get shot down. A suicide run.
This is not acceptable. I can see why guys are complaining about it. What we need to find is something that will be acceptable for the strategic guys and the non strategic guys.
Two thoughts
1.) To make the fuel bunkers harder to take down
2.) Two different kinds of fuel bunkers(heavier bunkers for larger fields)
I like the strategic part of the game, but I have to agree with the non strategic guys on this. One plane should not be able to take fuel down for an airfield.
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
I'm seeing one F6F take fuel down to 25% for a large airfield. They come in and take all the fuel down and get shot down. A suicide run.
When one country has two countries gang up on it or when a country is seriously outnumbered, taking down strat objects is the only way you can slow the onslaught down.
With a map like Trinity, killing troops & fuel can bring things to a crashing halt. It's less serious with AKDesert and the smaller maps.
So, what you are suggesting makes it easier for one country to be overwhelmed. I don't think that's good.
curly
-
Just 5% of the players are really trying to work on strat targets at bases. If a single plane can't do any serious damage, it won't be possible at all.
-
"I'm seeing one F6F take fuel down to 25% for a large airfield"
Rather than watching ... you need to get up and shoot his bellybutton down ... problem solved.
-
As usual people are too damned lazy to up a fighter and defend they'd rather complain and have HTC program away their problem :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Revvin
As usual people are too damned lazy to up a fighter and defend they'd rather complain and have HTC program away their problem :rolleyes:
Lol, that is easier said than done. I'm just giving the other sides arguement. They make a good point. I don't care if it stays the same, but I hate to see people not having fun over it and leave the game. I just think some fields should take more than one plane to reduce the fuel to nill. I'm not talking every field.
Lol, rolleyes, the peanut gallery has spoken.
-
I think he means the otherway around i.e. the country getting ganged can buy some time by porking fuel, troops etc.
-
Originally posted by Trikky
I think he means the otherway around i.e. the country getting ganged can buy some time by porking fuel, troops etc.
Of course he did.
But its a double edged blade. One plane can take out fuel at one base wether you have 4 or 100 bases.
-
iI dont use much stategy in the games justing to stay alive .but what if the fuel and barricks were harder to find maybe then 1 suicide plane couldnt get all the fuel or pork the troops.not sure what you could do about camo but its just a thought
-
Yeah, Curly.. one brave green soul sneaks out through the oncoming hordes of red and makes it almost 1/5 of the way to the enemy base and...... gets bounced by six red guys on the way to mob the green base.
Works good.
:D
-
I agree with Six, should be more fuels at a base, 1 guy killing all the fuel is no fair. Also if bunkers would be harder to kill you would have missions going to kill fuel. Missions are starting to die out Ive noticed. Was a thread on this topic couple months ago
-
I would argee with harden fuel cells if base didn't flash. Only way for 1 guy to get all fuel is for no one to up when base starts flashing or he's seen on dar. If he porks base only ones to blame are those who don't defend base. NOT the existing game play...........
only thing I would like to see is RADAR at hq stay down longer,or be harder to rebuild now that 163 is available. And Would like to see cv commander be able to block flight ops on cv........ Its frustrating to see cv sail for 1hr and 40 miles from base a newbie takes off gives it away ............... we kinda have this now when hiding cv so don't see much dif.
-
Quite often when I was after some base fuel, it was 1 enemy pilot, who covered it at high alt, and made it impossible.
1 pilot who can kill fuel is normally heavy, so 1 enemy pilot who take fighter can catch him and shot down.
That mostly solves the problem. Though it may be borring to stay high over the base which may never be attacked, but strat choices are often borring, they have pleasure in result. It is your choice how to fly.
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
You make my point curly, so if you are down to 4 bases, you like the thought of one plane taking down all your fuel?
6pence, when you capture a base, have you ever heard the phrase "don't pork the fuel or troops?" Most folks try to avoid damaging the base when they are capturing it. Of course, you destroy the vehicle hangar, but generally, you leave fuel/ordnance and troops alone.
But, when you get down to 4 bases, the game is over unless the two countries who ganged you start fighting each other.
curly
-
Like I said, I think a second fuel bunker that is a little harder to take down would be nice. Just so that it would harder to reduce the large airfield fuel supply.
It could stay and it wouldn't change what I think about the game(my complaint the GV model)(and bring the T-34!), but I see the arguement of the furballer, and it's understandable. But i'm a strategic guy too, and I realize you have to take out ammo at a coastal field so bombers don't take ur fleet out. And taking the fuel out at the field closest to the one you are attacking will make it harder for the enemy to fly over with altitude and make it a longer trip. So the strat system is good. But I was under the impression it could be added to the terrain editor like they added the bridges(wait a minute, can you change the value of any object to have the value of a fuel bunker? If it is, my arguement is moot, it can already be done)( which, by the way, have they made the bridges driveable yet?) so I thought it might be an easy add in. I'll ask in the TE forum.
btw, sorry for the double post
-
I abhor certain game-the-game methodologies, especially suicide runs. But I strongly agree with the sentiments expressed by my CO, Revvin. Seems to me that whenever someone sees a particular incident they don't like, they want HTC to program it away. I have seen calls for fields to be "moved closer together", for "night to be abolished", and even for "jabo/bombs to be perked" - all demands made to satisfy the needs of Mr. Quickfix. Hehe, AH2 is going to "program away" a whole raft of gamey crap - can't wait!
But let's consider the suicide fuel porker problem logistically. In a real war situation in which fuel porkage was occurring, the porkees would learn to better defend their resources against the tactics of the porkor in order to limit porkage. (I was always greatly amused in WB to observe that the fuel tanks were adjacent to the ammunition bunker for middle fields - bit of a safety hazard - lol.) Instead of asking HTC to program the problem away, perhaps we could ask instead for defences to be rearranged - mannable ack/field gun next to the fuel tanks. I'm not in favour of "hardening" the fuel tanks, or for automatic ack to make fuel porkage impossible, as I believe that fuel porkage should be a legitimate tactic.
People often whine about the other sides' bombs damaging their hangars, damaging their fuel/radar etc., and "reducing their choices". Let me tell you that bombs are designed to destroy ground targets! That's the whole bleedin' point!!!:rolleyes:
-
I know some of you strat guys have trouble grasping complex ideas but... here it is..
The way MA strat works is... the country with the most numbers is the steamroller... they country with the least numbers is steamrolled... the remaining country is along for the ride.... the steamroller "wins the war" and all that "winning the war" entails. Hope I didn't spoil the wonder of it all for you.
lazs
-
Suicide runs are gaming the game?
Didn't you guys see all the war movies where the heroes are briefed by the CO that many if not all of the heroes "won't be coming back from this one" but the "it's a job that has to be done"?
I look forward to AH2 and I hope HT makes it as real as possible. MAXIMUM realism. And I hope all you guys that pine for that enjoy it and play it exclusively. :D
-
Yep... they will all be waiting patiently in the tower for the general to give his orders... uncomplaining and filled with the zeal of teamwork and the "missun"..... They will all subdue their own enormous egos for the good of missun and country... no stife shall exist in the "missun arena" since they all agree on what makes for a good time.
I won't miss em.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I know some of you strat guys have trouble grasping complex ideas but... here it is..
The way MA strat works is... the country with the most numbers is the steamroller... they country with the least numbers is steamrolled... the remaining country is along for the ride.... the steamroller "wins the war" and all that "winning the war" entails. Hope I didn't spoil the wonder of it all for you.
lazs
You missed something. The side that gets all its fighter hangars destroyed is the one that gets its wings clipped as far as launching fighters goes. The side that does not defend its (fuel) resources is the one that flies locally for the next half hour. Just thought you might need reminding about that. ;) Oh wait, you don't. You've been whining about it for the last two years... :D :D
-
Originally posted by Toad
Suicide runs are gaming the game?
Didn't you guys see all the war movies where the heroes are briefed by the CO that many if not all of the heroes "won't be coming back from this one" but the "it's a job that has to be done"?
Doh! My mistake, Bufo Marinus. I was forgetting - until your lapdog reminded me - that suicides are not what ruins the game. The only things that ruin the game are Buffs/Fluffs, and a funny thing called Organisation. LOL! Organisation - what a concept! :eek:
Classic whine to be found - Organisation "ruining" the game. (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=43614) ROFL!
-
Coleoptera Chrysomelidae, the jury will soon rule on your interpretation of what makes this game "good" for the majority.
AH2 is not far off. Let's see what develops. I believe in AH2 you will get all those strateegery things you vocally pine for on a routine basis. "Life" will have meaning, targets must be hit, MISSIONS of GREAT IMPORTANCE and all that tripe.
Maybe it will be a great hit. Maybe it will be interesting to perhaps 5-10% of the people as the CT appears to be. The CT was going to be a smash hit too, if you listened to the proponents that kept telling HT he didn't know what made good gameplay and just give them a chance to show us all how to do it.
As I said, your views will be given a chance to show validation. I suspect, however, that once again we'll see it's a fringe minority that's been raising all the ruckus once the "new" wears off the Missions of Great Importance.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Coleoptera Chrysomelidae, the jury will soon rule on your interpretation of what makes this game "good" for the majority.
AH2 is not far off. Let's see what develops. I believe in AH2 you will get all those strateegery things you vocally pine for on a routine basis. "Life" will have meaning, targets must be hit, MISSIONS of GREAT IMPORTANCE and all that tripe.
Maybe it will be a great hit. Maybe it will be interesting to perhaps 5-10% of the people as the CT appears to be. The CT was going to be a smash hit too, if you listened to the proponents that kept telling HT he didn't know what made good gameplay and just give them a chance to show us all how to do it.
As I said, your views will be given a chance to show validation. I suspect, however, that once again we'll see it's a fringe minority that's been raising all the ruckus once the "new" wears off the Missions of Great Importance.
I would tend to think HT knows his customer base. At least, I should hope so. Why would they spend all this effort, effectively ending further development on AH if they did not think AHII would attract a large portion of the community?
Do you think HTC is wasting resources by even develping AHII?
Personally, AHII will be my new home. But thats my style.
Have there been other threads that give an indication as to who plans on playing AHII exclusively?
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
When one country has two countries gang up on it or when a country is seriously outnumbered, taking down strat objects is the only way you can slow the onslaught down.
With a map like Trinity, killing troops & fuel can bring things to a crashing halt. It's less serious with AKDesert and the smaller maps.
So, what you are suggesting makes it easier for one country to be overwhelmed. I don't think that's good.
curly
Curly, for all of his faults, is right. Killing troops will stop offensive base capture missions. Killing fuel will stop offensive jabo raids (sometimes) and will limit the amount of time a guy can vulch a runway. Killing both will put a lot of guys in Mustangs, Panzers, and level bombers.
-
Muck,
Tell me which you think would be more time consuming:
1. Programming an automatic "mission generator" and some AI
or
2. An entirely new graphics engine, new art for all the aircraft, game objects and terrains?
I think there's a misconception on what's really taking up all the time here.
:D
-
Well depending of what you want ... I would say both :)
The difference is 1st must be made in house ,but the 2nd can be bought.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Muck,
Tell me which you think would be more time consuming:
1. Programming an automatic "mission generator" and some AI
or
2. An entirely new graphics engine, new art for all the aircraft, game objects and terrains?
I think there's a misconception on what's really taking up all the time here.
:D
Toad-
You have to consider 2 thing here.
1- We really have only the vaguest of ideas as to what AHII will really be in the final product
2- I have no knowlege of any type of computer programming aside from Basic in high school.
10 Print "Lisa is a potato"
20 Goto 10
hehe.
I would guess from your syntax your saying the bulk of the time is spent on the option 2.
Another question:
At peak, we have about 500 players online. (Correct?)
Tour of Duty, (The weekly event, not AHII) attracts anywhere from 100-150 players. This is at an off peak time, for me anyway. So your looking at 20% at least, who are interested in a very VERY structured, organized, mission oriented event.
If I had to guess, and I am really guessing here, If the AHII is done right, and delivers what was promised so far, you may see up to 200 players in there at peak times.
TO arrive at this number, I simply took the number that attend TOD, and added 50-100 players to account for the fact that TOD has a set cut off time, which is not always convenient. You also have to consider the fact that weekly TOD only allows squads, with no Walk ons allowed.
-
Fuel was probably just as easy to take down in WW2 as it is in AH, apart from that in WW2 the ack wasn't as good as AH and in WW2 they were probably more interested in damaging aircraft which would have been a more viable target - planes take time to be repaired/replaced whereas bunkers are easily replaced.
So, in AH the fuel on a small and large base are easy to take down. The medium field fuel bunkers are well placed and very difficult to hit for a single Jabo.
To try and make AH a little more realistic, keep the existing fuel bunkers but introduce mobile fuel bowsers scattered around the airfield - these would have been at Bulk Fuel Installations or dispersals in WW2. How many? Not sure! 3 or 4? Perhaps even introduce a fuel bowser that you can spawn from a V base and refuel aircraft that are sitting on the runway only?
Also since in WW2 there would be several aircraft scattered around the airfield on dispersals. These aircraft would already have fuel in them. So, how about even if the fuel goes down to 25%, you can still up a set limit of aircraft with 100% fuel to represent the aircraft that would have been on the dispersal? How many aircraft? Say 3 aircraft per aircraft hangar type - i.e. field with two FHs then 6 fighters can up; field with 4 BHs then 12 buffs can up.
Any thoughts? I'll repost this on the feedback forum!
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
Lol, that is easier said than done. I'm just giving the other sides arguement. They make a good point. I don't care if it stays the same, but I hate to see people not having fun over it and leave the game. I just think some fields should take more than one plane to reduce the fuel to nill. I'm not talking every field.
Lol, rolleyes, the peanut gallery has spoken.
Easier said than done?? click on a button and you're on the runway ready to take off, how much easier do you want it? So is this really about individuals taking down fuel or missions? If we're still talking about individuals then with the uber ack and the fact that the enemy plane will be heavy with bombs or rockets you really should have much trouble at all shooting him down and his effect not really that great on anything but a small field. If you're allowing him to do that at a medium field you're giving the guy far too much time to circle and kill ack to aid him in killing all the fuel. Your argument centre's around laziness at not getting up and doing something about it and wanting HTC to program away your problem. If making snide comments about the use of a roll eyes smiley (how cute you're following the current trend of doing that BTW) then it only shows how weak your argument is.
-
Perhaps I'm being unfair on you, just fed up of the way certain players whine for HTC to program away their problems.
-
Rude say's the direct confrontation of plane vs. plane pleases more folks than that of plane vs. structures....those of you who prefer the latter are obviously confused and have chosen the wrong game....please move along.
Rude say's thank you.
-
Two Fuel bunkers can be created by changing the values of another object. It can already be done, so my point is moot. If you want a map where the large air fields have hardened fuel bunkers(or representing a buried fuel bunker), you just have to make one.
Carry on.
-
Originally posted by Imp
Of course he did.
But its a double edged blade. One plane can take out fuel at one base wether you have 4 or 100 bases.
I disagree. When a country has just 4 bases, there are so many of the players flying around those that it's not that easy to get in and pork something. With more bases than players OTOH...
-
muck... I think the numbers will be dilluted by a continuous running "missun" arena... the reason people go to the events is because they are so rare and special..
I think that all the new features of the "missun arena" (minus the missun) will be in the MA too.
fuel and dar down is not fun for guys who want to log on for an hour or two. I think all the limeys must be devoid of an outside life as most of em want to play some glorified board game.
beetle... take down FH's, fuel or whatever... the basic AH strat remains.... the team with the numbers is the steamroller... Not only that but... if it is a huge boring difficult to wade through map like infinity.... the team with the most numbers is the steamroler but... if their numbers drop then the new team with the most numbers is the steamroller... all the building batting in the world don't change that .... it is pre ordained... destined. you can't change it... those with any sense don't even try...
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
muck... I think the numbers will be dilluted by a continuous running "missun" arena... the reason people go to the events is because they are so rare and special..
I think that all the new features of the "missun arena" (minus the missun) will be in the MA too.
It is my understanding that all the features of AHII will be in AH classic, minus the organized missions, so you are correct.
I have to disagree with your first statement, from my point of view. I would play ToD every day if it was available. I simply enjoy a structured enviornment, with a set goal and reward for accomplishing the mission. I especially enjoy the teamwork that can be found in a large mission. Now, teamwork can be found in the MA without missions, and it's also very entertaining, but not as easily found. I've always appreciated games that let you attain rank, and earn things. (Ie: better planes, better maintained planes, etc.)
Now, I will play AH classic when I only have 30 mins and need my AH fix. But when I sit down for a 3 hour session of gaming, I'll be in the mission arena.
You have to remember, you're talking to a guy who's second favorite game is Civilization III.
I think you and I have very different taste when it comes to gaming.
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
I simply enjoy a structured enviornment, with a set goal and reward for accomplishing the mission.
"God punishes us by fullfilling our strongest desires" (C) do not remember who.
I expect AHII to be a game, I am looking for during last 20 of my 33 years of life, but may be it better not be it. :)
-
Lazs, when AH2 comes out, you know what I'm going to say to you?
Come towards the light. :D ROFL...
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
Have there been other threads that give an indication as to who plans on playing AHII exclusively?
Once AH2 is released and anyone that still plays AH will pretty much be flying AH2 exclusively as there won't be any more original AH. Now if you're talking about the ToD theaters in AH2, I still think the majority will fly in the revamped Main Arena. Sure, the numbers in the ToD theater will be high for the first few months but as the novelty wears off and boredom sets in, players will flock back to the Main Arena to get their fix for a fight.
Ack-Ack
-
I will most likely go to both arenas.
As I said earlier. The main for the quick fix, the ToD arena when I can concentrate and dedicate a serious block of time.
-
I think that, by far, the vast majority of HT's coding time is going into the new graphics engine and of course, there's a ton of attendant changes to the art work. It's being designed in house as far as I know.
I seriously doubt that the AI/Mission Generator aspect of AH2 is anywhere near as huge a project as the graphics engine & artwork project.
However, I'm deleriously happy that the "strat" contingent are getting something they think they want. I want everyone to be happy. I'm deleriously happy that guys that like the CT HAVE the CT, too.
It's all good.
-
There's strat in AH? :)
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Once AH2 is released and anyone that still plays AH will pretty much be flying AH2 exclusively as there won't be any more original AH. Now if you're talking about the ToD theaters in AH2, I still think the majority will fly in the revamped Main Arena. Sure, the numbers in the ToD theater will be high for the first few months but as the novelty wears off and boredom sets in, players will flock back to the Main Arena to get their fix for a fight.
Ack-Ack
The scenario that AKAK describes is the one that accords most closely with my own prognosis. Wonder how the steamroller will fit in...
-
Who is airborne long enough to use more than 25% fuel?
:)
-
Me for one, i never take less than 75% and only then for the p51 or F4U-1 (huge tanks).
But then again i always aim to stay alive to rtb.
-
LOL Since when does getting shot down constitute a suicide run?
Suicide is when you intentionally get yourself killed or intentionally crash.
People who fly to a base,pork it,then intentionally auger so they can hurry up and do it again are suicides. Not the ones that simply get shot down. LOL if getting shot down was a prerequisite for being labeled a suicider then you could lay that label on 99% of all the people that fly. I just looked it up and as of this posting in the "fighter" category the even the number 1 ranked fighter only lands 50% of his flights. After that the next 3 land only a little better then 1/3 of their flights. and that ratio only proceeds to get worse as you go down the list.
Most players int he game while are not suiciders are fly till ya die type players.
Just think about your own flights. How many times do you all actually get to land your flights compared to how many times you have taken off?
Admittedly many many times, I am one of your hated base porkers. But I certainly do NOT intentionally get myself killed thus Im not a suicider. LOL I have every intention on surviving my run to at least try to return to base. Unfortunately it doesnt usually work out that way LMAO. just the same is it doesnt usually work out that way for all of you.
Why do I insist on porking bases? Typically I pork the base that is sending hordes upon hordes of aircraft that are doing the exact same thing to over run the bases of my country and hanging around in usually massive numbers to vulch anything that moves.
Lately I've changed my primary target to that of the Barracks as opposed to the fuel when I see a fight going on of roughly the same amount of numbers on either side. This is an intentional move on my part to appease the furballing crowd.But as soon as I see then enemy side is gaining an advantage making the fight unfair or I see MY bases being bombed and hoarded. Sorry but your fuel and ammo has got to go bye bye. More often then not it is the only way to save your base's from being over run by the hoarders.
So, when I stop seeing massive hoards over the base of my country. I'll stop reducing your modes of transportation and fighting ability to that of Ox cart and slingshots.
I dont fly for rank or score. I have a rather novel approach to the game. I fly for whats best for my country. And if because of the hoards attacking us requires me to pound your base till its unusable so be it.
Therefore you have two options.
1- you can stop trying to splatter and /or try to over run MY bases.
2- Try and stop me.
heh Good luck! LMAO
Drediock
Originally posted by Sixpence
OK, I like the strategic part of the game, but I am seeing why players are complaining about it and I have to agree. I'm seeing one F6F take fuel down to 25% for a large airfield. They come in and take all the fuel down and get shot down. A suicide run.
This is not acceptable. I can see why guys are complaining about it. What we need to find is something that will be acceptable for the strategic guys and the non strategic guys.
Two thoughts
1.) To make the fuel bunkers harder to take down
2.) Two different kinds of fuel bunkers(heavier bunkers for larger fields)
I like the strategic part of the game, but I have to agree with the non strategic guys on this. One plane should not be able to take fuel down for an airfield.
-
well laughing boy... I land more than half my sorties. Guess rank doesn't mean any more than building battling. The fight is the thing.
(insert 20 or so acronyms for laughter and a dozen silly balloon heads)
lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's
-
Your my kind of guy, Dred.
Are you in a squad?
-
Didn't I see mention of "ranks" in AHII:TOD? If this is true, I think it will not be a big hit. I don't see myself taking orders from some pimply-faced geek with a pnus-derived CPID for too long. (No Swagger - I ain't talking about you....). I have a hard enough time taking orders from my wife.
Sour
-
Lets try and not count the ones where you up, then end mission cause ya grabbed the wrong plane shall we. ::grin::
Originally posted by lazs2
well laughing boy... I land more than half my sorties.
(insert 20 or so acronyms for laughter and a dozen silly balloon heads)
lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's
-
Rgr That.
Im in the Iron Dogs Squad with the knits
Originally posted by muckmaw
Your my kind of guy, Dred.
Are you in a squad?
-
I think that laughing boy is thinking of someone else... Have you thought of adding a "drool" at the end of every laughing/grinning acronym? would be very accurate.
lazs
-
OhMyGAWD!!!
(Jumps up on podium)
Listen, furballer/duellists. There is a duelling arena. If you want to have your one-on-one, two-on-two, or whatever, go there, get a plane, and fight it out to find out which pilot has the bigger gun and the slicker moves. Not everybody in here wants to be a latter-day Erich Hartmann, though...some of us like to play a different way.
I ENJOY BOMBING YOUR AIRFIELDS. I GET A KICK OUT OF STRAFING DEFENSELESS TOWNS. I LIKE SHOOTING DOWN PLANES WHILE THEY TRY TO TAKE OFF. I DON'T COMPLAIN WHEN THAT HAPPENS TO ME--IT'S PART OF THE GAME.
By the way, I also don't complain when one of you furballer types comes out of your narcissistic pile of planes and shoots down my heavy P38 while I'm on my way to pork your base. Nor do I complain when I can't get one of you clowns (on my side) to give me a hand when I'm getting chased by one of the enemy furballers, or goon hunters. I usually don't piss and moan about the fact that one of my "friends" will use me as bait to get the guy that's chasing me.
You children remind me of "it's my ball, play my way" ten-year-olds. Live with the way the game works, find another game, or get the skills to WRITE YOUR OWN.
(ducks down behind podium in anticipation of flung fruit)
-
Forget the fruit...watch out for the flaming arrows.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to pork some airfield's fuel.:D
-
you wanna strat...strat
you wanna furball...furball
just dont whine about the other type when they do something you dont like
-
there are furballers and there are building battlers.. neither should have an unbalanced effect on the other. the talent required should match the effect.
rshubert should not be able to take out a cv by making himself into a bomb and ruin the fight that a dozen or 2 guys are having... certainly I feel for him... he can't shoot down other planes so he needs to fell useful... the buildings offer very little input and the Ai ack and Ai features don't seem to do it for him.. I guess the only difference between being here and in a boxed game for him is the chance that he will be discovered and, invariably, shot down if a human finds him...
The new resuply system and field capture is part of the problem... the new longer distances between fields maps are another part... the fields are too hard to capture and too far apart. they tend to be rendered useless and then the fight doesn't exist except for several sectors away... that leaves little choice but to be in the gangbang or be gangbanged. neither is fun. Watching guys suicide heavy 38's into your field makes you respect your fellow players and the game less. The animosity builds.
Fighting a group of guys defending or attacking two close fields leads to great fights between the fields where everyone feels that they have a good chance of engaging and getting out if they are hurt.. the fights tend to be more equal... the dar is more representitive of what is really happening (as oppossed to what it is when the field is 2 sectors away)... the close and hard won fights build respect for the other players (on either side) and for the game.
lazs
-
HI guys i want to have a buddy for AIM messenger my SN is naziteck
-
welcome nazi... you should email beetle.
lazs
-
Well said rshubert!!
I enjoy exactly what you describe, but I also enjoy the close hard fought battles that are difficult to find in the MA. The problem is, that the MA is such a fluid, constantly changing environment. No matter what we do to the game, there will always be inbalances. The pros and cons of different environmental settings (IE: Strat target toughness) may or may not solve the problems discussed here, but it will surely give rise to some other variable/problem which will be the subject of much debate in the future.
When I feel that bases are too far apart, I find one that is closer. Sometimes a base I am flying from has porked fuel, then I fly from another one (usually retaliating by porking the enemy fuel). Sometimes the carrier I am flying from gets nailed, so I find another one that is already engaged, and fly from there.
There are plenty of options available on the new larger maps, everyone should be able to find a situation in a short period of time that is to their liking if they just look hard enough. Unlike the smaller maps, the number of options is significantly greater, you just have to go find them. We can't tailor make situations that are to our liking. The joy of the engagement is that it is always different than the last one. Strat target toughness forces us to go find a different fight, or change the one we are currently in.
If someone (myself included) wants to fly a sector and a half and turn himself into a flying bomb, that is fine with me, he is the one that wasted the long flight to get there for a few seconds of glory. Whatever floats your boat (or sinks it). This game is not broken! Please don't try to fix it. I do not subscribe to the mentality 'fix it till it is broke!' That is what some of these arguments sound like to me. This game strikes a pretty darn good balance for all types of players.
-
tracerx, you are in error. How can a porked, frontline field be further away than another? Hint, it can't. If you can't up from the frontline field, you have to up from a field further away. Thats upping from a closer field?
When your field is fuel porked, you up from another field. Is that one of the "closer" back fields?
-
Sorry to confuse you Apache, I am not trying to say that upping from another unporked base would be closer to the enemy base (I think I have actually seen this happen once or twice though). Rather, that in the case of porked fields, I either find another set of fields that are close together, or up from another base and try to pork the enemy fuel to make things even. The examples I gave are separate and independant from each other, do not try to combine them into one example. Hope that clears it up.
-
tracer... there are only so many fields that have any action at em.. the furballers do indeed seek out the action but it takes a while for that to get going again... it is far too simple for the talentless building battlers to ruin a good fight and send a dozen or so guys off in all directions looking for another good fight.
Sheesh... just make the reward equal the effort is all... if you use little or no talent to do something you shouldn't have much effect... 1 or 2 people shouldn't easily pork a field where there are 500 people in an arena.
lazs