Hordes and the game dynamic

[Ack-Ack]

I very much doubt that. You would be one of the top 3-4 AH gods if you can could consistently pull that of. I know for sure I can't get even remotely close to that number. And yes, I did a 100 perk sortie once too, but that doesn't change the average.
Taking a glance at your numbers from last tour, you got 300 kills in 346 fighter and attack sorties. Each single kill would have been worth 12 -24 perks to get to that number of 10-20 per sortie.

Again, the "average" tends to be vastly overestimated, both on a global as well as often on a personal base  

Averaging 10 perks per sortie I don't think would be that difficult, depending on the plane you fly and what planes you wish to engage.  I average close to 8 perks for sortie, and with the perk modifier in place and engaging late war planes, I can get up to 30 or more perks per sortie and that's just flying an average perk gaining plane.

ack-ack

[Lusche]

Averaging 10 perks per sortie I don't think would be that difficult, depending on the plane you fly and what planes you wish to engage.  I average close to 8 perks for sortie, and with the perk modifier in place and engaging late war planes, I can get up to 30 or more perks per sortie and that's just flying an average perk gaining plane.

Again, you are WAY above the average AH player. That one has no chance to sustain anything like this. See the stats I've posted earlier: Not even one kill in two sorties, landing only 1 in every 3 missions, less than 3 kills/hour and only a handful of kills per tour. That is the ordinary AH fighter pilot. Averaging 8 Perks per sortie would require at least 2-6 kills per sortie in a ENY 20 bird, depending on perk modifiers and what planes you encounter. This is totally out of range for the vast majority of players, and getting into a ENY 30 perk farmer for increased gain is not really an option either for them.

This is exactly what I meant... a top 5% player calling the things he can do as "average" or "not that difficult". The difference between these pilots and the majority of player is really that big. Again, the "average" is usually totally overestimated.

On a personal note, I would be hard pressed to sustain a 8 perks/ sortie gain over extended periods, even when flying ENY 20-25 birds... and I'm certainly not that bad

[Fulcrum]

 



I'm afraid my main point is getting a bit lost among this. it's not about Dirtdarts perk gains.
It's about how easy it is, to base gameplay discussions like this one on global assumptions created from very subjective personal perceptions. I'm not excluded from that myself. Once I also had the opinion "it's soooooo easy to get the perks for the 262" because it was based on my own perception as well.
Only when I did take a closer look at the actual data I realized how astonishingly high I - and most posters here on the BBS - are above the 'average player'. There is one awkward tendency of false modesty, with everyone declaring himself as "not that good" or "I'm purely average" just because we get kicked around by even better players and die a lot in the main.
Joe Average dies a lot more. Joe plays a lot less. It takes ages for Joe Average to scrap together the perks for a Me 262 sortie, in which he will die after 2-3 kills... if he's that lucky at all. And Joe Average just can't 'get better' by practicing a lot and learning, because it's just a game and not many players are able to put that many hours into 'working' on their skills. (In addition, if everybody would do that and improve their skill, nothing would change either - there still would be a small group of 'aces' clubbing the masses)

Your main point was not lost on me.  I get it.  I still consider myself to be "average" at best, but maybe it would be better to day "average" for a player with a little more than 8 years experience playing Aces High. 

[The Fugitive]

I'm curious what you suggest they change?

I think the ability to close airfields/or vulch a field closed is a major contributor to horde behavior personally.  I'd like to hear your thoughts on what could be changed.

Personally I'd like to see it set up so if a small force (10-12 players) attacks a base it take 40% of the town down to capture. If they take out the VH and FH on there way in make it 50% of the town down. 12-18 players now it takes 60% of the town down, add the hangers 70%. Over 18 players 90% and with the hangers down 100% of the town down for a capture. This way a horde can still play if they want but they have to work harder at doing it. More work means more time for defenders to up and defend. It could also show some of these "generals" that splitting their force to hit 3 bases at once and so getting an easier capture would spread the fights out ore but still be defensible.

Other suggestions bring up limiting the number of planes that can launch from a base, or use a "zone" ENY system to help regulate off balance play in an area of the map.

Changes in the score system may change game play as well. Greebo started a thread with some good suggestions there.

Maybe "System" generated missions. Join a Game "system" mission and accomplish its goal.... 2 players pork ord at "X" base and return get a bunch of points/perks. Sure there is a bunch of coading to make sure it isn't easily abused but it's something like the "Achievements" that might bring more interest in the game and add a bunch of places where little battles can pop up as others try to stop them.

Are there problems with ideas like these? Heck ya!!! But I'm not one of those guys that can see all the angles. I just plow along solving the problems as they pop up. HTC and company seem to be very good at seeing the angles and coming up with fixes before they run into them. I'll let them handle the details 

[PFactorDave]

Personally I'd like to see it set up so if a small force (10-12 players) attacks a base it take 40% of the town down to capture. If they take out the VH and FH on there way in make it 50% of the town down. 12-18 players now it takes 60% of the town down, add the hangers 70%. Over 18 players 90% and with the hangers down 100% of the town down for a capture. This way a horde can still play if they want but they have to work harder at doing it. More work means more time for defenders to up and defend. It could also show some of these "generals" that splitting their force to hit 3 bases at once and so getting an easier capture would spread the fights out ore but still be defensible.

Would be interesting to see how that would affect things.

I would like to see the field ack ramped up massively.  Make vulching a field as dangerous as flying into CV ack.  Then tie the number of hangars destroyed to the eny of the planes that can launch from the field.  Instead of closing the field, dropping hangars forces planes from that field to be of a higher eny value.

This might, hopefully, make it so a fight can ALWAYS happen at a field.  A pilot can launch and get a little airspeed before the horde jumps him, even though he may be forced to fly an eny 30 plane because all of the fighter hangars are down.

Then, depending on how it plays out, possibly adjust the capture requirements to make it easier or harder, as needed.  Probably a little easier will be in order, which would possibly give a small skilled squad a better shot at capturing a base without a horde as well.

My reasoning for this is...

When I was a new player, I hated having to climb out from 25miles away and spend 10+ minutes in the boring part, only to die in a turn or two.  So, 10+ minutes of take-off and approach only to die in seconds.  I actively searched out situations where a CV was attacking a field, because I could get into the fight quickly.  If I died, I could be right back into it right away.

If it weren't for those CV attacks, I probably would have left Aces High before picking up what little skill I now have.

We need to make it so today's new guys can get up and INTO FIGHTS quickly, even if they get killed.  Keep them engaged in the fight as much as possible, not punished by repeatedly having to spend boring minute after minute to get to that two turn death.

Take vulching and the closing of fields completely out of the equation.

[bustr]

Is it possible in the past few years Hitech has tweeked the gunnery and damge making it a bit more demanding in a real world sense to his physics? No one has ever accused this game of having arcade physics like it's competitors. I've found the 105Mil ring standard for the British, works better these days for lead shooting specifically for the radii hold off increase. I see most newer players shooting late in snap shots or under in 6-chase shots. Most of them look like they are pointing and clicking instead of calculating gunnery based on 3 dimensions coupled with relative speeds. That would account for all the HO's and missing my plane by high speed pickers while I'm flying level lately.

Where gunnery is concerned at least, HTC can build a new offline drone\AI gunnery training system to teach new players ww2 air to air gunnery. He has the AI now that can interact to teach the concepts.

This is not a very good game for the xBox generation to simply mount up cold and start shooting in. That was part of the reasoning in my earlier wish for the offline lead computing cross to be updated with standardized 100Mil expanding and contracting rings to show newbies something with a 1:1 relationship to what they are trying to learn on the fly in the game. Until they can actually hit anything when they point their guns at it, how are you going to convince them to stay around long enough to understand and value ACM?

The new generation of gamers are piu, piu, piu instant gratification centric. Aces High is a mother of a delayed gratification game when it comes to learning combat skills or ever landing 2 kills. Especially during the first year for most if they man up and don't give up. Asking the xBox generation to "man up" is a foreign concept to them. You can meet them half way with simple training tools that are easy to use. Then on the Internet they might say nicer things about Aces High other than, it's a nad smasher of a learning curve and you die all the time with no reward for your efforts.

We are seeing things from HTC now that can help the new generation and be attractive to them.

1. - Developed interactive air combat AI.
It would be nice to have a drone break turn climbing\diving when I reached 400 from it. Then add in the LCG green cross, and you have the beginning of understanding gunnery as we do it in the game. Only a very green newbie performs low E slow turns in the game like our ancient drones do offline at 200+mph. Sorry "Bag the Hun".

2. - Films being created to show specific skills in ACM.
This one is obvious, especially since HTC is controlling the accuracy of the content.

3. - Updated graphics and terrain.
Biggest complaint by the younger generation about our game after "it's too hard to learn the skills".

HTC is working on new mechanics for the game as we kvetch. What has always been different about this game is HTC won't force players to do anything unless to stop an obvious rapid hemorrhaging of customers. Ultimately that means most game play problems originate from the players themselves, not in anything that can be changed to change how they choose to gain satisfaction visa their conduct. It gets back to monkey see monkeys do, or sit around and yell at each other.

[Lusche]

Would be interesting to see how that would affect things.

I would like to see the field ack ramped up massively.  

That had already been done in the past, we used to have much less ack (and more vulchings). Did it work out?

The problem is the possible reaction will be different than expected. The more difficult things get, the more players will invest to ensure things do not get wrong at the first try. Bigger hordes, and if you can't really cap a field anymore, the more likely it gets that it will always be shut down right from the start.




On a different matter, the overly simplifying and mostly pejoratively used "xbox generation" is really getting on my nerves... 

[WWhiskey]

I think we've gone in the wrong direction making it harder to capture,,, just my opinion tho,,,, it could be that it needs to be easier to defend,,   I don't like the m-3 resupply dynamic of it all,,, this doesn't promote combat ,,,again,,, in my opinion!,,,it also makes  it harder for a recapture, once a captured base town has been rebuilt, with a few loads of supplies,, some great battles happened trying to re take a field ,,, that's gone now!

[PFactorDave]

That had already been done in the past, we used to have much less ack (and more vulchings). Did it work out?

The problem is the possible reaction will be different than expected. The more difficult things get, the more players will invest to ensure things do not get wrong at the first try. Bigger hordes, and if you can't really cap a field anymore, the more likely it gets that it will always be shut down right from the start.

Well, I included that it should not be possible to shut down a field.  Right now, it's way too easy to close a field by vulching.  Heck, a trio of 190s can do it if they are working together.

How do you feel about the time it takes for a new player to get into a fight after every death?  Do you agree that it being easier and quicker to get into a fight would be beneficial for newer players?

[Lusche]

Well, I included that it should not be possible to shut down a field.  Right now, it's way too easy to close a field by vulching.  Heck, a trio of 190s can do it if they are working together.

I'm absolutely convinced you will NEVER see indestructible and massively ack protected fields in AH. Never. There are few things I'm as sure about Probably getting even the nuke before that happens

How do you feel about the time it takes for a new player to get into a fight after every death?  Do you agree that it being easier and quicker to get into a fight would be beneficial for newer players?

Not necessarily, especially if the feature allowing that has a lot of unintended consequences for gameplay dynamics.

[SPKmes]

I'm curious what you suggest they change?

I think the ability to close airfields/or vulch a field closed is a major contributor to horde behavior personally.  I'd like to hear your thoughts on what could be changed.

As it is now the strats are in one group...a few bombers can flatten and have a large effect in a trip to one spot.

Have base zones with strat structures which affect all bases in the zone..not together but separated so you can't just drop all strat types in one go
These have reasonable strength and repair time (types>>.Radar...remove radar  and affect radar when at differing %ages...same with ord,fuel,building repair times and hardness etc etc)
These strat structures directly affect the downtimes and hardness of structures etc of bases in the zone
These are supplyable to bring them back up much like Hq
The main strats still have effect...these being taken down affect the zone strats rate of repair..Not supplyable

Make it so that to take a base with Zone strats full up is difficult... but not impossible...

so now you need a couple of bomber groups to head off and slap the main strats...and the satellite strats of a zone to help soften and ease the take of all the bases in that zone...
oh yeah...supply to town only helps bring up ack.... and time is dependent on strat health


Very basic form... but you get the idea...(my thought..and there is probably many other sides to it that I am blind to in my fixated view of an idea)

[WWhiskey]

Maybe just harder to shut down,,,,, a GV motor pool instead of one hanger,,, more flight hangers as well,,,,, if it takes 20 players to take a base,, 20 players should have some kind of an opportunity to save it,,,
 So ,,town easier to capture,, or as it is,, base harder to close,, m-3 supply, less effective  but still useable!
Maybe just a little tweaking on the system we have now!

[bustr]

On a different matter, the overly simplifying and mostly pejoratively used "xbox generation" is really getting on my nerves... 

That's okay, they get on my nerves but, it's who HTC has to entice to buy subscriptions as our next generation. And they aren't that complicated when it comes to how they want to piu, piu, piu. I have a pet gnat with a longer attention span.

[PFactorDave]

Not necessarily, especially if the feature allowing that has a lot of unintended consequences for gameplay dynamics.

I'm to the point that I think a major change is in order.  I don't see it ever happening, to be honest.  It's a bit sad.

[BaldEagl]

That's okay, they get on my nerves but, it's who HTC has to entice to buy subscriptions as our next generation. And they aren't that complicated when it comes to how they want to piu, piu, piu. I have a pet gnat with a longer attention span.

And that's exactly the type of attitude that will keep them away.  I'm not picking on you specifically but everyone else here with the same bias.

Face it, life is easier.  Every generation complains that the kids have it too easy these days and they do.  So did you compared to your parents and grandparents.  I don't have to split wood to keep my house warm in the winter and I don't have to wring my clothes out and hang them on the line to dry.  The list goes on and on and today's kids kids will have it even easier.

So do you really think jumping on the BBs and denegrating them is going to draw them into the game and the community?  As a kid myself once I wanted to get as far away from my parents as possible and no, I didn't want to go hang around with different parents or authority figures.

Now don't lie and tell me you yourself don't enjoy instant gratification at least on occasion.  We all do.

If it's a younger generation we need to attract and this is how we view and welcome them we're doomed.