Idea discussed at the con.

[martyb]

Originally posted by martyb
First my apologies if I've accidently repeated anybody, this thread is pretty long.

It seems the general idea to is discourage the "pork and auger" people.  I agree it would add general mayhem to the game if the hangers were popping up and down.  Here's my angle.....

1)  Make the bombs from bombers (one's with bomb sites) only able to release when viewing the bomb site.

2)  Leave the destruction of buildings the way it currently is.  It is very realistic and historically accurate (except for the pop back up in 15 minutes, but hey it's still a very cool game).  Pilots would die in some instances after hitting their intended target.  That IS the cost of war.

3)  To discourage the "pork and auger" folks, re-work the perk system to apply a negative score if the pilot gets shot down/augers/crashes within 2 minutes even if flying a non perk plane.  Right now, you still get perk points even if you don't land your mission, and have successful hits/objects destroyed.  It could be as simple as adding a negative to the perk point gain for the 2 minutes for when you hit something, or even more costly (an extended formula).

Again, I think the perk system should be looked into as a option to this.  In reality, high risk manuvers have high risk costs, however, the gain of a successful high risk raid should be a equally high gain for the risk taker.  For the player who takes the high risk without concern of being shot down, or even crashing;  in reality, they've forfited their life, but this an online combat sim, hit'um where it'll take notice, in the perk score.  Sure this will affect newbies, but I can't tell you how many times I got shot down "de-acking" before I learned the right and "safer" way to do it.  A negative perk score for newbies would ideally encourage them fly lower risk missions to decrease their score defecet.

[Tilt]

Originally posted by Midnight
How would this work with bomber formations?  [/QUOTE

If the timer started from the point at which the bombs were released then higher alt bombing would be more benefiscial as the damage would become hard sooner after it was incurred................ where as low alt suicide attacks have almost simultanious timer start points..................

Allocating stuff to formations could be handled in several ways............. the simple mechanism would be to invoke a ratio of 3 :1 for every formation ac killed within the time alloted (1 third of the bombs become ineffective) the other (as you suggest) would be to run 3 timers, one for each member of the formation, for each salvo...............

(for a formation of Ju88's that could be 72 timers...............)

If this is applied to damage rather than threshold destruction criteria then even suicide straffing porkers are effected then we are running timers for each bullet..............!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I still like the concept of perking heavier bombs............ HT's criticism of bomb perking (COADING difficulaties to one side) was that it could deny new players total access to bombs...............

actually rockets and 250 Lb bombs could always be free...............

[E25280]

Originally posted by hitech
What it is intended to change is the attitude ,if I put orindance on target I succeded even if I die, both in bombers,straffing, or jabo.



Yes they would also apply to CVs and GV's. Any thing that hits ground targets.



by ground targets I was refering to any non player controled targets" like buildings and CV's.

And when I said it would effect CV's and GV's I was referning to if you destroyed a building with deck guns, or destroyed buildings with a GV.


HiTech

Say three squadmates are trying to take a base, and they up 2 Ostis and and M3.  One Osti starts taking down one side of the town and the other Osti takes down the other.  While doing so, an enemy notices, ups an A20, and flies over just as the last buildings are going down.  He dive-bombs one Osti, and augers into the ground shortly after his bombs.  This kills the Osti, therefore half the town pops.

As the second Osti tries to take down all the buildings that just popped, the A20 returns with a second bomb load, and dive bombs and augers, destroying the second Osti.  Buildings all pop again.  M3 Driver is sitting around going .

Now, WHOSE BEHAVIOR WAS "SUICIDAL"??  Certainly not the Ostis.  They drove for perhaps 8-10 minutes to get to the town in the first place.  They are after a base.   They had every intention of landing after the capture.  They are displaying the teamwork and comraderie you would like to encourage.

The A20, on the other hand, was being a complete dweeb with total disregard of his virtual "life", displaying the very attitude you deplore and are trying to "correct" with this rule.

Yet, A20 gets his way.

Originally posted by hitech
And as to holes, quite frankly I realy havn't seen one posted in this entire thread.

HiTech

 

[martyb]

E25280:
In your scenerio, under what I've described above, the buildings would stay down, the damage model would stay unchanged.  As for the A20 pilot, he'd get minus perks becase he augered, even though he's about to re-up.  As for the first osty, I see what you're getting at.  Since suicide attacks are not realistic with GVs (and ship guns for that matter), I would have to say not to apply the negative perk formula to those type units.  That may be what HiTech is referring to; if not, I disagree with HiTech.

As for the A20 re-upping and killing the 2nd osty the same way (under my suggestion).....well, I'll have to say kudos to him for taking it BIG in the shorts twice just to prevent the capture of the field.  The loss of perks would hopefully generate the deterrent HiTech is looking for.  That's a good example of high risk, high reward.  That's why I think it should be a thought out formula instead of a straight negative.

Bottom line, the A20 would loose signifcant perks for augering after a kill, while the osties get the few perks they do even though they were killed (just as they currently would in the MA).  I feel by adjusting the perk system instead of the damage models, it's less information for the server to track (lag) and less re-programming (coding) for the software folks to generate.

[Flit]

Originally posted by hitech
At the con we were discussing changing building down times based on how long you lived after destroying a target.

After doing some detailed thinking about it, relized the down time is problematic when mutliple people have hit a targe. But was wondering what people thought of the following.

Based on how long you lived after hiting a target, currently im thinking around 2 minutes. If you die a portion of your damage is removed.

As an example 2 people drop bombs on a hangar. 1 does 2k damage, the last does 1k damage and destroys the hangar.

The 2nd player dies after 1 min. The system would remove 1min/2min i.e. 50% of the damgage aplied to the hangar. The hangar would then reserect with 2.5k damage left on it.


Thoughts?
HiTech

 Ok, after  watchin this thread, it seems as tho it's all about dieing.
 How about how you die ? (Sorry if I missed any discussion on this).
  How about you make it depending on if they hit the ground ?
  That's really the problem.
 If they get shot down, by whatever, no problem.
 If they die by hitting the ground without significant damage to thier aircraft, ord has no effect.

[cav58d]

Originally posted by hitech
Kev this is in no way intended to "FIX" dive bombing buffs, thats your pet peve,not mine.

What it is intended to change is the attitude ,if I put orindance on target I succeded even if I die, both in bombers,straffing, or jabo.

As to quick and dirty, Ive only been discussing and working on this issue for over a year. Infact your F6 thought process is the quick and dirty one.

And it in no way addresses the issue/behavior we are trying to change.

As to hardening targets, That would have absoulutly 0 imapct on the suicide behavior, It would just make people have to rinse and repeate more often.


HiTech

once again...What will become of the players with "the right attitude" who happen to die in the limbo window?  Do their efforts just get written off?

[KTM520guy]

Maybe instead of selecting to be scored as "fighter" or "attack" we could choose to be scored as "suicide dweeb" or "worthwhile player"  

[MOIL]

Originally posted by Iceman24
in all fairness, if you can't get rid of your ord and then live for another 30 seconds or a minute then you need to go find something else to do. HiTech's not trying to hurt any of the level bombers or anything like that, all he's trying to do is put in place some type of reward system for dropping ord. and actually surviving. Its not like he's even saying you have to make it home or live for another 10 minutes, it's a small time, anything under 2-3 minutes shouldn't be a problem a all... heck even if I'm in a C-hog it still takes a good minute or so to shoot down 3 B24's. It is just retarted to think that you cannot use all that E you have to simply extend away from the target for 30 seconds or 2 minutes, whatever the time is. The typicall suicide porker will come in around 10-15k dive straight down on the VH cause they have no clue how to line up correctly and release when they see the distance marker read about D800 or so then try and pull up... sometimes they do, sometimes they don't make it. If I up a heavy 38L, and the people that are manning the ack guns are all normal shots, no zazens around, then I can usually drop the VH with 2x1000lbers, and about 5-8rockets, then I can whipe out all the field ack with about 20 cannon rounds tops, it only take 1-2 20mm's to kill a field gun, then use my .50 cals and remaining rockets / 20mm's to destroy the troops and or fuel/ammo, I do it all the time just messing around trying to pad my attack ranks.... For level buffs, this will implement the same thing, even if your level at 15k and your planning on doing a regular F6 mode drop, now if you have a fighter on you, you have to decide whats important, your AC/crew or dropping your ord.... the more and more i think about it I really like this idea. Only problem I have with it, Murdr addressed and HT responded in a post and that was about the smoke. The main whine I keep hearing is about the time limit, and its just silly to even think that living for an extra 30 seconds or whatever will be that much harder, if it is then this new timer is most likely being implemented because of your suicide pork flying style.

Although a good write, this seems to again prove my point. Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure Iceman here is probably 10x's better in a fighter or attack A/C than myself, however it again shows how easily a field can be brought to it's knee's or rendered darn near useless.

I think this scenario would play out a little different if said individual or likewise attacker was met with

FIVE of these (40mm Bofors-Twin mount)


A couple of these (Bofors 40mm Single)


Ten of these (20mm Twin mount)


And some of these for good measure (Granted the VH is still up)

[MWL]

Greetings,

  To cut down on porker (especially the suicide porkers) improve auto AAA ability to hit.  Easier than messing with 'who did what and lived for how long and was shot down by what as he/she was doing this to that. . . . .'  my penny's worth.

Regards,

[ET]

at 360 mph, you would have to fly 12 miles with a 2 minute timer to have hit count. A 250 mph bomber would have to fly about 8 miles.
5 to 10 seconds should be enough to take care of suicide porker.

[jamesdeanoo7]

Lol this certainly caused alot of discussion but one thing you can throw out of the chat straight away is bomber perk points. ???? They mean absolutely nothing. Who wants to fly a jet bomber with a payload able to drop a dog kennel. Hit them where it hurts Lol anyone want my bomber perks  ????

[jamesdeanoo7]

But hey wait a minute......I  have got it........perk the heavy bombers.... that way who would ditch ??????Lol

[Karnak]

To really weed out the suiciders, wouldn't it need to track how the player died?  Otherwise it would be removing legitimate damage infliced by players who gave living their honest best and just lost.

That seems an unfair burden on players who are newer as AH has a steep learning curve as it is.


It seems that as described in the OP this would make the "horde" tactic even more desirable and prevalent as well, something seen, by and large, as undesirable.

[Simaril]

Originally posted by cav58d
once again...What will become of the players with "the right attitude" who happen to die in the limbo window?  Do their efforts just get written off?

Obviously, yes.

Which is why players -- regardless of their attitudes -- will change their tactics to find a method that works.

Same thing we do every day in the MA. We're a clever lot, we'll figure it out.

[Flayed1]

I can't decide if I like your Idea or not HiTech...    I can see some good things and bad things...    

  I would say that if it dosn't take to much time to program, try it for a tour and at the end of the tour put another post up like this one and get some feedback on how it worked out for people...
 
   On the MA message describe new rules and let people know it is not a permenent thing unless you get good responses in the forum at the end of the test....

  I think the only real way to know if an idea is good or not is try it and see.






    P.S.  Please put the HQ damage back the way it was..... It had it's problems but now HQ raids arn't fun any more and are almost nonexistant.