Bring back linked base capture

[Anaxogoras]

Last night in the late war arenas I got to watch the knights switch from failed attack to failed attack in 20 minute increments as I chased them around the map.  They would attempt to take a base, fail to succeed on the first attempt, and then put up a full sector of dar bar 3-4 sectors away.  The defenders would meet them, the initial attack would fail, and they'd move on again.  This was the only "fight" to be had if you were rook in blue last night.

I did a search and found this thread: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,193413.165.html

The replies are funny, ranging from glowing approval, to tentative support with changes, to ones like this:

HT PLEASE ! JUST PUT A GUN TO MY HEAD AND GET IT OVER WITH!!!!!!!!!

A lot of the most vocal nay-sayers aren't here anymore, even though they won out and linked-base capture was put back on the shelf.  Maybe capture the flag played with airplanes isn't so exciting after the 1000th undefended base sneak?

It seems like the original implementation was slightly flawed:

• Only 1 or 2 bases could be captured on each front, for a total of 6-12 on the whole map.
• CV's could not participate in the action until linked-capture meandered to the coasts.

These defects would be easy to fix, no?  Perhaps if 3-4 bases were in play on each front, for a total of 18-24 bases on a large map, it would be a good compromise.  Add in one base on the coast for a cv strike and all of the important objections have been met and remedied.

[Lusche]

A lot of the most vocal nay-sayers aren't here anymore

I am still here.

[Anaxogoras]

I am still here.

You weren't one of the most vocal nay-sayers.

Another thought that just occurred to me: wouldn't it be great if the number of bases could change with the number of players in the arena?

[Lusche]

You weren't one of the most vocal nay-sayers.

Really? I thought I had been, no kidding. I definitely was very much against it (And I am still)

Another thought that just occurred to me: wouldn't it be great if the number of bases could change with the number of players in the arena?

Hmm.. how should that work? Bases disappearing from map when numbers go down?

[Anaxogoras]

No, just the number that are open to capture changes with the number of players logged on.

Really? I thought I had been, no kidding. I definitely was very much against it (And I am still)

Compared to this guy?

HT PLEASE ! JUST PUT A GUN TO MY HEAD AND GET IT OVER WITH!!!!!!!!!

[BaldEagl]

I'm still here too.  That idea almost got me to drop my account.  If it ever came back I'd be gone for good.

[Saxman]

The only way it would work was if they opened ALL front-line (including coastal) bases to capture. Or maybe front line bases and the next set of bases further in. If you capture a base ALL adjacent bases become capturable. So linked but without being linked.

[Lusche]

Maybe I just wasn't that vocal...

[Anaxogoras]

I'm still here too.  That idea almost got me to drop my account.  If it ever came back I'd be gone for good.

Funny, I felt that way last night with the way things are now.  But enough with the knee-jerk reactions.  There needs to some kind of compromise that most people would tolerate.

As it is now, I post some thoughts for compromise, and the response is that the status quo must remain.

[BnZs]

Anax, it is possible to have TOO much of a good thing.

Force everyone in the MAs to fight at one place and it taxes systems and at some point, having too many in one piece of sky really isn't any fun either.

[Anaxogoras]

BnZs, the way things are now, I can log into an arena with 150 people, and not find a sector with more than one notch of enemy dar-bar.

[RipChord929]

Not sure about "linked base capture" in so you
would force things into a mandatory order..
Just seems too canned, or artificial to me..

But I would like to see some kind of "obstacles" that
would need to be surmounted on the WAY to an
enemy base...

RC

[CAVPFCDD]

i think some of the maps are just wayyyyy too big, finding a con is like finding a needle in a hay stack, which as you said gives way to this strategy of undefended base NOEs.

As for these knight missions you speak of, i was only on one and it was a great sucess, we took a97 and v98 from the rooks, prob because we were a massive horde, but oh well, knights are constantly on the losing side of things so i feel no remorse    ......but i dont recall seeing any other missions up, maybe that was earlier in the night.



P.S. BnZs, love the dale gribble quote on your signature, king of the hill is the funniest show ever

[Lusche]

BnZs, the way things are now, I can log into an arena with 150 people, and not find a sector with more than one notch of enemy dar-bar.

We must be playing different games. Sure, on non-peak times action is harder to find, but still I'm able to find things to shoot down in LWMA. The rare time I'm not, I go bomb some stuff. Occasionally someone's upping to get a cheap kill on that milker



But the capture order was the most horrible thing I ever experienced in AH, for several reasons. The would have to be much changed (maps, strat system) before such alimitation would still alow for flexible, diverse and sometimes surpising gameplay.

[SEraider]

Respectfully to the author, I like it the way it is.