Uncapturable Bases!!

[MAINER]

I know its crazy but think of it..

-no more "winz teh war" hordes.
-promotes more fighting (it is called Aces High right? not Horders High)
-bring a more strategic battle rather then clobbering bases over and over.

+keep the so called "strats"
+ keeps "war win" perks

why get rid of "winz teh war"?
because we wont have so many hordes at 10k to keep pushing people away. instead of having to constantly defend something virtually undefenable we would defend our own bases from enemy fighter patrols.

how does it promote more fighting?
because no one would be worried about clobbering the other 2 countrys base's. people would focus more on what I would call "WWII" style fights where 1 group of people up planes and go search out enemies over their territory. With capturable bases the only time enemies are over your base is to pork it or shut it down and/or deack to vulch. If theres no reason to take bases then why else would you shut a base down? Ok well, say you shut that base down and they cant up fighters any more. Gives you more of an advantage to get kills. then you can deack to vulch the dumbtards that up. But then theres the threat of fighters being upped from a different base and coming to kill the vulchers.

how is it more of a strategic battle?
because its concentrated on air superiority rather then clobbering all the bases and suddenly the "war" is over. the goal would be transformed to air superiority rather then rape the town and hangars.

wait..how do we keep "winz teh war" perks?
after a certain period of time (3-4 days?) the country with the most kills and bomber damage is awarded the 25 each in the 3 catagories.

keeping the "strats" that no one really cares about in the game wouldnt do anything that it already doesnt do.

flame on

-100000000000000

[matt]

I know its crazy but think of it..

-no more "winz teh war" hordes.
-promotes more fighting (it is called Aces High right? not Horders High)
-bring a more strategic battle rather then clobbering bases over and over.

+keep the so called "strats"
+ keeps "war win" perks

why get rid of "winz teh war"?
because we wont have so many hordes at 10k to keep pushing people away. instead of having to constantly defend something virtually undefenable we would defend our own bases from enemy fighter patrols.

how does it promote more fighting?
because no one would be worried about clobbering the other 2 countrys base's. people would focus more on what I would call "WWII" style fights where 1 group of people up planes and go search out enemies over their territory. With capturable bases the only time enemies are over your base is to pork it or shut it down and/or deack to vulch. If theres no reason to take bases then why else would you shut a base down? Ok well, say you shut that base down and they cant up fighters any more. Gives you more of an advantage to get kills. then you can deack to vulch the dumbtards that up. But then theres the threat of fighters being upped from a different base and coming to kill the vulchers.

how is it more of a strategic battle?
because its concentrated on air superiority rather then clobbering all the bases and suddenly the "war" is over. the goal would be transformed to air superiority rather then rape the town and hangars.

wait..how do we keep "winz teh war" perks?
after a certain period of time (3-4 days?) the country with the most kills and bomber damage is awarded the 25 each in the 3 catagories.

keeping the "strats" that no one really cares about in the game wouldnt do anything that it already doesnt do.

flame on

 

[chris3]

moin

i doesnt get it.
is air superiority not need to take a base?
do we not knew were the hordes came from??
do we not knew were the goone came from?

from my point of view its always a hard fight until we get air superiority.

if thhere is an enemy horde it is the most fun to flank this hord get some easy kills. sure it is not easy to get in an good taktikal position against a hord but that is the most fun.

dont whish for thinks you dont realy want...

cu

[The Fugitive]

I could almost live with the horde if there was some way to have some sort of defensive structure in place. It's fun to defend IF you have a chance to.do.so. getting rolled by 10 to 1 odds is only padding the horders score.

[4Prop]

wow is this guy stupid? uncapturable bases? wow what was he thinking.

guess it was a little to crazy. It was worth some ideas though

[Babalonian]

Isn't

Personally, I want more gameplay (and indeed much more "strategic", high altitude stuff, so I'm very much on his side actually)... but not necessarily "less horde" (a quite charged expression btw)   /hijack off

The hordes giveth and they taketh.

wow is this guy stupid? uncapturable bases? wow what was he thinking.

guess it was a little to crazy. It was worth some ideas though

You've never even logged into all the arenas/environments offered and you're striding in with grandios ideas of change, change, change.

Buck up Chuck(ie).

I see the good intention of the OP in this thread too, but they didn't think the idea fully through before presenting it to our community of thorough thinkers (enjoy that laugh for the week HT ).  At least, this is not a new idea.  It has been agreed and implemented to a degree (greater than others on various maps currently in circulation on the MAs) that some bases (a select minority) should be uncapturable to facilitate productive (and ungrieved) gameplay.

Since obviously you're not pitching something already in existence/implementation, it comes across that you must be proposing that all bases be uncapturable, then?  For a more strategic battle?

Please, elaborate to us, how would making no bases capturable either maintain or increase the current strategic gameplay environment?  Resolve the issue of hording?


And now, if you want us to be REALLY mean to you, I'll tell you the single-most little mean truth here nobody else has in your thread, yet.

WE ALREADY DO have an arena where your EXACT idea is already implemented and you can go RIGHT NOW and see for yourself the increased and prosperous battle of strategy.  The Dueling Arena and Furball Lake awaits you...  be sure to let us all know tomorrow how close to Valhalla things get in there for you tonight.


Welcome to Aces High!  Despite our old, gnarly and surly nature, we're usually a friendly community and available to answer any questions you might have.

[bustr]

I could almost live with the horde if there was some way to have some sort of defensive structure in place. It's fun to defend IF you have a chance to.do.so. getting rolled by 10 to 1 odds is only padding the horders score.

It's a very fine line for HiTech to tinker with but, you are right. Back when he first dropped the NOE minimum to 65ft and overlapped the DAR circles, the first 2 weeks were a blast for the defenders. Then the defenders lost interest, the hoard hid above 15k and the whining here in the Forum was epic. Then gradualy the hoard adapted and overcame the change while HiTech tinkered the DAR back closer to it's original state. As long as I can remember the paying majority likes joining a hoard(Organised Group) to take bases with very littel personal risk in their evening.

And a minority of adrenalin jocky's have made the same complaint about the fudgy lame cautious game play since I can remember.

I have wondered why with the 3 sizes of air feilds and thier towns, the location of the feilds didn't have something more to do with their size being directly important to winning the war. So proportionately increased defences, manned and other, could be added to the size of the feild beyond the current formula to make winning the war hing on that last LARGE FEILD. Depending on the size of the map make holding 1-3 large airfeilds part of the winning the war requirement. Tangable realestate needed to win the war above the 90/20 rule. Maybe now 75/20 including 1-3 Large Airfeilds. At least you will know they are coming some time tonight to a large feild near you........

Any undefended feild of all 3 sizes can be carpet bombed by 12 boxes of bombers into oblivion in a single pass. I've been on the receiving end and watched the single M3 or C47 follow in on the explosions and take the town. POTW is guilty of doing that to capture a Large airfeild once. It's a fantastic feeling the first time the whole coordinated effort work's like clockwork. But, it's over in under five minutes when the first bombs drop. The time to organise it and get the assets in place can take up to an hour. Then it's over in a moment. I understand for some in the hoard they are chasing that version of the adrenalin rush. The big buildup, and if everything goes as planned, 30 seconds of a mega emotional fix, and it's over.

And just like the adrenalin jocky's they want that emotional high again and move on to another field to get it their way.

Some kind of tweek to DAR so you can see the hoard coming from farther away would spice things up for awhile. You notice the adrenalin jocky whining abates as long as they can get at the hoards long enough to be immersed in personal combat through out the evening while successfully collecting scalps during their time online. It only picks up like now when the hoards are successfully evading the adrenalin jocky's and taking their feilds from them.

You cannot advocate for any change to this environment that favors control of the arena out come by a minority or unduely penalises the less accomplished for their state while ruining the FUN time of the majority. Thats how you will find yourself alone down the road with a small number of like minded adrenalin junkies on oversized maps going "Piu, Piu, Piu" to an empty arena.

[The Fugitive]

I loved the bigger dar circles. It made "hiding" so much harder. I didn't mind the fight getting higher, it would be a bit more "immerse" if it was.

I'd also like to see the towns white flag percentage reflect the base size. A small base is 50% for a white flag, a medium 70% for white flag, and large 90% for a white flag. I think it would add some strategy tot he whole "win da waz" thing. 

[Lusche]

I loved the bigger dar circles. It made "hiding" so much harder. I didn't mind the fight getting higher, it would be a bit more "immerse" if it was.

The bigger dar circles significantly benefited what is called "the horde" - If you are on dar all the time from takeoff to target, and can be spotted anywhere as lone con even when trying to get home on the deck, people will even more stick to each other.
Also it meant that the attacker had full dar coverage of the enemy base (and most of the times even a good area beyond it), which was in practice a huge advantage to any horde piling on it, especially vs lone, brave , desperate goon hunters.

I'd also like to see the towns white flag percentage reflect the base size. A small base is 50% for a white flag, a medium 70% for white flag, and large 90% for a white flag. I think it would add some strategy tot he whole "win da waz" thing.  

I would welcome any such or similar attempt to increase gameplay depth!  

[kvuo75]

it's not my idea, but a new perk point formula, taking into account # of friendly vs. # of enemy in range (more perks for killing while outnumbered locally) might encourage defense and (possibly) discourage horde zombies.

another idea that is not mine is instead of # of kills landed, show perk points landed.

would be interesting!

[guncrasher]

it's not my idea, but a new perk point formula, taking into account # of friendly vs. # of enemy in range (more perks for killing while outnumbered locally) might encourage defense and (possibly) discourage horde zombies.

another idea that is not mine is instead of # of kills landed, show perk points landed.

would be interesting!

just show the people that got killed.

semp