Revamp of Strategic Gameplay

[The Fugitive]

I agree, but what harm would there be in throwing in a few Uber-Bases on the map?  It would not be a requirement to invest time into fighting over them, but it would me an option and most likely a hot spot that could breed some epic battles for hours.  If you wanted no part of it, you could go off do your own thing and capture an easy base, which would still be worth something just not as valuable.  It's a simple premise, but I think it would be a lot more fun for everybody.

And I should note, that everyone is chalking up my OP to the old zone system.  This isn't the same at all.

That 9-10k base in the middle of Festers map was one such "uber base". The only thing uber about it was it's alt, but fights for the base lasted hours.

I like Easyscor's idea about the strats. The fights and resupplies on the Mindanao maps HQ where all night affairs. The trick is making the missions rewarding without hindering the game play too much to stop those that don't want to have anything to do with the "win the war" game play.

I think the elements are still here in the game, I just think too many people forgot how to use them. Too many people look for that quick easy smash and grab as the only mission available because well lets face it, it's about the only mission they have even seen.

[lyric1]

The thing I don't like about this is that fact that personally I only see a war won maybe once a month, if that.  I don't have 100 hours a month to play this game so won wars are few and far between, I'm speculating that is the same for many players.  Especially on these large maps I would only expect the strat to come into play a couple times a year.

From your perspective I can see what you are saying especially with large maps. Small maps on the other hand may get to hang around a little longer.

[grizz441]

I think the elements are still here in the game, I just think too many people forgot how to use them. Too many people look for that quick easy smash and grab as the only mission available because well lets face it, it's about the only mission they have even seen.

As I said before, there is currently no strategic incentive to capture a defended base.

[Lusche]

I think the elements are still here in the game, I just think too many people forgot how to use them.

I don't see them. All bases are more or less having same importance with no zone bases anymore... all that counts is now pure number of fields, with the rare exception of some high alt bases on certain maps that can give one side a very slight advantage.

Heck, it's not even a good thing to get a offensive rolling towards the Strats on large maps, as any RW commander would do... because once you get close to them, they are jumping out of reach, right into 163 territory, without and detriment effect such a relocation would have (I would like to see all Strats going to 0 when that happens)

[ink]

Grizz....Grizz...Grizz


why oh why are you feeding "win-Z-var" crowd...... don't you know that they are our mortal enemies

don't you dare ask me to get into a Bomber.... even though I am C.O. of said Bomber wing. 

[Lusche]

why oh why are you feeding "win-Z-var" crowd...... don't you know that they are our mortal enemies

He needs us to feed his 262 some kills

[hitech]

Make taking a strat as ......... rewarding as taking any feild in the game!

You just gave me a new design idea for a new system, has to peculate a bit.


HiTech

[The Fugitive]

I don't see them. All bases are more or less having same importance with no zone bases anymore... all that counts is now pure number of fields, with the rare exception of some high alt bases on certain maps that can give one side a very slight advantage.

Heck, it's not even a good thing to get a offensive rolling towards the Strats on large maps, as any RW commander would do... because once you get close to them, they are jumping out of reach, right into 163 territory, without and detriment effect such a relocation would have (I would like to see all Strats going to 0 when that happens)

Capturing fields in a certain order has strategic importance. Take one base because it can be used to GV another base , so that base can't be used to defend the target base, and so on. Using 20 guys and some good tactics can get you plenty of base captures. Todays player only knows how to count up the total grabbed and thats it.

[Lusche]

Capturing fields in a certain order has strategic importance. Take one base because it can be used to GV another base , so that base can't be used to defend the target base, and so on.

That's IMHO a relatively minor effect compared to the importance zone bases once had, and very much varying depending on the terrain.

[Kev367th]

Most of it used to be in-game -

a) Zone bases - important to hold onto
b) Hi-alt bases - important to hold onto
c) VBase that spawned to HQ - important to hold onto
d) Base next to HQ - important to hold onto

All created large fights, especially when the Vbase into HQ was snuck fully up, or a raid on the base next to HQ.
Most have gone in one form or another.

The very things that caused large scale fights, also seemed to cause the problems.

Fugitive - The chain of bases in a specific order was tested a long while back, didn't go down well at all.
From a purely strategic point of view it prevented any side from doing 'an end run' and opening up a new front, something that comes in really handy if you are penned back.

[lyric1]

Most of it used to be in-game -

a) Zone bases - important to hold onto
b) Hi-alt bases - important to hold onto
c) VBase that spawned to HQ - important to hold onto
d) Base next to HQ - important to hold onto

All created large fights, especially when the Vbase into HQ was snuck fully up, or a raid on the base next to HQ.
Most have gone in one form or another.

The very things that caused large scale fights, also seemed to cause the problems.

Fugitive - The chain of bases in a specific order was tested a long while back, didn't go down well at all.

I seem to remember being at fights with you when 163 bases were able to be captured. These seem to have generated a lot of fights in my early days in the game.

[Kev367th]

Yup that was the HQ bases.

They were usually hi-alt surrounded by low alt bases, so it was even difficult to hold onto the low alt bases close to HQ bases.
Generated huge fights!

[bustr]

Guys,

All of you sound like you have very strong analytical abilities and excellent imaginations. So saying, before you can create a new framework to replace the old, you need to identify point for point what exactly works and the human motivation supporting it; and what is failing and the human motivation supporting that. You are dealing with human emotional dynamics in a carrot and stick reward system that the human is PAYING to be part of. It would not hurt to search all the way back to 2000 finding all of the positive dialogue about given maps and game strategies and the negative. Look at why the game succeeded versus failed from the human perspective in each dialogue. Then create a synopsis document.

Before doing this research all of you need to create the AH Emotional Motivation Foundation list of WHAT motivates a player in response to the current manner in which the game is being implemented and WHY. Then take all of the searched threads and measure the responces against your AH Emotional Motivation Foundation list. Since I have been playing this game ALL of these threads have been about what motivates specifically "YOU" not you bringing your powerful skillsets together to analyse what motivates the community and WHY. Then use this to help craft new winning game strategies based on real facts and information about what the customer base predictably may respond to or enable yourselves to make GOOD educated guesses.

It always devolves into each of trying to show the other how smart you are and what your secret wish would be if HiTech was willing to implement it. Throw away your soap boxes gentlemen and think outside of it's woody comfort for the WHOLE community.

[Lusche]

t. Since I have been playing this game ALL of these threads have been about what motivates specifically "YOU" not you bringing your powerful skillsets together to analyse what motivates the community and WHY.

I may sound rude now... but only thing that comes to my mind when I read this is "nonsense".  

My posts would like very different if I was thinking only about me. A whole different approach on gameplay. I would not speak for a way to introduce more strat game, but without affecting the furballer's ability to just go out and have fun, for I am NOT a furballer, and if it were all about me, I would go "strategic" all the way.

And I have read lots & lots of threads, posts, and proposals by guys that always had the whole community in mind, not just their own playing style.

[Easyscor]

You just gave me a new design idea for a new system, has to peculate a bit.


HiTech

hehe, I can see it now, destroy a factory and all the dependent bunkers blow up.