Idea for the CT

[aknimitz]

Ok, I'm just kinda thinking out loud on this one.  But, here is a problem I have with the CT.  I login, and see 20 people in the CT.  GREAT! I think, so I head in there for some historical mathcups!  Most of the time, what I find are a couple of pilots trying to take some random field, a couple pilots at 20K and maybe a few that want to get nasty in some dogfights.

Seems to me that perhaps, since this is a COMBAT theatre, field capturing should not be an option.  That can be done in the Training arena and Main Arena.  Also seems to me that with the current radar settings, its rather difficult to find the fight sometimes.  So, why not make few fields enabled to launch aircraft?  I dunno, and this is just me, but when I login to the CT, all I care about is some good fights in historical planes.  I dont care what terrain it is, all I care about are historical matchups.

I really would like to see field captures disabled though.  I love the 2 country atmosphere, maybe a map like the TOD Black Sea map would be great for the CT.  Maybe thats it, we need more maps that are 2 country oriented.

*shrug*

Nim

[Greg Stelmack]

There needs to be *SOME* objective besides dogfights and getting kills. What do the buffs do?

[aknimitz]

Well, good point.  And maybe what I am envisioning should involve a separate arena.  I dunno, but when I log into the Combat Theatre, I am expecting some historical combat.  Clearly there should be some objective for buffs, and feasibly even goons.  On the other hand, if we allow ppl to fly buffs and goons, well, they will.  And of the 10 that are logged in for the LW, if only 5 are in fighters, then my chances of first finding out where they are and second engaging in a fight, will go down.

*shrug*  Remember, I am just thinking out loud

I have an idea.  Ok, like every week lets say the CT changes objectives.  Perhaps some weeks we could have it as it is now, with bombing, captures, etc - whatever goes along with the historical recreation.  But perhaps some weeks we could have strict fighter v fighter mathcups, again to go along with a specific historic recreation?  Lets take the Battle of Brittain.  The Germans never were able to capture fields in England.  They jsut bombed the toejam outta London to piss off the English, and Dover because it was a strategic target.  So if that were recreated, goons would not be needed.

Just a thought...

Nim

[Geeesy]

Well but to be historical more correct engaging into air combat wasn't really the objective of most Air Forces during the war. The Fighters of one side had just the objective to shoot down as much bombers as it was possible. For example the Luftwaffe had at some points strictly order to do not engage any fighters, only bombers. Well and the fighters of the other side of course had the objective to protect the bombers, for doing that they had to give up many victories they could have made because they had to stay with the bombers and couldnt go after the disengaging enemys to finnish them.

So I think bombing is quite an important part of the CT. Well of course there wasnt won any airfield due to one C47 droping out 10 men, but succesfull bomber raids led to succesfull ground offensives (greece, creta, north africa, D-day...) just in a slower time than its the case in the game. But well making things too historical correct would most people just bore to death. We are flying most of the time to mess up with some enemys, pilots back these days were glad if they havent met any enemy after all.

[Wotan]

I hate field capture as well and could careless about buffs being pointless. They already are even with field capture available. They cant do anything a fighter/bomber cant.

However we could get rid of field capture or severly limit it by requiring m3s/ground troops only. Bases seperated by sea we need lvts.

I dont like that but its better then what we got.

Ideally is we could increase the time in takes for a base to repair on its own. Or even better set it so the base doesnt rebuild unless supplied. This would expand the buff and make it necessary for buffs to hit numerous targets to a keep a field down. In turn this would force us to engage the buffs.


So my idea:

No field capture or at minimum limit field capturte to m3s/lvts

No repair for fields unless resupplied.

Buffs would have a whole host of strat targets.

For instance to shut down a11 you need to kill fhs (or fuel) and to keep it down you would need to kill bhs or barraks at surrounding  fields and depos to keep it from being resupplied.

This ultimately would benefit the allies because of their larger buffs but it would be more "real" then what we have now.

Fer gameplay we would need field capture but its too easy to do as its currently modeled even if its limited to m3s/lvts.

anyway my .02cents

[Sandman]

Imagine if we took two of those...

No field capture.
Fields are damaged for long periods of time.

Result: the FLOT will grow wider and wider.

Certainly, there aren't enough people in the CT, but weren't there even less before we got field capture turned on?

I'd like to see the fields damaged for longer periods of time. I'd also like to see them require more troops to close.

Also... I think the fields in the CT and the MA should have more than one VH.

[Buzzbait]

S!

I don't think we can get rid of the idea of some form of Strat.

In Pyro setup of the Europe map, there was no Strat.  No way to take objectives.  The map was just a furball.  It didn't hold people's interest.

I think the players need to have some kind of motivating factor.  I think for example, the current setup has people focused on taking the field objectives listed.

However, the current AH system has a bias towards taking objectives with Goons.  It is much faster than using a GV or LVT.

But it isn't very historically realistic.  Airborne operations were rare, and they required enormous amounts of planning.

I am hoping to have the Stalingrad terrain up sometime this week, if I do get it up, then I will be limiting the availability of C-47's.

But that only works if the terrain is designed to allow capture by GV's.

The Stalingrad map has most of its bases designed with outlying spawn points for GV's.  So you can spawn a tank group quite close to an adjacent enemy field and do a quick raid.  Instead of having to drive for 45 minutes.

This hopefully will lead to action with Sturmoviks or attack 190's going after tanks.  With the fighters battling it out overhead.

Plus the map designer has put a lot of factories, buildings, fields etc. in a confined area...  Stalingrad.  Which should make for some interesting Tank battle terrain.  I have requested and he tells me he has done this...  placed modified "shore batteries'  around some of the fields, simulating dug in field guns.  This will provide a little more in the way of base defence.

As I said hopefully it will go up in the CT sometime this week.  (delays with Pyro and Ronni focused on the new BB's etc. meant it couldn't be up this last weekend)


                                             Cheers Buzzbait

[Pepe]

S! all CT players.

I agree fullheartedly about GV's having too little impact in here. I can understand that in MA, since it's a flying game. But not in CT. From my point of view, Panzers & M8's (especially Panzers) should be able to cause a lot more of damage in field's structures and, therefore, should have much more importance in taking the field. And I think It's great the idea of limiting the capture to M3/LVT troops, and leave the goons exclusively for ressuply.

Cheers,

Pepe

[Wotan]

Theres isnt any more folks flyin the ct now with scores and strat then there were when ct was 1st opened with the norway and long flight times.

There wasn't any more when we were in the euro map with shorter but never the less long flight times.

Folks who fly in these arenas are a static number.

Most base captures occur in the ct now when no one is in their to defend the bases.

good planned maps with lots of bases and good plansets is what will bring folks in but it will never have a regular following of more then a small percentage then the whole.

Every other game that had a ha ct or ava or what ever ya wanna call it is exactly the same way.

My point is it should cater to the folks that do fly there and not micro manage it with tweaks hoping you will find the magic combination.

The fact is base capture and scoring havent brought in any more folks.

As a matter of fact I see the same folks in there now as I did with no field capture. And I fly there.

[Greg Stelmack]

I agree that the key to this arena is to provide historical matchups. But that involves both numbers and strategic objectives, something missing with the unstructured nature of the arena. What's needed is some of the structure of the organized events.

What I've always wanted in this game was to log on, find a mission going, and take part in it. If I get shot down, I have to wait for my next flight.

Air Warrior had started to go down this path a bit. What I really want is something like:

Every hour or two the arena resets. On a reset the arena loads up a mission similar to the snapshot or old AW warnight setups. Two sides, one or both with attack objectives, maybe one with a defend objective. Historical planesets, one life; when you get shot down, go fly in the MA or do something else to tide you over to the next reset. If there aren't enough people, slots are filled with drones (drones don't have to be good, just fly the plane, drop bombs, basic dogfighting like any raw recruit) to balance it out and provide a certain minimum. At the end of the time limit, anyone in the air is marked as landed then kicked off and the score is tallied and posted somewhere. The host then resets for another run say 15 minutes or a half hour later.

This is my ideal. I have no idea how much is there now or how much effort it would be to do the missing pieces, but this is what I've wanted since I started flying Air Warrior: War Nights every 2 hours that don't require a CM.

Even the CT as it exists now is just the main arena with an historical planeset and limited sight ranges. There is still no real purpose and it still basically degenerates to a general furball, so people will go for the numbers.

[hazed-]

please read my Idea thread AKnim. posting it now,........

[Airscrew]

Ok, Hows this sound as a possible idea?
Taking Aknimitz, Woton's, and Greg ideas possible objectives in CT

1.  One of the objectives of the airwar in WW2 was attrition.   Shooting down as many of the enemy's planes as possible, even destroying them on the ground.   Why not have different types of objectives each night.   One night could be limited number of planes if thats possible.  Example
Axes 14 109-g10s, 18 109-g6s, 12 190-D9s, 20 109-f4s, etc.

Allies 16 P-51s,  14 P-38s, 12 P-47s, 14 Spit 9s, 18 Spit Vs, etc.

Each side starts with a certain number of planes and the objective is shoot down  either a) as many as possible in a predetermined time limit say 2 hours or b) shoot down all the opposing sides planes.   Then reset and start over.
Because the number of planes available is limited its not dependent on how many people are logged in.   If only 20 people log in then they fly and fight until they run out of planes.

2.    To have strategic objectives Another possiblity is say the fighter hangers represent 10 of each fighter type, when the fighter hanger is destroyed the enemy loses those planes.   (no rebuild,  unless you want to include the C47 in the strat)  

      If you capture a base with intact fighter/bomber hangers your side gains those plane numbers for each of those hangers.  
Fields could only be captured by ground vehicles and you should need more than 10 troops to capture, but you only need to bring the city down 50%.   I would also limited the number of fields to between 5 - 10 for each side.   Also increase the ack implacements (to prevent late night milkrunning) and add at least a few Vehicle fields in the mix.
Question?  Is it possible to set the 88's to fire at ground targets??


One problem is maintaining balance in either of these sceniarios.
I sure there are other considerations I not thinking of right now, but its just an idea.