Author Topic: Gonna Miss Fester (Read 3772 times)

muckmaw · « **Reply #135 on:** October 14, 2003, 10:39:03 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by SlapShot
" would like to see a game that requires the combined use of all weapons types available, in a coordinated team effort, to reach a specific goal."

Muck,

The only failing variable in that equation is "specific goal".

This game has been designed with many types of goals and not one "forced common goal".

The best a map maker can do is to try and satisfy as many of these goals as possible. I beleive that FesterMA is the closest so far, given the map/gameplay architecture.

Slapshot-

No one is forced to realize a goal in this case because there is no specific goal in my statement. The goal could be different for different people. It could be something as simple as a base capture, or as intricate as a multi faceted strat attack. The goal is not forced as everyone has their own. Other people have goals that require no help from anyone else.

I have a goal every month to try and get my K/D above 2. A goal like this does not require the cooperation of anyone else...except maybe the guy I'm shooting at.

I would like to see more combined efforts of Air and Land forces necessary to capture bases. The goal here being the base capture, and the requirement being cooperation of a large group of people employing various weapons.

Sorry if this is confusing. It'a hard to put into words.

lazs2 · « **Reply #136 on:** October 14, 2003, 11:11:08 AM »

muck and beetle... when I asked for furball friendly map I asked that the fields be closer together. real friggin simple eh?

now.... what FEATURE would you like on a map that would promote your style of gameplay?

lazs

Swager · « **Reply #137 on:** October 14, 2003, 11:32:12 AM »

Bring back the Beta 1 map!!!

BTW, I totally agree 100% with this thread!

Basically, I dont care which map is up, I just fly and die!!

Toad · « **Reply #138 on:** October 14, 2003, 11:37:25 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Zanth
Whoever made resupply pretty much ineffectual(a) is largely responsible for our 25% fuel problem. They went way too far...

...Make resupply effective and every map will benefit.

That would be HT.

BTW, see.. we agree on something!

beet1e · « **Reply #139 on:** October 14, 2003, 12:01:36 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Beet, people vote with their mouse buttons. You loathing of the Big 5 (or is it 6 or 7 by now) merely shows how out of touch you are with the masses. They fly what they want to fly and it bothers you. How redikulousneesss!

I keep missing these "votes". Has there been another one? I don't have a loathing of Big 3/4/5/6/7... I'd just like to see more balance instead of the same 4-5 planes, and I'm not alone on that. But how do you feel about fuel porkers? I could say "They fly what they want to fly and it bothers you. How redikulousneesss!" BTW we've all got nicknames for maps. I don't think my "QWW" tag is any more off colour than "Pizza" - is it?

I want the same things as guys like Muckmaw and MiniD. But with fields too close together I think we move away from that, and end up with QWW.

Lazs asked "now.... what FEATURE would you like on a map that would promote your style of gameplay?"
Honest answer: I'd like adequately spaced fields and more hi alt and mountain terrains. Pizza's not perfect by any means, but it does go part way. I'd also like to see fewer fields - not layer upon layer of unused fields.

I don't blame the maps for the SFP and other tardz. They're here because it's only 50 cents a day. But it has to be said that some maps encourage tardishness more than others.

Toad · « **Reply #140 on:** October 14, 2003, 12:05:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by beet1e
I keep missing these "votes".

That's pretty obvious. But the results are right in front of you every time you log in and see what people are flying and what they are doing.

muckmaw · « **Reply #141 on:** October 14, 2003, 01:29:26 PM »

What do I want...hmmmm...

Well, the fields closer together IS working. There no arguing that. At least my furball side is loving that, and I've not seen any adverse effects, but the map was only up one week.

I'm really hoping thr close fields create a stalemate, requiring level bombers to break the enemy strat before the line can be advanced.

What I would want in the map before all else would be a MUCH bigger field-town.

Maybe 4X what it is now. Basically, I'd like something that would make it impossible or very difficult to capture a town without heavy bombers.

If this is not something a map maker can dictate, I would have to ask for a few more Strat targets to hit. Unfortunately, the thing I want for gamplay above all else is not up to the mapper...change the strat system so it has a more direct impact on the war.

beet1e · « **Reply #142 on:** October 14, 2003, 01:53:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
That's pretty obvious. But the results are right in front of you every time you log in and see what people are flying and what they are doing.

Logged in - first plane I saw was a C47 - honest truth! He asked me if the town was still down at A219. I checked and it was, so he dropped and we got A219. Then I wondered how many other strat minded C47 pilots there are. Later checked the capture stats for this guy. He has 2 captures in goons and is ranked #392. 4 captures in M3 and is ranked #406. Shows me that there are hundreds of guys delivering troops to capture fields. Before that there would need to be about 6 guys to kill the town, VH, CAP the field. I don't know if it's possible to get stats for goons - except the somewhat meaningless kill stats! But just looking at those stats, I am led to believe that thousands of players are in the field capture business. Do you know different?

Muckmaw - fields closer together is great for furballs - I never doubted it would be. But that's not what I'm looking for - didn't think it was what you wanted either, looking at one of your earlier posts in which you said what you would like to see in AH.

lazs2 · « **Reply #143 on:** October 14, 2003, 02:25:40 PM »

beetle... what you are saying then is that the feature you would like is "adequetly spaced fields".... I don't know what that means but later you insinuate that the much hated pizza map is much to your liking spacing wise..

That being the case one can only infer that you feel that the only way you can get your style of gameplay is to deny everyone else from having any other choice.

The reverse is not true with closer fields... you can still hide from other players on festabria. you can take off 6 filds back if you like and not see another player for a whole tank of fuel... course most everyone else will be fighting and having fun... the only way you can get em to play your way is to deny them the choice to do anything fun.
lazs

muckmaw · « **Reply #144 on:** October 14, 2003, 02:33:33 PM »

I'm not married to any one style, Beetle.

This strat vs. Fur thing has taken on a life of its own, but people have to realize that there are folks who like to do both.

I am really looking forward to TOD, and enjoy the current events we participate in. I love a good organized raid better than anything in the game. But there are nights when I simply do not feel like getting involved in all the planning, that goes into a strategic raid.

Some nights, I prefer to just climb into a plane a lone wolf it out to the nearest furball.

If I had to choose one way of playing or the other, I would go for the full scale realism.

The way AH is laid out now, I don't see any problem the closer fields are causing. I've not see the fuel porking issue I had feared. Field captures seem harder to execute, which I like. If I need to up a heavy, I simply fall back a base or 2 so I can get enough Alt.

The things I want in AH, I do not think can be provided by any map maker. It requires a change of AH coding, I think.

sax · « **Reply #145 on:** October 14, 2003, 02:42:41 PM »

Muck's got it

beet1e · « **Reply #146 on:** October 14, 2003, 02:49:28 PM »

Lazs, I know you like furballs, and your gameplay style does not interfere with mine - and vice-versa. We're not usually on at the same time anyway. My reason for wanting adequately spaced fields is not to spoil things for guys like you and Toad. I just want things to be harder for the suicide pork dweebs. But I would like more high alt activity - the P47 handles very differently at 20-25K from how it handles at 5K, and I expect the same is true of other planes. I enjoy exploring the flight envelope at those alts.

Muck, I understand your game, and if I was on your time zone I might even apply to join your squad. You are right, FMA has only been up a week. Let's reserve judgement until we've flown it a few times.

nopoop · « **Reply #147 on:** October 14, 2003, 08:59:31 PM »

Actually I would think Beet that closer spaced fields pretty much negates the suicide porker unless he takes off from rear fields to get sufficient altitude to come in "above" to do his contribution to the "war" effort. Porking fields no longer means much in festers map. Kinda a sly thing to do if you ask me.

No flames here. The Main should be a sandbox where all can "play". Porkage issues and field separation combined caused an issue that eliminated some from the equation.

Closer fields seems to have solved that and it's become a sandbox of fighting once again. That is a good thing. And from reading impressions on the board well excepted.

WB went so far as REMOVING the sandbox. Where'd that get them ?? The well known California expression "Got Brains??" applies in their case..

I'll take my pizza, I'll take my big isles. If I don't hang around long on those maps, that's ok. If you dislike festers map, we'll bear up with out ya.

As long as EVERYONE can get what they want out of this map or that, it's all good.

..and Muck doo do some furballin when the mood strikes.

I SEEN HIM.

straffo · « **Reply #148 on:** October 15, 2003, 02:33:42 AM »

Toad I disagree about your interpretation of fuel porkage.

When I'm in "strat" mode nothing piss me more than a captured field with only 25% as it mean that I won't be able to proceed to another field (I know I can refuel but I rarely use the same plane in 2 consecutive sorties ...)

I do pork fuel when gangbanged (aswell as upping LA7 and shiden-kai) but it's more the exception than the rule.

IMO there is nothing strategic in this attitude , it show the lameness of some players nothing more.
It show also that the resupply system need more tuning I think.

beet1e · « **Reply #149 on:** October 15, 2003, 04:13:16 AM »

Hi Poop! I'm running out of things to say on this thread. Yes, fields close together means fuel porking has less impact - there'll be a nearby field with fuel. The pizza way of dealing with it, fields further apart, means that it would take those SFP tardz so long to make one trip that they would quickly lose interest. Last pizza week, I only once saw a field porked to 25%, but there was another field with 125% which was just as good for rook use at that time. So perhaps the problem is worst with intermediate spacing of fields, as on the ch... er, small maps. The other thing about close fields means your 1v1 fights are more likely to be joined by an interloper.

But enough of pizza etc. Trinity seems fine to me. Had some good fights, some 1v1 - some of those I didn't deserve to win, some I lost that I should have won but learned something new.

One last thing. Stayed up very late last night - 3am here - and even ran into Mr. T in the text buffer. This game is a whole different animal at those hours (442 online), compared to what it is 12-18 hours earlier (80-140 online).