Author Topic: Defining bad game-play  (Read 25343 times)

Offline DREDger

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 766
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #870 on: May 11, 2009, 06:38:27 PM »
Only when it calls for it.

Well I wouldn't do it too much, some might consider it a sign of an overinflated sense of self worth.

Offline Scotch

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2419
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #871 on: May 11, 2009, 06:39:47 PM »
See Rule #4
« Last Edit: May 12, 2009, 03:12:10 PM by Skuzzy »
-AoM-

Offline grizz441

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7000
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #872 on: May 11, 2009, 07:32:36 PM »
 :lol

Offline DREDger

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 766
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #873 on: May 11, 2009, 07:33:48 PM »
You suck.

Yes I know, you've said so twice already.  Do you have anything else to offer or should we keep it to the parochial playground banter.

Interestingly you have heard of me, yet I can't say I've ever heard of you.  I am flattered.   :rock

Offline Kazaa

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8371
      • http://www.thefewsquadron.co.uk
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #874 on: May 11, 2009, 07:42:34 PM »
Can anyone fill me in... what's the latest grips ? :aok



"If you learn from defeat, you haven't really lost."

Offline StokesAk

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3665
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #875 on: May 11, 2009, 07:54:16 PM »
Somebody did something, Scotch spoke in 3rd person, he was ritaculed, he layed the 'Told' down, and now you are asking about what happened
Strokes

Offline fudgums

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3867
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #876 on: May 11, 2009, 08:15:06 PM »
Strokes got grounded  ;)
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27

Offline TonyJoey

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1953
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #877 on: May 11, 2009, 08:26:53 PM »


Offline RumbleB

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2799
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #878 on: May 11, 2009, 08:31:16 PM »
Woah what have i BEEN MISSING?!!??! 59 PAGE?!
What's going on here.. give me a summary. Tonyjoey you troublemaker i know its you.. or kazaa.. or strokes, or ..

lol has anyone noticed that page in TJ's sig? it has a death counter. totally tubular hell christians are some morbid fujkkers.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2009, 08:32:48 PM by RumbleB »

Offline falcon23

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 882
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #879 on: May 11, 2009, 08:43:04 PM »
Woah what have i BEEN MISSING?!!??! 59 PAGE?!
What's going on here.. give me a summary. Tonyjoey you troublemaker i know its you.. or kazaa.. or strokes, or ..

lol has anyone noticed that page in TJ's sig? it has a death counter. totally tubular hell christians are some morbid fujkkers.


 :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

Offline RumbleB

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2799
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #880 on: May 11, 2009, 10:45:10 PM »
"The vast majority of those people are entering Hell. "

 :rofl

Offline Scotch

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2419
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #881 on: May 11, 2009, 11:22:13 PM »
Yes I know, you've said so twice already.  Do you have anything else to offer or should we keep it to the parochial playground banter.

Interestingly you have heard of me, yet I can't say I've ever heard of you.  I am flattered.   :rock

Blah blah blah, you suck.
-AoM-

Offline 1Boner

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2285
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #882 on: May 12, 2009, 06:37:24 AM »
Let me explain to you a scenario how a NOE is detectable and defendable 1Boner.

A tower general studies the map and suspiciously notices a base is flashing with no dar bar.  He realizes it is an NOE raid and yells out on country channel NOE RAID11!! A57 need Fighters!  Now, 10-15 pilots point their planes 90 degrees towards the ground and auger their mission just to up at A57 within the window of opportunity to stop the raid.  Raid stopped. 

So in order to effectively stop the raid you need A) A player not playing the game studying the map (paying $15 to inspect the map)...  :huh and B) 10-15 Pilots willing to just auger their planes for the chance of stopping this NOE raid...  :huh

You think this is reasonable strategy to defend against the NOE attack?


You don't have to expain it to me, I play this game too.

And if you truley believe the quote above, I have a question for you.

What game are YOU playing??
"Life is just as deadly as it looks"  Richard Thompson

"So umm.... just to make sure I have this right.  What you are asking is for the bombers carrying bombs, to stop dropping bombs on the bombs, so the bombers can carry bombs to bomb things with?"  AKP

Offline WMLute

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4512
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #883 on: May 12, 2009, 07:09:20 AM »

You don't have to expain it to me, I play this game too.

And if you truley believe the quote above, I have a question for you.

What game are YOU playing??


Griz described it perfectly.

The only way to defend against a NOE raid is to have people either sitting in the tower available or players willing to just auger and go help break it up.  I personally will pretty much never auger to defend vs. a mission.  (I might ditch though)  I also don't think many players will just nose it into the ground to up and defend vs. the NOE mission.  Not many players are willing to just sit in the tower and wait for a NOE mission to smash.  (I know I would get bored after 5min)


The NOE mission people COUNT on the above because, as it has been proven over and over and over and over, if the base gets defended, they probably won't capture it.  That is why to also go out of their way to pick fields that are away from the action and have a higher probability of getting snuck.

What game are YOU playing?



What is even more pathetic is when they send 2-3 bomber fomations ahead of time and kill the hangers right before the NOE mission arrives.    It is bad enough they are in a hoard attacking a field with little to no defenders, but they kill all the hangers because they are afraid it WILL get defended and they know if that happens, they are going to probably fail.

Missions like that tell me one of two things.

1) the mission planner is afraid of how good the enemy is so they go to great lengths to remove them from the picture.

2) the mission planner is afraid of how bad the friendlies are in the mission so they go to great lengths to remove any bad guys from the picture.

It's not "tactics" it's "fear".
 
"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity."
— George Patton

Absurdum est ut alios regat, qui seipsum regere nescit

Offline DREDger

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 766
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #884 on: May 12, 2009, 08:46:25 AM »
Griz described it perfectly.

The only way to defend against a NOE raid is to have people either sitting in the tower available or players willing to just auger and go help break it up.  I personally will pretty much never auger to defend vs. a mission.  (I might ditch though)  I also don't think many players will just nose it into the ground to up and defend vs. the NOE mission.  Not many players are willing to just sit in the tower and wait for a NOE mission to smash.  (I know I would get bored after 5min)


The NOE mission people COUNT on the above because, as it has been proven over and over and over and over, if the base gets defended, they probably won't capture it.  That is why to also go out of their way to pick fields that are away from the action and have a higher probability of getting snuck.

What game are YOU playing?



What is even more pathetic is when they send 2-3 bomber fomations ahead of time and kill the hangers right before the NOE mission arrives.    It is bad enough they are in a hoard attacking a field with little to no defenders, but they kill all the hangers because they are afraid it WILL get defended and they know if that happens, they are going to probably fail.

Missions like that tell me one of two things.

1) the mission planner is afraid of how good the enemy is so they go to great lengths to remove them from the picture.

2) the mission planner is afraid of how bad the friendlies are in the mission so they go to great lengths to remove any bad guys from the picture.

It's not "tactics" it's "fear".
 

Frankly I think you are oversimplifying.  As I've said before NOE missions are busted all the time and easily.  There is about a 5 minute length of time before an NOE can reach target.  During that time all it takes is one person on country to send out the warning.

At any one time there is about 25% of the force in tower I've noticed.  All it takes is one of them to jump out and grab some alt, then the NOE is going to be helpless.

As far as sending bombers first to knock out the hangers, sound fair to me, though I've rarely seen it in conjunction with an NOE.  First off it will take about four sets of bombers to get all 6 hangers on the first pass.  If the bombers go NOE, they will have to pop before reaching the base to get alt, otherwise their own bombs will blow them up.  Likely as not the ack will kill them before the second hanger, because they will be so low.

The sooner they pop, the longer the time you give to the enemy.  Doesn't make sense to do it that way, NOE are won or lost on surprise, not killing the hangers.  I guess the last thing is to add four pilots as bombers takes away from the town killer numbers.  Usually I can barely muster enough to kill the town, much less send half them on a hanger banger errand.

As far as 'fear' is concerned, lets keep in mind it is just a game, who is really 'fearful' of anything about it.

Anyway I'm not entirely sure what your point is.  Are you saying the NOE missions should not be allowed, or that perhaps dar should register no matter what the altitude? 

Or perhaps bases shouldn't be capturable?