What's more important to the AvA

[ROC]

I have a question for the AvA crowd.

On the subject of base capture, is it the act of taking territory that isn't supported, or is it the Way the territory usually get's taken, by a swarm of land grabbing showing up while no ones looking that seems to be the problem.

Would taking territory or meeting objectives that progressively opened up new planes or pushed planes back from the front lines, depending on the territory that was taken, be of interest if the settings were such that it had to be a real effort to take the territory?  Not simply dropping some buildings and a load of troops, but to have the rebuild rate so that you had to run an aggressive and coordinated mission to take out the objects and drop Several sets of troops, within a shortened window of time.  

If that actually provided a strategic element that could be expanded on, instead of simply using a large map for a large furball in the middle, would that be something to consider?

[VWE]

In the past for me its always been about the aircraft matchups weather historical or not. I've never gotten into the 'the is how it was in this year at this time' thingy.

Its a limited plane set and its always about the air to air fights.

Personally I see no need or use for GV's in the areana other than to just piss people off, you want to make this different than the other areanas I'd say get rid of the GV's, you can still capture bases but you'll have to do it as part of Aces High not the Aces Low crowd. Some of the maps like bOb are really fun when you can capture a base on England or France and up without having to fly 10 minutes across the channel.

I'd like to see some special 1 on 1 matchups vs. our current we gotta have x number of planes to choose. I'm not sure we'll ever see a balanced plane set, I'd say it'll always be acklies heavy biased.

Also is there any way to limit 1 type or all types percentage wise based on numbers in the areana? Say we have 6 people flying acklies and our current setup has the uber woobiecan IIc, is it possible to limit the woobiecan to say only 20% available at any one time so that I'm not fighting a whole squadron of woobiecans? I mean some of these setups are redickerous in that most of the plane set isn't even touched other than a couple in the line up.

[1cajun]

The way you describe it is really good ROC.  Land aquisition actually opening up another plane or pushing certain planes back from the front lines is good.  Also, making it more difficult to take a base where it would actually take coordination and well planned/supported attacks.

This all sounds great.  I think the limited plane sets would keep it from turning into the MA.  There could still be good fights along with some strategy thrown in without a mad crowd furballing in 100 different kinds of planes.

I think that there is a large group who would welcome additions like these and who still would want to keep the fights on a higher level then the constant HO's and vulching common in the MA.

[dedalos]

Originally posted by 1cajun


 There could still be good fights along with some strategy thrown in without a mad crowd furballing in 100 different kinds of planes.

 

Will see, but I don't think so.  The people doing the strategy thingie will be focusing on that.  You cannot get them to fight because that is not part of strategy.  You cannot be trying to take a base for example and at the same time looking for a fight.  It gets in the way and messes up the timing of things.  So, IMO, strategic play eliminates fighting because the right way to do it is to come in high, blow something up and run, and then cap the field which means vulchig.
 
This is not meant as an insult.  I am just saying that if your goal is to capture something as a team, the right way to do it is to avoid all possibilities of conflict including drop eggs and auger to save time.

[sparow]

Originally posted by ROC
Would taking territory or meeting objectives that progressively opened up new planes or pushed planes back from the front lines, depending on the territory that was taken, be of interest if the settings were such that it had to be a real effort to take the territory?  

Hi ROC!

My first instinct was to say a BIG YES to this concept, then number problem stroke me...

Let's say that for six months until one year, we would forget about base capture or strategical issues. That we would increase our player base, we would work on the consolidation of a hard-core enlarged group of AvA fans. Contrary to some opinions, I am all for letting the GV's in AvA. Make them use their tracks, sweat for a kill, not put them away. The same for the bomber chaps, let them fight their way to some strats.

VWE mentioned something very similar to a mix between perk and ENY sistems implemented...That might be interestint to test. As you know very well, I am mostly a ackllied-untalented-spittard and I must admit that woobiecanes have a bit too powerful punch, very much like the FM2's that transvestite like Brewster Buffalos...

I am aware of the gaps in the Japanese, Italian and Russian planesets. There's nothing we can do about it. All that can be done is avoid matchups that include the absents.

So, I think that we should drop the base capture all together for a while. Concentrate on the matchups, follow historical chronology as close as possible and have fun!

And, Fork, you're right: increase advertising of AvA is of the utmost importance. But, like everyone in advertising world knows, we must create expectations and we must fullfill them entirely or even go beyond their expectations. And that, we will only obtain through two simple things:

One: what we say AvA is, it is and it's even more...More demanding, more balanced, more technical, more relaxed, more historically correct, more guts, more hands, more brains. More pilot, less machine.

Second: AvA must be radically different of ANY of the MAs, as different as water and wine. Diferentiation is the key note for AvA growth and development. AvA will be the kindergarten of all the SEA future pilots and the rest home of all veterans looking for a good fight in a prop plane.

Cheers,

[storch]

Originally posted by dedalos
Will see, but I don't think so.  The people doing the strategy thingie will be focusing on that.  You cannot get them to fight because that is not part of strategy.  You cannot be trying to take a base for example and at the same time looking for a fight.  It gets in the way and messes up the timing of things.  So, IMO, strategic play eliminates fighting because the right way to do it is to come in high, blow something up and run, and then cap the field which means vulchig.
 
This is not meant as an insult.  I am just saying that if your goal is to capture something as a team, the right way to do it is to avoid all possibilities of conflict including drop eggs and auger to save time.

we have a winner

[E25280]

Originally posted by dedalos
I am just saying that if your goal is to capture something as a team, the right way to do it is to avoid all possibilities of conflict including drop eggs and auger to save time.

With respect, you are equating a capture with MA "milkrunning."  Not every MA base capture is a milkrun, and in the AvA I don't think it would have to be either.

If there is a structure (something like ROC suggests) that lets both sides know what the objective is, then the fight is guaranteed.  The side that wants it will have to beat down the defenders -- the defenders will be struggling to keep it from happening.

[E25280]

Originally posted by sparow
So, I think that we should drop the base capture all together for a while. Concentrate on the matchups, follow historical chronology as close as possible and have fun!

This is basically what we have now.  So you are saying, change nothing.

[sparow]

Originally posted by E25280
This is basically what we have now.  So you are saying, change nothing.

Sorry mate, but I mean abandon entirely the base capture concept. And, as stated above, make it harder in some ways, change other things a bit.

It's not a revolution, it's more like stretching this concept further in the direction of air-to-air combat, focusing it clearly in this area, while still allowing bomber pilots and GV'ers to find something in it for them.

Cheers,

[kamilyun]

Originally posted by ROC
I have a question for the AvA crowd.

On the subject of base capture, is it the act of taking territory that isn't supported, or is it the Way the territory usually get's taken, by a swarm of land grabbing showing up while no ones looking that seems to be the problem.

Would taking territory or meeting objectives that progressively opened up new planes or pushed planes back from the front lines, depending on the territory that was taken, be of interest if the settings were such that it had to be a real effort to take the territory?  Not simply dropping some buildings and a load of troops, but to have the rebuild rate so that you had to run an aggressive and coordinated mission to take out the objects and drop Several sets of troops, within a shortened window of time.  

If that actually provided a strategic element that could be expanded on, instead of simply using a large map for a large furball in the middle, would that be something to consider?

This is a very interesting idea, if the playing could be tweaked to offer strategically important targets, it would be great.  

However, that must be balanced by some severe penalties for hording and gangbanging.

If a large squad came in and joined a single side with the aim of running an "aggressive and coordinated" mission to knock down HQ, that would be counterproductive to the goal of bringing in more players.  With 20 vs 5 odds and the team of 5 without any radar, they would probably just log.

And dedalos makes an excellent point....

[kamilyun]

What I'd like to see are smaller maps, or disabled fields beyond a certain "active" front.

[Trukk]

(A)  It'd be so great to have an arena where the focus was on flying a realistic mission, like the ones you read about.

[XAKL]

I'm in disagreement with most of you.  I'm tired of the scenario's (Finland, Pacific, BoB, etc....)  I've brought this up before, so I'll bring it up again.  I envision Axis Vs Allies as complete usage of all the planes, vehicles, and Fleet.   For example, British and Americans = Rooks, Germans, Japan=Knits, and the Russians and Italians=bish.   The Russians and Italians both switched alliances during the war, so in this set up they can either play with the allies or against them.

We can even use one of the MA maps.  Large Fields can hold all airplanes and vehicles, Medium Fields can hold Medium bombers and all airplanes, Small AirField- single engined bombers, and only early and mid-war airplanes, VH- no bombers and early fighters only.

I still need to work on it more, but that's the gist of the idea.  I'd like to participate in design of it, but I'm not advanced in computer graphics.

[KONG1]

Originally posted by Trukk
(A)  It'd be so great to have an arena where the focus was on flying a realistic mission, like the ones you read about.

Special events and (cough cough) CT cover that like an open format disorganized free-for-all arena never could.

[Trukk]

Yeah, except I'm not in the right timezone for the first (and in the course of a month only adds up to a few hours playing time) and the second is still vapourware.