enemy spawns

[Zimme83]

How will they be avoiding one another? All the villages do is lengthen your spawn. Course you can stop this by simply defending a village from capture or capturing  a captured village yourself win either case it usually leads to a fight.

On quite a few maps the ground war has already become primary. but lets say it does.
Aircraft come in in supporting roles. Enemy aircraft come in to provide protection from those trying to support the other side.

Hmm. sounds like a war to me

So u mean that instead of the present spawn system it should be replaced by a line of villages between the 2 bases? And when u have taken all villages on the line u can spawn into the base itself. Correct?
What happen if someone just horde the base and capture it using C-47? Is that team getting control over all villages belonging to that base automatically? And what happen to enemy Gv:s that are defending a village when the base is captured by a C-47?

[DREDIOCK]

No, until HiTech changes "his" underlying reasons for how he presents the game. We are stuck with what we got. We have been down this rabbit hole for almost 14 years. HiTech changes very little of how the game functions, and at a glacial speed for reasons only he knows. While you guys have spent those years building sand castles and stay offended at him for not responding, or,  that he has never duplicated your sand castles in "his" game.

HiTech should really give you guys a "What If I Were King" forum.

This last 12 months, almost all of these wishes devolved into a doom message to HiTech from his loyal angry customers. The sky is falling and you need to burn the house down and build a new one or else......

Else what?

And exactly what role is it that you think you play in all this? All you seem to do is your very best to shoot down each and every idea as it comes along.

I agree HT does what HT does. and at HTs pace. His game, his house.
 You've been here a while. Well Ive been here awhile too. Wanna go by registration dates? Ive been here  longer...I win.  
 Your being here a while does not make you an authority or your opinion any more valid one single iota then anyone elses be it mine or someone who has only been here 6 months. And unless you actually ARE HT. You are in no position to decline anyones suggestions.  As you also are not any sort of "king" around here either though you seem to feel some sort of entitlement to act as though you think you are.

I dont see anyone being offended at HTCs lack of implementation or response. I know I have never been. This is a wishlist forum. Thats what I see people putting out Their wishes on what they think they would like to see. If HT chooses implement any or none of the ideas put forth here that is entirely his call. Not yours. His house. Not yours. To give him and HTC as a whole a lot of credit. At least they are open to ideas or this forum wouldn't be here

What I do see that is offensive is your continual bullying like tactics in shooting down or manipulating,twisting and redefining as you have done to mine, other peoples thoughts and ideas just so you can make an argument against them. You are our resident Naysayer Nellie, our very own Eeyore

Wanna go by time spent? Ive been playing these games for over 20 years. I think by now I have the experience of actually playing to form a valid opinion and have a pretty good grasp on what I as well as other people might like in a game and what I and they dont. What I think might work and what I think wont.

How is it HT came about creating his own games in the first place but by the very notions we see here. He had the experience of game play himself. knew what he liked and didnt like, had his own ideas and thought he could do it better. Coupled that with the ability to "coad" Then went out and did it...twice (that is intended as a complement to HT BTW)

If I could write code I'd do the same. I cant, so the best I can do is the same as everyone else. Offer my suggestions based on what I see. What my experience playing tells me works/will work and doesnt/wont. What has gotten stagnant and what hasnt. What I see that attracts new people elsewhere over coming here and what isnt.
I do so for the same reasons as everyone else. We give a damn about the game.

Instead of being critical of every suggestion people come up with. Why not let HTC make those decisions for themselves. It is after all their decisions to make.  And this forum IS supposed to be for people to make suggestions is it not?
Try offering something positive for a change. Maybe a suggestion or two of your own.
At the very least back off of those that do

[DREDIOCK]

So u mean that instead of the present spawn system it should be replaced by a line of villages between the 2 bases? And when u have taken all villages on the line u can spawn into the base itself. Correct?
What happen if someone just horde the base and capture it using C-47? Is that team getting control over all villages belonging to that base automatically? And what happen to enemy Gv:s that are defending a village when the base is captured by a C-47?

Yes a series of villages. connected by a road net which you can choose to or not to use. The benifit of using the roads would be faster travel. the downside would be being exposed to enemy attack. The downside to driving over open terrain would be slower movement. But the upside would be cover and concealment.


For each there would be benefits and drawbacks

Spawn within range yes. Like say for example. (and example only) the final spawn point village would be where the current spawns are now. But not directly next to the base.
This would give the base some maneuvering room to muster and organize a defense.

All villages would be neutral until captured if you owned the village before capture. You still own it even if the enemy takes the base/s. If the bases on both sides of the string of villages were captured. Those villages would still be yours so long as you can hold them. But you would not be able to spawn to or from them nor resupply from them. A chain of supply must be maintained from a base in order to use the rearm pad. However just as normal you can resup GVs by way of goon or any other means as is currently used for resupply (think Bastogne)

If you lost a base but not the villages and managed to regain it. Those villages would automatically be considered back in supply and the Rearm pad could again then be used

Likewise if you capture both bases but not the villages and want those villages inbetween to be yours. Well, you have to go out and capture them.

Bombing villages should have no effect on the village itself other then the destruction of buildings and would not effect the ability to take, hold or prevent re-arming. Obviously Gvs would be susceptible to bombing just as normal.

The villages themselves should be spaced a reasonable distance from one another (not the half sector someone suggested)
This would help in the aiding of breaking up spawn camping the villages.

We have a couple of maps that have both near and far spawns where if the far spawn is camped people up the closer one to drive over and break up that spawn. Same principle

Im not talking about completely reinventing the wheel.
Just upgrading from wooden wagon wheels to Michelin Pilot Super Sport tires

[BaldEagl]

No, until HiTech changes "his" underlying reasons for how he presents the game. We are stuck with what we got. We have been down this rabbit hole for almost 14 years. HiTech changes very little of how the game functions, and at a glacial speed for reasons only he knows. While you guys have spent those years building sand castles and stay offended at him for not responding, or,  that he has never duplicated your sand castles in "his" game.

Oh really?  Here's just a few examples of things that have been implemented that I specifically crusaded for (only those that leap immediately to mind):

Return of large maps
Return of disbursed strats
Return of VB tank bunkers
Addition of the I-16

Here's a few more additions that have come as a direct result of player input and/or this forum specifically (again only a small sampling):

Addition of the B-29
Addition and relocation of vehicle hangers at V bases
Changes in radar range/effective altitude
Un-perking of the TA-152
Addition of field ack
Redesign of the strat system (at least twice)

The list goes on and on.

To suggest that player wished fall totally on deaf ears at HTC is ludicrous based on the history of implementation.

HiTech should really give you guys a "What If I Were King" forum.

Evidently you already think that he's given you one in the wishlist forum.

This last 12 months, almost all of these wishes devolved into a doom message to HiTech from his loyal angry customers. The sky is falling and you need to burn the house down and build a new one or else......

Else what?

Outside of the twelve hour rule please state examples of "almost all" wishes leading to this.  Also, please post links to the threats mentioned.

[Zimme83]

Yes a series of villages. connected by a road net which you can choose to or not to use. The benifit of using the roads would be faster travel. the downside would be being exposed to enemy attack. The downside to driving over open terrain would be slower movement. But the upside would be cover and concealment.


For each there would be benefits and drawbacks

Spawn within range yes. Like say for example. (and example only) the final spawn point village would be where the current spawns are now. But not directly next to the base.
This would give the base some maneuvering room to muster and organize a defense.

All villages would be neutral until captured if you owned the village before capture. You still own it even if the enemy takes the base/s. If the bases on both sides of the string of villages were captured. Those villages would still be yours so long as you can hold them. But you would not be able to spawn to or from them nor resupply from them. A chain of supply must be maintained from a base in order to use the rearm pad. However just as normal you can resup GVs by way of goon or any other means as is currently used for resupply (think Bastogne)

If you lost a base but not the villages and managed to regain it. Those villages would automatically be considered back in supply and the Rearm pad could again then be used

Likewise if you capture both bases but not the villages and want those villages inbetween to be yours. Well, you have to go out and capture them.

Bombing villages should have no effect on the village itself other then the destruction of buildings and would not effect the ability to take, hold or prevent re-arming. Obviously Gvs would be susceptible to bombing just as normal.

The villages themselves should be spaced a reasonable distance from one another (not the half sector someone suggested)
This would help in the aiding of breaking up spawn camping the villages.

We have a couple of maps that have both near and far spawns where if the far spawn is camped people up the closer one to drive over and break up that spawn. Same principle

Im not talking about completely reinventing the wheel.
Just upgrading from wooden wagon wheels to Michelin Pilot Super Sport tires

This would most likely leads to a jeep race at the beginning of each map in order to take as many empty villages as possible. And when a base is captured by a C-47 a bunch of A-20:s will up and bomb the few enemy tanks remaining in the village line. If bases are a sector away u have to count with having Gv:s drive for 10-20 miles before they eventually have taken all villages and can attack the base so it will most likely cause a big drop in Gv-fights. (Since all villages between the bases are neutral all Gv:s start at their own base and drive down the road all the way to the enemy base, 25k away)

[DREDIOCK]

This would most likely leads to a jeep race at the beginning of each map in order to take as many empty villages as possible. And when a base is captured by a C-47 a bunch of A-20:s will up and bomb the few enemy tanks remaining in the village line. If bases are a sector away u have to count with having Gv:s drive for 10-20 miles before they eventually have taken all villages and can attack the base so it will most likely cause a big drop in Gv-fights. (Since all villages between the bases are neutral all Gv:s start at their own base and drive down the road all the way to the enemy base, 25k away)

Could always limit capture by vehicle type. but I don think thats needed.

Jeeps may go quick. But remember. You sill gotta hold it once you have taken it. Something jeeps wouldnt be very good at. It would however give ner use for the faster moving but less used vehicles such as the M8 which can not only go faster to gain ground. But potentially hold it until armor arrives. I think you would end up with more vehicle collisions (fights) not less. Also remember you would have the other side doing the same thing. An attacked base would be able to see the attack coming just by the villages being taken.

You might have A20s up yes. Its known as mopping up and on that front it would be little different then what happens now. and remember you dont HAVE to stay on the roads. You can leave them at any time. Which would mean that just like now. The A20s would have to find them then kill them.


Course some wirbles or osties or opposing aircraft might contest that..just like now

But lets say like you say people up and race to capture as many villages as they can. Remember. the last village would be placed where the current spawn is now. the lines would eventually stabilize and What you end up with is nothing worse then we have now. A spawn to the enemy base. The difference it those spawns can be taken from you. You can be pushed back and forced to spawn to an area further away.

What you end up with here is movement becomes important rather then the spawn camp. Just like the real thing. Anyone camping would have to worry about being attacked from the next village over. It wouldnt be arcadish whackamole with little or nor risk

[Zimme83]

Jeeps don't need to defend anything at all, as soon as they roll in to an undefended village u can spawn in as many Tiger 2:s into is as u want. What would happen is that a jeep takes of from each base at the end of the village line and run down the line until they meet halfway. Then the stalemate begins. Because u need to kill all the defenders in the village in order to capture it and the defenders can respawn into the village as many times as they want it will be impossible to take it. So all assaults will start with a jabo killing the VH at the base, leaving the village line undefended since most of the time no one will babysit the villages. Step 2 is the jeep, running into 1 or 2 undefended enemy villages and take them while the VH is down. Incase of  enemy gv:s left in the village after VH is down Jabo:s will bomb them to clear the village before the jeep arrives. When the VH pops again the attackers spawn a few tanks into their new village to defend them until VH is down again and it starts all over. So it will kill all GV-fights because no one is stupid enough to drive a tank 3-5 miles and attack a village where the enemy can respawn as much as he want.

Having a fight for terrain instead of bases is a good thought but it wont work.

[DREDIOCK]

Jeeps don't need to defend anything at all, as soon as they roll in to an undefended village u can spawn in as many Tiger 2:s into is as u want. What would happen is that a jeep takes of from each base at the end of the village line and run down the line until they meet halfway. Then the stalemate begins. Because u need to kill all the defenders in the village in order to capture it and the defenders can respawn into the village as many times as they want it will be impossible to take it. So all assaults will start with a jabo killing the VH at the base, leaving the village line undefended since most of the time no one will babysit the villages. Step 2 is the jeep, running into 1 or 2 undefended enemy villages and take them while the VH is down. Incase of  enemy gv:s left in the village after VH is down Jabo:s will bomb them to clear the village before the jeep arrives. When the VH pops again the attackers spawn a few tanks into their new village to defend them until VH is down again and it starts all over. So it will kill all GV-fights because no one is stupid enough to drive a tank 3-5 miles and attack a village where the enemy can respawn as much as he want.

Having a fight for terrain instead of bases is a good thought but it wont work.

they dont respawn directly into the village. But in the surrounding area. This would be done to make it harder to spawncamp the village itself.

Why not? people are stupid enough to keep reupping at spawncamps and people drive those distances now. And your assuming jabos would always be there to help. Thats not always the case now.It probably wouldnt be any different here either. Tiger2s are expensive. Thats why you dont see many of them.

And even with teh VH down it can be notoriously difficult to jabo all spawncampers  or town protectors before the VH re-ups. I know Ive personally held off jabo attacks long enough for the VH to respawn. I dont see a village as being any different

Most of the things and reasoning you are using and are saying nay to already exist

not to mention. any attackers would be under the same danger of air attack as defenders would...just like now

[Zimme83]

How far from the village are they spawning and how close do they have to be in order to count as "in" it?

The system still has a lot of flaws. Since all villages are neutral at the beginning we will not only see the jeep race between front line bases but if someone want to resupply or spawn Gv into a friendly base under attack it always require that someone drives all the way between the bases (can be more than one sector) and capture the villages so GV:s can spawn into the base. That is for ALL bases on the map. And same thing if u manage to capture a base. In order to get to the next base u have to drive all the way there, fighting your way trough the system of villages. No map will ever be won by anyone.

[guncrasher]

Oh really?  Here's just a few examples of things that have been implemented that I specifically crusaded for (only those that leap immediately to mind):

Return of large maps
Return of disbursed strats
Return of VB tank bunkers
Addition of the I-16

Here's a few more additions that have come as a direct result of player input and/or this forum specifically (again only a small sampling):

Addition of the B-29
Addition and relocation of vehicle hangers at V bases
Changes in radar range/effective altitude
Un-perking of the TA-152
Addition of field ack
Redesign of the strat system (at least twice)

The list goes on and on.

To suggest that player wished fall totally on deaf ears at HTC is ludicrous based on the history of implementation.

Evidently you already think that he's given you one in the wishlist forum.

Outside of the twelve hour rule please state examples of "almost all" wishes leading to this.  Also, please post links to the threats mentioned.

players are campaigning now against large maps.  we dont have the players.  they complain about the strats are not together, then they complain because they are together.  they complained against the dar being too small, then being too big.  they complain against the field ack being too accurate and not accurate enough....


semp

[Wiley]

The way this reads to me, about the only way it would work reasonably well is if the maps were tiny compared to what we have now.

Wiley.

[SPKmes]

I'm not sure if I am right in this... but I think many are fixed on the capture side of this... I don't believe the villages count on the entire win the war capture system..

Is this correct DREDIOCK ?

[DREDIOCK]

How far from the village are they spawning and how close do they have to be in order to count as "in" it?

The system still has a lot of flaws. Since all villages are neutral at the beginning we will not only see the jeep race between front line bases but if someone want to resupply or spawn Gv into a friendly base under attack it always require that someone drives all the way between the bases (can be more than one sector) and capture the villages so GV:s can spawn into the base. That is for ALL bases on the map. And same thing if u manage to capture a base. In order to get to the next base u have to drive all the way there, fighting your way trough the system of villages. No map will ever be won by anyone.

Location of spawns would have to be determined. Like I said I cant code so I cant makea working model to experiment with. But as a beginning working number say the same distance around the village as we have at spawns now more or less.

No to take the village you actually have to physically enter it. Once entered and a predetermined spot occupied (for arguments sake we will say the Rearm pad)

Maps arent typically won by the ground war but by hordes of players coming in by air. flattening and steamrolling bases. As so far as the horde is concerned. The villages would be little more then speedbumps

[DREDIOCK]

How far from the village are they spawning and how close do they have to be in order to count as "in" it?

The system still has a lot of flaws. Since all villages are neutral at the beginning we will not only see the jeep race between front line bases but if someone want to resupply or spawn Gv into a friendly base under attack it always require that someone drives all the way between the bases (can be more than one sector) and capture the villages so GV:s can spawn into the base. That is for ALL bases on the map. And same thing if u manage to capture a base. In order to get to the next base u have to drive all the way there, fighting your way trough the system of villages. No map will ever be won by anyone.

This is however a valid point. I have a couple of ideas to address this But let me ponder on it a bit and get back to you.

[DREDIOCK]

I'm not sure if I am right in this... but I think many are fixed on the capture side of this... I don't believe the villages count on the entire win the war capture system..

Is this correct DREDIOCK ?

Im dont think villages counting toward the capture system in "winning the war" would be a great idea as yes it would lead to people just running around in jeeps capturing villages.
Villages primarily would be to move forward, make it harder to spawncamp thus turning a GV battle into ...a gv battle as well as provide aplace where once owned your GV can go get more ammo instead of either having to drive all the way back to base, tower out, or depend on the mercy of someone bringing an M3 out to you