Update to Strategic System?

[Karnak]

A fourth addition would be Fighter, Bomber and Vehicle factories.  These would be located near the main HQ and would be rather larger and tough to knock out, maybe 1-2k per building.  That means you really won't be able to do much damage alone.  You will need the help of others to knock out one of these factories.  As each factory takes damage, the perk price starts to go up.  Once the factory is at 50%, you can no longer use perk rides.  When the factory is completely destroyed (0%), you will be limited to Mid-War era aircraft.  For the case of the Vehicle Factory, you just lose the ability to use the Tiger, Sherman and the T-34/85 at 50% and below.  These factories will be down for 1 hour and are not resupplyable.  But, since they will be rather large complexes, you won't have to worry about a single player ruining your day.   You could make the size of the complex around 25% - 50% of what the Capital City is now.

This will not happen as it specifically counters the ENY balancing system now in the game.  HTC does not want the outnumbered side to also be fighting from a technological disadvantage, and that is the primary result this suggestion would have.  In short, it would encourage ganging against the weakest side, something that is very undesirable from a gameplay standpoint.

[Dadsguns]

Now we really need a B29 to bomb all this stuff.........   


 

[Volron]

I re-posted my 5th change/addition, and separated them for better clarity.  I do not know why I didn't separate it in the first place.  bah  Sorry about that.

A fifth addition is a series of changes.  The current City setup is a very large city with the standard factories inside the city.  This should be changed to where this city is in the HQ zone at all times, but the other zones would have what we use to have for city and factories.  This would eliminate the need to code a city "retreating", then later returning, when it's zone field is taken/recaptured.  The HQ zone would have the Capital City and 2 rail yards, while the sub zone would have the old set up for it with the addition of 2 rail yards.

Another change would be, once a HQ has been knocked out, it will stay down for 1-2 hrs and is not resupplyable.  But, there will be 2 HQ facilities, the main one we have now and a sub on inside the Capital City.  This should put a little more worth into the HQ.

For some maps, you can swap out the River Barge for 2-4 Freighters with 1 or 2 DD escorts and for all maps, slow down the truck convoys and trains a tad.  (edited/added)Has anyone noticed when you take out the locomotive of a train, the rail cars just keep on going?  It's the same with taking out the tug on the river barge convoy.  That is something I spaced when putting the idea in about the Trains, Trucks and River Barges/Freighters.  Some maps would still use the river barge as a means to get supplies to island bases, seeing as they are so small.  The point is, an update to that would be nice as well.  You take out the locomotive/river barge tug, the rail cars and barges would stop, sitting there until respawn.  Which means, it would deny the enemy those supplies.  The freighters would have some ack for themselves, 1 or 2 low level ack, maybe 1 2x .50 cal gun and a single 20mil gun?  Of course the DD's will have their full compliment of ack, including puffy.

Flak over targets seems to be a tad light, especially over the Capital.  For a target like that, one would expect heavy flak considering the value of target.  The following could have light ack, Ports, dar factory, troop training. Medium ack would be in ord and AAA factory, the smaller zone city, rail yards and the main HQ.  Heavy ack would be in the refinery, Capital and Fighter, Bomber and Vehicle factories.  When I mentioned the factories individually, it was intended that these factories were in a sub zone and not in the Capital.  The Capital would put up heavy ack on it's own, with the refinery putting up a light ack in added defense.  The sub HQ would also put up light ack as well.  The other factories inside the capital would rely on the Capital's anti-air battery's.

Motherland
The dar bar pops up when I take off from deep inside friendly territory and it is quite annoying. lol  If I'm over enemy territory, near targets/flak battery's, I can understand a dar bar being up.  But when out in the middle of the ocean and/or over friendly territory that isn't close to enemy territory?  As for the City, an alternative to this could be, the city would be in a single location and just add rail yards through out the country.  The city would be far enough in, that you wouldn't see everything around it get captured, but not so far back that you would be doing an HQ raid to get to it, especially on the big maps.  One possibility of making the targets more important would be to increase the down time.  Maybe tack on another 1hr to the strategic targets.

Though I am kind of puzzled about what the main page says about strategic targets...http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/map.html#targets  According to this, you can resupply strategic targets now.  I hope I am misreading/misunderstanding this.   When it came to the strategic targets section prior to the update, it had a No.  Now there is a Yes...  Someone clarify please.  I have only been able to play for one day since the new update, not enough time to find stuff out.  I'm still waiting on getting my main account activated.  More stuff hits the fan......I need a new fan.     Fiddlesticks....

Karnak
You make a very valid point.  So maybe it wouldn't be applied to MA, but what about FSO?  Example:  In Frame 1, the Allies hit the Axis fighter factories.  In Frame 2, there would be less aircraft available due to the factories being hit in Frame 1.  I know they put a limitation on the number of aircraft used in each frame, but this could add a little more to it.  Situation 1: Say in Frame 1, you have 50 109's available at the start (that is the factory output per frame), you lose 20 and the factories were not hit, you would have 80 available in Frame 2, because the factories are operating at 100%.  Situation 2: In Frame 1, the Allies knock out half of the factory and the Axis lose 20 109s.  In Frame 2, you would only have 55 109's available, since the factories were only operating at 50%.  Maybe something like that could work.  There is also the Axis vs Allies arena.  It might be applied there as well. Maybe it could cause the perk price to rise?  From what I've gathered, people tend to make sure it's fairly even in numbers, so it may work there.

Karnak.....Karnak.....  That name seems very familiar.  lol

For the supply chain (using the alternate setup mentioned to Motherland), the city would send trains to the rail yards, which in turn would dispatch trucks to the bases.  The exception would be that it would send trains to the fleet ports, which would transfer the supplies to the river barges and/or freighters. (depending on the size of map and/or how bases are set on the map)  These would then head to a port city on the islands.  From there, trucks would resupply the bases on that island.

Turns out the basic details for supplies, was rather short.

[MadHatter]

Now we really need a B29 to bomb all this stuff.........   


 

I agree  hope you got room in that foxhole Dadsguns

[Volron]

If any of these ideas were to actually draw attention from the HTC staff, how would we know they decided, "You know, this and this, would make a nice addition."?  Would they come here and tell us something, or would it just show up as "the next update" type of thing on the main site?

People seem REAL desperate for the B-29.  I would like to see it too, along with the He-111, Ju-52, Do-17z, G4M Betty, SB2C Helldiver, TBD Devastator, G3M Nell, PBY Catalina,  H6K Mavis, H8K Emily....The list wouldn't end anytime soon.

[Ghosth]

Some ideas have been commented on by staff, others have just materialized in game down the road.

Like you I'd love to see a new plane every week for a year.
But it takes a lot more than that.

If nothing else trying to find realistic unbiased data based on real numbers not some pilots "remembering" what it flew like is hard. Especially for the Axis country's, where things were being bombed on a daily basis.

[RaptorL]

I like how you put thought into this post and I like most of your ideas. +

[MadHatter]

People seem REAL desperate for the B-29.  I would like to see it too, along with the He-111, Ju-52, Do-17z, G4M Betty, SB2C Helldiver, TBD Devastator, G3M Nell, PBY Catalina,  H6K Mavis, H8K Emily....The list wouldn't end anytime soon.

I was just making a joke about the fact that the mention of the b29 is met with either extreme agreement or extreme animosity. Just going for the laugh, guess I overshot. 

[Volron]

I was thinking about the freighter's that would be used when supplying island bases.  There would need to be a Troop Transport, Oiler and 2 Merchant ships in the convoy.  One merchant would be bigger than the other, as one would carry munitions (ack and ords) and the other, basic supplies.  It would also mean, 2 DD escorts.  The country that the supply convoy belongs to, would see an icon, similar to a fleet icon, only it would say something like, SC1(Supply Convoy 1), and it would not be a controllable fleet.  The DD's will have at least basic dar for the convoy and it would flash when it came under attack.  If, for instance, the oiler and the large merchant ship were sunk, the bases on the destination island, would not receive fuel and any damaged things, like hangers and dar, would not be repaired.  It would have to wait until the next supply convoy was dispatched or if someone decided to up a supply plane from the mainland.

MadHatter
lol  There isn't a foxhole that will save ya from the B-29.   It's the same for the He-111, when it comes to it's addition.  You have your Zealot's and your Non-Believer's.    I haven't looked through all 270 pages of Wishlist requests, but so far I haven't found any for the Ju-52.  Maybe I should start one....  Hmm....

Ghosth
But I wonder how often these things are checked as well.  Is it checked when it's a "very hot topic"?  I'm kinda curious as to what gets their attention.  I'm guessing if something becomes "very hot topic", with legitimate posts and not bumps, it draws their attention.  Or maybe someone on here directs them to it?  HTC staff will probably take one look at this one and say, "Oh SPORK no!"   

[Volron]

I started thinking about the fleet setup (after reading some other postings about it), and the fleets could have two troop ships added to it.  If they are sunk, you couldn't launch LVT's or PT's.  You would have to return to the nearest friendly port to respawn them.  There would be one docked troop ship at the port, but if it was sunk, you would only be able to spawn back one troop ship.  They would be slightly tougher than their RL counterparts, otherwise they wouldn't hold up against bombs, torpedoes and strafing runs.  Maybe between the DD and CA in toughness...  They would have low level flak but no puffy and could possibly have mannable guns.

I've also thought about power station complexes.  These would supply power to the dar installations and affect down time to the linked fields and facilities, and there would be at least 2 per zone (depending on map size).  If a power station is hit, a dar installation would lose 25 to 50% of their dar range and increase down time of downed buildings by 15-30 minutes.  The exception on the fields would obviously be the hangers, and the dry docks and docked ships at the ports.  They would be large complexes and tougher than your standard strategic target (1,000 lb bombs to destroyed the buildings).  This means that you would need help to knock one out in one pass.  At 50%, the down time to the linked facilities would be 15 mins extra and the dar installations would lose 25% of their range.  At 0%, it would be 30 mins and the dar installations would lose 50% of their range.  Flak over these targets would be light to medium in intensity.  These power stations would be down for 1 hr and are not resupplyable.  You don't NEED power to repair/rebuild, but it helps a little bit.  Example: If a rail yard, dar installation and the power station linked to them were knocked out, the total time for the dar installation being down would be 2 hrs and 30 mins and 1 hr and 30 mins for the Rail Yard.  The power stations would get their supplies directly from the Capital, so the rail yards being down won't affect it's resupply.  However, the industrial center in the Capital, could affect it's down time.

I also forgot to mention, rail yards would NOT resupplyable and the toughness would be 500 lb bombs for the buildings.  The industrial center in the Capital could affect it's down time.  Which means, we should probably double the size of it, or at least make the individual buildings blow up, instead of a city block.  I noticed this when I made a few runs on it.  As a bomb hits, the whole block blew up, instead of the few buildings it landed near.  As mentioned earlier, they would be large enough that you would have to make more than one pass, or take someone along, to even possibly knock one out completely.  I am, of course, referring to the Lancaster.  Some would say, "I can just take a Lanc and completely knock out a rail yard alone....".  Though this could be possible, but you would HAVE to make more than one pass and it wouldn't be an easy thing to do as the flak intensity would be heavy, considering the value of the target.  Coming in low would be costly, as there would be low level flak to defend against low level raids.  Enough to make it really risky to do in a bomber, but not so much that you couldn't do with a group of fighter-bombers and dive bombers.

Which what was mentioned above, the Industrial Center in the Capital would 1) double in size, 2) change it to where the individual buildings blew up instead of the whole block and 3) would have to revamp the down time on the industrial center to 1 hr (which tacks on 1 hr to down time to linked facilities), seeing as they are linked to the rail yards and power stations, which are in turn linked to bases and facilities within their respective zones.  Worse case scenario: The industrial center is knocked out, the power stations, rail yards, and a dar installation is knocked out in zone a, the total down time would be 2 1/2 hrs for the railyard, 2 hrs for the power stations and 3 1/2 hrs for the dar installation (just an example).  I doubt that people would be willing to put THAT much effort into chocking bases and facilities, but the option WOULD be there.  Since there are so many targets required to be knocked out for this scenario to happen, it would take serious effort on a country's part to do the job.

Example:  3-4 people would be needed to knock out the industrial center, 2-3 would be needed for each power station, 2-3 for each rail yard and 1-2 for the dar installation. Doubling the high numbers, that is 24 people working to hit these targets.

I can guarantee that they would draw attention from the country they are trying to hit, so it would require more to insure the job got done.  Of course the chances of hitting the targets would increase with fighter escort (stating an obvious), which requires more people.  48 people, 24 bomber formations and 24 fighter escorts, is a lot of people.  Like I said, serious effort required for the worse case scenario.  Only a few times, have I seen several people at once, go after strategic targets (probably just missing the fun bits during the day).  A setup like this, would probably be something akin to a wet dream to bomber zealots (more targets to hit, flying in huge formations), but at the same time, a total nightmare for both sides.  The side trying to makes this happen, having to get a lot of folks together who are willing to fly for a while, and the side getting hit, having to defend and/or suffering the consequences if they should fail to defend.

Not an update to the strategic system, but I would like to see a change in how planes are shot down.  One example is how many people hit the HQ or a target deep in enemy territory, then bail the moment they do.  If they do that, they should be forced to ride the chute all the way down or just not deploy and smack into the ground.  Smacking into the ground would count as a 3 deaths (the bails won't count), if they took a formation, or if they bailed and rode to the ground, 3 bails (I think it's 3 bails anyways, not too sure as it has been that long since I lasted played).  In general, if you bail, you either let your self smack into the ground, or you ride the chute all the way to the ground, before you can end flight and return to a tower.  If the pilot is killed, you could watch your plane fall in F3 mode (it would automatically switch), to the ground and crash.  If you are a bomber formation, you just switch to the next bomber (unless it's your last bomber), but you could see the bomber that was hit, go down (though chances are, you are too busy to watch it).  If you decided to watch it crash, you would, as well as everyone else, leave wreckage until you end flight. (This wouldn't apply to drones shot down) The option to end flight, would be there if the pilot is dead, instead of watching it fall to the ground.  If a wing in your lead bomber is taken off, you "bail" from it, or it gets 1k away from your drones (if you stayed inside), you would automatically switch to the next bomber and you could see the stricken bomber fall all the way to the ground.  I highly doubt something along this line would be implemented, as 1) coding nightmare (would also have to recode the drones to go all the way to the ground when going down) and 2) resources required for these things to happen.  Still can wish though.