Author Topic: Combat Theater Feedback (Read 829 times)

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #30 on:** August 10, 2001, 11:00:00 AM »

Quote

HTC is trying to get a situation similar to what fighter vs. fighter combat was like. right now on this map, the combat is similar to the rodeos and circus where like (with a lot less aircraft obviously). where we meet each other at between 15-25k, and the fight is on from there.

The fighter vs fighter combat is identical to the MA. How can you possible think it is any different? Its just that now that's all there really is to do. How does this make anything more historical?

The ONLY historical aspect is that now you have allied planes on one side and axis on the other. That is it.

There is still endless respawning.
There is still a fight/die-fight/die mentallity.
There is virtually no authentic wingman type behavior.
Most are entering a furball looking for the right opportunity.

I have RTB'd about 2 times since I've been playing there. I believe that to be about the norm from what I've seen.

I only saw one fight last night that went over 20k. Most were below 5. Of course, there was an allied CV just off the coast that stayed there for some time because a) The allieds didn't want to fly as far to fight and b) the axis didn't want to fly as far to fight.

There is no real risk associated with loosing the CV. There is no real risk associated with jumping into a furball. Basically, there is nothing even remotely promoting any type of historical behavior.

The arena can only provide the tools... the players have to do the rest. Right now, the players are saying they want an instant fun fight. I'm questioning why an HA is needed to accomplish this.

AKDejaVu

jihad · « **Reply #31 on:** August 10, 2001, 11:18:00 AM »

I'm questioning why an HA is needed to accomplish this.

You answered your own question a few lines up:

you have allied planes on one side and axis on the other.

Not to mention no in-flight dot radar and historical terrains and short icons.

Why are you always a wet blanket when HTC responds to players desires and it doesn't fit your idea of fun?

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #32 on:** August 10, 2001, 11:53:00 AM »

BD, Are you trying to insinuate my stash somehow makes me want to furball mindlessly in an anti-grav arena?

Hardly... it makes me want to crash into the ground... A LOT!

-SW

Steven · « **Reply #33 on:** August 10, 2001, 11:55:00 AM »

Deja,

"I'm questioning why an HA is needed to accomplish this."

You don't have to play the CT and you don't have to pee in my cheerios. I like the CT (HA) due to one thing...historical matchups of aircraft. That's it. Actually, the name "Combat Theater" may be appropriate because it'll concentrate on just that...a particular theater of operations and the correct time-frame for those aircraft. If we ever get a SouthPacific Theater, you will NOT see LW aircraft. I find this an attractive idea.

I am a firm believer this will really pay dividends when we get some early war planes. I think it's a great breath of fresh air to have the plane set restricted to a historical period of time or battle/s.

"There is still endless respawning.
There is still a fight/die-fight/die mentallity.
There is virtually no authentic wingman type behavior.
Most are entering a furball looking for the right opportunity"

Everyone defines the arena differently, but to me "historical" does not mean "authentic" in terms of radar, distance flown, respawning, wingman behavior and furballing. Plain and simple, I feel this arena to be a place where aircraft can be pitted against similar types and maybe give the feel of a particular period of time or battle. I can't wait for a CT with F4F, P40, A6M2, Dauntless and similar without having to fight LW aircraft or swarms of LA7s or even the potential of meeting up with early jets. That just bursts my bubble as to what I'm looking for.

I do hope the CT survives and matures. You have a choice as do I. I'll attend both arenas but I favor the potential CT has to offer.

-Puke 332nd Flying Mongrels

woops, CT = Combat Theater.
CA = Combat Arena which is what I think they call it.

[ 08-10-2001: Message edited by: Steven ]

pugg666 · « **Reply #34 on:** August 10, 2001, 12:02:00 PM »

Quote

The fighter vs fighter combat is identical to the MA. How can you possible think it is any different? Its just that now that's all there really is to do. How does this make anything more historical?

that's what i meant by the circus and rodeo comment, the only really strategic purpose of those was to draw the LW out to fight.
in the MA people use the pretense of a field capture just to set up a vulch fest( i know that not everyone does this )..here there is no oportunity for that.
and yes the fights actually do start around 15-25k here, but i do agree that most of them end on the deck. But that is quite accurate as well, a lot of the accounts i've read have ended with a fight to the deck.

overall i agree that it is close to the MA, but there are enough differences to make it enjoyable for me.

[edit]
heh quoting myself.......

Quote

in the MA people use the pretense of a field capture just to set up a vulch fest( i know that not everyone does this )..here there is no oportunity for that.

what this results in is 2 sides meeting each other with whatever advantage they can get. be it numbers, altitude, coordination etc... it's not a matter of waiting for someone to spawn and then just picking them off. you have to rely on skill and SA.

i had my most enjoyable fight since i started flying AH in the CT against zigrat( err..zighawk, sorry

) and hblair on the first night...<S> that was a blast even though ya got me in the end HB ( you're both lucky i couldn't shoot straight that night

)

anyways, deja, if you don't like it or you think it's just like the MA you don't have to fly in it. it's all for fun no matter what arena your flying in

[ 08-10-2001: Message edited by: pugg666 ]

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #35 on:** August 10, 2001, 12:10:00 PM »

Quote

Why are you always a wet blanket when HTC responds to players desires and it doesn't fit your idea of fun?

I'm sorry.. but you are totally out of line with this.

I'm not responding to anything HTC has done. I am responding to how the players are handling it.

HTC has provided an arena for historical matchups. It is becoming a single furball arena. How am I saying this is HTC's fault?

What I am also commenting on is how so many say they want something, and end up showing their true worth when it is provided.

I am flying in the CT. I am not constantly squeaking about it in there. I will support more historical actions in that arena.

I have made no comment on the icon settings because I have no oppinion on it. The change in dot dar is irrelevant because everything is happening over the channel out of dot-dar range anyways. I've always supported the NOE no-bar-dar idea... so I'm pleased with that.

AKDejaVu

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #36 on:** August 10, 2001, 12:18:00 PM »

Quote

that's what i meant by the circus and rodeo comment, the only really strategic purpose of those was to draw the LW out to fight.

The only real purpose of those was to draw the LW away from the bombers. Fighters aren't developed to fight fighters. They are developed to protect bombers or kill them. They are developed to protect bomber killers or kill them. That is it.

It is pointless to endlessly send fighters up simply to fight fighters. That is not historical. They may have tried to bait them.. but there was always a reason it was being done. A strategic reason... something this arena is missing.

AKDejaVu

Nifty · « **Reply #37 on:** August 10, 2001, 12:37:00 PM »

Deja, so last night wasn't good for you either?

the new arena is a blast when you find a nice 2v2 or similar out over the North Sea. The insane furball wasn't all that fun tho. Maybe if the numbers were closer to even, but as it was... I just don't know how to avoid five 109s in a Seafire.

pugg666 · « **Reply #38 on:** August 10, 2001, 12:37:00 PM »

Quote

The only real purpose of those was to draw the LW away from the bombers. Fighters aren't developed to fight fighters. They are developed to protect bombers or kill them. They are developed to protect bomber killers or kill them. That is it.

ok.....

the only real purpose of those was to draw the lw into fighter vs. fighter combat. how can you possibly think differently?
i don't see a logical reason why the RAF would send up to 12 squadrons of fighters to protect, what, 6-12 light/medium bombers. the bombers where the bait on the hook. regardless of wether or not is was very successfull, the reason for the rubarbs, rodeos, and circus' was to draw the LW day fighters out. honestly i don't think the RAF was stupid enough to believe that such tiny bomber force would have ANY effect.

in other words it is accurate in the it is drawing out the LW pilots here. and yes it is completely pointless because of respawn, well except for the fun factor of course

[edit]

Quote

Fighters aren't developed to fight fighters

explain the spitfire then?

it is not an escort due to combat radius

it is not a bomber killer due to it's fragility, compared to say an a series 190 (which itself was not designed as a bomber hunter)

it's a point defense fighter that was pressed into service as both an escort and bomber hunter due to lack of anything better at the time...

to protect bomber killers, and kill them....yes i agree with that.

but most fighters in wwII were developed for point defense/air superiority

[ 08-10-2001: Message edited by: pugg666 ]

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #39 on:** August 10, 2001, 12:48:00 PM »

Its well known the Rodeos and such other British tactics were primarily intend to force battle on the LW day-figters in the west.

Half a dozen Blenheims dont do anything in RL.

Some of us forget RL didnt have AH GPS/Laser bombing accuracy.

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #40 on:** August 10, 2001, 01:04:00 PM »

Some questions you need to ask yourself:

Why was the first fighter developed?

What is the strategic value of shooting down a fighter?

Why would it be necessary to develop a fighter capable of killing another fighter?

What strategic value, by itself, does a fighter possess?

There is nothing strategic about a fighter. The spit was developed to prevent bombers from hitting England, and to prevent LW escorts from stopping them.

If Germany did not intend on dropping any bombs on England... would fighters have played any role in anything?

What is the point of killing LW fighters? So they can't kill allied fighters? Couldn't you accomplish the same thing simply by not taking allied fighters up?

Take off the blinders. Fighters are tactical, not strategic. They are designed to handle an aspect of things, not fight the war. Their existance is a response to a bigger threat.

AKDejaVu

Karnak · « **Reply #41 on:** August 10, 2001, 01:19:00 PM »

The purpose of killimg the German fighters was to weaken the German air defenses so that the bomber fleets would face less oposition.

Baddawg · « **Reply #42 on:** August 10, 2001, 01:52:00 PM »

The fighters role is to achieve air superiority. Either in defensive or in offensive.
This in turn allows bombers and jabos untethered freedom to attack strategic targets such as oil refineries,factories and transportation routes such as saturating rail yards,to defey the enemy supplys to the front.

In 1943 US Airmen who fought over Europe called
it the "Big League" bewcause of the ferocity of flak and strong Luftwaffe presence. The daylight bombing did not really start to take serious strategic effect until air superiority was achieved . Then total systematic destruction of German resourses became more efficient and less haphazard then some of the earlier strikes that were decimated and harrassed by the luftwaffe.

Rodeos were used to help break the luftwaffes back. Though the effect they had on acheiveing air superiority is minimal comparative to the destruction of air fields and bombing of factories.

Fighters were used both in strategic and tactical applications.
But it is a double edged sword and one edge is sharper then the other.

funkedup · « **Reply #43 on:** August 10, 2001, 03:10:00 PM »

FWIW Frank Gabreski told some of us Northolt guys once that the Spitfire was a "fighter fighter". He flew Spit 9's with 315 Sqn.

funkedup · « **Reply #44 on:** August 10, 2001, 03:12:00 PM »

Back on topic:

Quote

1. Can't form or join a squad.

2. Acks and ships rebuild almost instantly.

3. Map is a bit too large for the taste of some players. If structures would stay down and we could get LVT's off the task forces this wouldn't be a problem, because Allies could take some fields in Norway.

4. No "dot radar" in the planes is great, but it would be nice to have "dot radar" in the tower.

1 and 2 are fixed. Not sure about 3 (haven't tried field capture yet). Looks like 4 is a limitation of the software.

The only new whine I have is the 5" flak which I whined about in another thread.

I'm definitely enjoying the combat in there.

[ 08-10-2001: Message edited by: funkedup ]