About the new terrain

[Lusche]

The grass texture gives me the impression that the plane is an RC plane sitting on a dry grass field.

I actually had about the same impression  

[MrRiplEy[H]]

It took a long time (years) of gradual decline for EW & MW to arrive at the current numbers. WW1 lost it's appeal very quickly, within a few weeks only. And the main reason was indeed a very one dimensional style of combat, which will get quite boring for most players after some time. More so, if you are not an 'ACM god', which very few are. Most ppl do suck in fighters compared to that top 10%, and having a fully developed gameplay enables them to contribute in different ways (and get a sense of 'winning' every once and then)

The last time I tried WWI arena it had multiple problems - the planes felt like at beta stage, very crude. The flight model was so different from MA that I got clobbered by the handful of WWI 'vets' including magic bb deaths so I couldn't bother to stay much longer. I'm sure most people who tried it share my experience. The MA was more attractive with its familiar FM and planeset - and it had much more action.

I'm not sure if you could even capture bases in WWI, no gvs etc so it's very different. Like I said if bases would be given real strategic importance much like ports do now, people would really fight for them and try to regain them if they lost the last field that provides a certain planetype for example. Maps could cycle periodically without the need to capture everything. Haven't you noticed how much interest a loss of the last port attracts for example? Defending it makes sense because it will have an actual impact if its lost. On the other hand the opposing side doesn't have such an impact in owning the field to horde massively for it, especially if points would decline rapidly in a horde.

[715]

The grass texture gives me the impression that the plane is an RC plane sitting on a dry grass field.

I instantly thought the same thing when I saw that image. 

[Easyscor]

I still miss the old Depots from AH1. That's why I include custom vBases with a few town buildings as a village in some of my AvA terrains .

What I'd like to see for the MA, is the addition of different types of vBases with a village, or a railyard, or a steelmill, etc., but with only two VHs to balance the added difficulty. They would behave exactly like the current vBase, but with the buildings (railcars etc) that would need to be destroyed before capture.

[Karnak]

My jmpression of the WT screenshot was also of a toy airplane in a dry, grass field.

[Megalodon]

Actually one thing I would like added to the game is a new forward airfield with no OED bunkers and bomber hangars. This would let terrain designers place airfields near tank town for fighter defence without bringing bombers too near as well. Give it an "F" prefix so it would be obvious from the map. It could have a pierced steel runway and a temporary looking, largely tented infrastructure.

Would be cool... I would go as far as limiting the plane set to planes that hunt tanks or are part of the tank buster theme. JU87, yak, Hurri, and Il2 and eventually the HS129    but I would allow bombs as this was historically accurate. The Ju87G2 specifically would be fine by me and I think the gver's understand that it takes some skill to plink tank's and is not the same as being bomb****ed.

The Ju87G2 can take off within the runway space now at a vbase used by the spy plane and would be very useful to implement some air game to the Vbase. It would also be useful, since it fly's so slow, to give it the same views as the 156.

I just don't think it's right that they can play basically immune from the air game on your map or any map for that matter.

  ,
 

[Tilt]

I still miss the old Depots from AH1. That's why I include custom vBases with a few town buildings as a village in some of my AvA terrains .

What I'd like to see for the MA, is the addition of different types of vBases with a village, or a railyard, or a steelmill, etc., but with only two VHs to balance the added difficulty. They would behave exactly like the current vBase, but with the buildings (railcars etc) that would need to be destroyed before capture.

I too consider that depots were never implemented to their true potential before being dropped from MA terrains.

It always strikes me as odd that AH GV fields are located in the middle of open country side and AC fields are located adjacent to towns. Looking generally at theWWII European fronts  gv battles were fought to acquire logistic advantage which was often a town or bridge or depot etc. With this in mind I would like to see GV fields located at such places.  

Like Greebo I would like the small airfields based on temporary airstrips suited to lighter aircraft.

[WWhiskey]

At one point it was talked about to put secondary strat targets back at the old strat locations,, I wish they would,, it would give bombers something else to hit, and others something else to do too.   The spawn points are still there,,, another idea would be a larger city at those locations to be captured/ defended!

[Bizman]

Not sure what are you saying. It's a screenshot from WT. 

WT? A game? Is that really supposed to picture a full size warbird on a dried grass field? Someone should've been using a lawnmower long ago in that case. Never thought a plane could land or up in grass taller than the cockpit. 

[LCADolby]

WT? A game? Is that really supposed to picture a full size warbird on a dried grass field? Someone should've been using a lawnmower long ago in that case. Never thought a plane could land or up in grass taller than the cockpit.  

Your eyes need testing

[Bizman]

Your eyes need testing

I just had them tested. Aging is showing.

[Slate]

My jmpression of the WT screenshot was also of a toy airplane in a dry, grass field.

                 "A toy aeroplane runs around on the floor, a Model Aeroplane is something entirely different."

[Karnak]

                "A toy aeroplane runs around on the floor, a Model Aeroplane is something entirely different."

Flight of the Phoenix.  Image was blocked at work, didn't even know it was there until I quoted.  I know the quote well.

It looks like a toy airplane though.

[bustr]

The non-perk offerings at this point don't make playing to earn perks very meaningful as the carrot on the stick anymore. So motivating players out of late war rides visa perks has no 1:1 meaning. Possibly paying them in 262 would. But perks these days have run their time as a motivation mechanism.

As for many of the solutions to our game play problems being argued over. If our arenas were 2 sides and limited to 32 on a side along with having to wait in the ready room for the numbers to fill in. That waiting, or delayed gratification would create a value to finally being in the air and achieving something. Our model is three countries, large numbers in the hundreds, with no rules, and anything goes at all times with no waiting or delaying of gratification.

That is what makes Aces High a different breed from IL2 and WT. But, many of you want to force IL2 and WT game mechanisms into Aces High as the solution to all of our woes. If those were the solutions, Hitech would have relented years ago to your ideas. You see parts of those solutions in our structured play in the SEA Arena events. And the foundation of many of your ideas is structured organized play opposed to no rules anything goes play.

Aces High cannot survive if it's game play model looks like it's trying to be like IL2 or WT. It can if it's graphics start looking like them, because that will be more attractive to new customers. 

[PFactorDave]

Aces High cannot survive if it's game play model looks like it's trying to be like IL2 or WT. It can if it's graphics start looking like them, because that will be more attractive to new customers. 

Exactly.  But if HTC can bring the eye candy up to par with IL2 and WT, the hundreds of players in a persistent arena.  No waiting for matches to launch...  Those could be big selling points to draw new players into AH.