Wild idea - Alternate victory conditions

[Samiam]

For example:

Make HQ Require 100K lbs of damage within a one hour window. Completely flattening opponents HQ wins reset.

Result:

- Opportunity for meaningfull deep heavy bombing missions
- Meaningfull bomber intercept role and need for high air patrol
- Escorted bombers, knowing that intercepts will be coming
- High altitude air combat ala ETO over germany
- Strategic element to base capture (take bases that provide path to HQ or make defence of HQ difficult).
- Quicker map rotations (think about it pizza haters, one coordinated 2am HQ raid acheives reset).

The only impact on furballers is that the map changes frequently. The only impact on land-grabbers is the added element that *which* fields you capture (or defend) in what order may matter more.

Just one idea, I'm sure there are others.

[xHaMmeRx]

I kind of like the strategic element of it.  OTOH, 3 guys with Lanc formations could take care of it.  OTOOH, the Me-163 at the HQ base could take care of the Lancs.  

Worth a look I think.

HAMMER
netAces.org - Tips, Tactics and More!

[Furious]

Similar idea from the way back machine


F.

[hazed-]

Originally posted by Furious
Similar idea from the way back machine


F.

yes furious similar only yours was better:) hehe

[Samiam]

I must've read and liked the idea when Furious first posted it, only to have it pop into my head today as if it were my own - should've known a briliant idea like this had to have another origin.

The main point, really, is to have several alternative victory conditions that emphasize different aspects of gameplay.

Base capture emphasizes coordinated Blitzkrieg JABO attacks. HQ destruction (or capture) would emphasise deep penetration bombing and bomber interception. Not exactly sure how to emphasize furballing/turn fighting.

[AtmkRstr]

That idea would make small maps not worth playing.  I like the small maps. I don't like large maps, or atleast I've yet to see one I like, but I really like your idea for large maps.