Author Topic: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?  (Read 10111 times)

Offline JimmyD3

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3754
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #60 on: January 22, 2022, 01:23:11 AM »
I don't like the BB's in general. If you want to add more ships, add CV's. At least there is an air element to them for players who play this game to fly.

It occurs to me that A4(red) is the closest bare to the green country port in 9,12,9. Seems to me that it's a bad idea to have a port so isolated from friendly air defenders.

Also, I'm looking at the map in terms of opening moves for aircraft and the Green/Blue fronts doesn't offer the same opportunities as Red/Blue or Red/Green

I think both of these issues can be remedied by shifting one base's ownership on each front. Change A4 to Green, A93 to Red, and the green base in 12,9,6 to Blue (Can't read the number)

No big push one way of the other on the additional BB group.

Green A34 is closer to to Green P44 and Green A65 is just north. We could drop A65 south to provide additional coverage for the P44.

To balance the Green/Blue front better, we could swap A52 and V47, this would provide one more airfield adjacent to the front. This would bring the Green front up to 4 airbase, to match the 4 Blue airbases.

I appreciate the feedback Devil 505, so far I am having a ball playing with this map. Oboes, Fugitive, Turt21, Easyscor's feedback and yours feedback have had a very positive effect on the map.

I am currently driving every spawn, flying out of every base, checking the elevations and setting the terrains, to try and accommodate all the different game plays. Bombers, Air Combat, Naval, and GV's. I started at Field #1, I am now up to #26. Still a long way to go. At some point I will upload the map and let everyone have access to it, I'm hoping for a lot more feedback then as well.

Again, thanks for the feedback, and let me know what you think about my solutions to your suggestions.

 :salute
« Last Edit: January 22, 2022, 01:33:04 AM by JimmyD3 »
Kenai77
CO Sic Puppies MWK
USAF 1971-76

Offline JimmyD3

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3754
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #61 on: January 23, 2022, 12:53:07 AM »
Devil505, see if this doesn't address your concerns sir.

Kenai77
CO Sic Puppies MWK
USAF 1971-76

Offline Marco

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 126
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #62 on: January 23, 2022, 07:33:50 AM »
Well done. She’s a beauty. :salute

Offline artik

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1898
      • Blog
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #63 on: January 23, 2022, 08:14:50 AM »
Can you show some in-flight screen shots over alps?

BTW what is the scale of the map?
Artik, 101 "Red" Squadron, Israel

Offline Devil 505

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8761
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #64 on: January 23, 2022, 12:25:09 PM »
Devil505, see if this doesn't address your concerns sir.

I'm not sure it does, honestly. The more I think about it, the more I think the primary problem is that this port starts directly next to an enemy field. Every other port has at least a friendly air base between it and the closest enemy base.
Kommando Nowotny

FlyKommando.com

Offline JimmyD3

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3754
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #65 on: January 23, 2022, 01:40:17 PM »
Can you show some in-flight screen shots over alps?

BTW what is the scale of the map?

The scale is 8.00, all mountains are really steep at that scale. Been trying to keep the original elevations as much as possible. But that doesn't lend it's self to gv access near the bases, so I have had to modify there.

I'll try to get a few screen shoots over the Alps for you Artik.
Kenai77
CO Sic Puppies MWK
USAF 1971-76

Offline JimmyD3

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3754
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #66 on: January 23, 2022, 01:42:14 PM »
I'm not sure it does, honestly. The more I think about it, the more I think the primary problem is that this port starts directly next to an enemy field. Every other port has at least a friendly air base between it and the closest enemy base.

I'll look into some other options Devil505 for the port. I assume the Balance issue you had for the Blue/Green is now acceptable, or at least better.
Kenai77
CO Sic Puppies MWK
USAF 1971-76

Offline JimmyD3

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3754
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #67 on: January 23, 2022, 02:09:33 PM »
Artik, here are some screen shots.....

Kenai77
CO Sic Puppies MWK
USAF 1971-76

Offline Devil 505

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8761
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #68 on: January 23, 2022, 02:39:10 PM »
I'll look into some other options Devil505 for the port. I assume the Balance issue you had for the Blue/Green is now acceptable, or at least better.

Yeah, I think so.

 :aok
Kommando Nowotny

FlyKommando.com

Offline artik

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1898
      • Blog
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #69 on: January 23, 2022, 03:10:00 PM »
Looks nice
Artik, 101 "Red" Squadron, Israel

Offline JimmyD3

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3754
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #70 on: January 23, 2022, 07:49:13 PM »
Looks nice

Thanks Artik, its all due to your wonderful program.
Kenai77
CO Sic Puppies MWK
USAF 1971-76

Offline oboe

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9753
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #71 on: January 24, 2022, 11:35:43 AM »
Looks fantastic, Jimmy!   Apologies for my absence, I've been away working on other projects.

One thing that strikes me is the distance between airfields.  NHawk's post in the Terrain forum describes the best distance between fields as between 0.75 and 1.0 sectors.  There are a few bases with much greater separation distances - especially in the east.    Would it be possible to add another airfield or two for each country, so the field density is increased a little?   I know more than a few MA pilots complain about the time it takes to fly to a fight.

Where did the flak bases go?   I thought at least one by the major strat targets, (esp cities) was appropriate. 

Thank you for working on this - still very excited at the possibility of seeing this terrain in the MA.   At some point would it be wise to have Hitech weigh in on the concept?    I'm crazy for it and I'm optimistic that the natural asymmetry of the map can be accounted for, but not sure about his feelings on it.

Offline JimmyD3

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3754
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #72 on: January 24, 2022, 04:59:00 PM »
Oboe loved your rendition of Greebo's Crater map btw.

WE could move the eastern Green bases more towards the central area to reduce flight times. The biggest issue is the difference in land mass between the Red/Green/Blue and an attempt to stay somewhat accurate to historic locations, albeit not 100%.

I had initially installed Flak bases, probably to many :) , and got a big push back. I agree however there should be some overall Strat protection, for at least the Cities. If you feel the need for the other strat protection, let me know.

I would LOVE to have feedback from Dale on the map as we go, it is my desire to see the map  go into rotation if at all possible and I know he has the final say.

I have generated a "Tank Town" setup in the Alps. Using the Mountain style Vbases  with no enemy spawns into the bases. All 3 spawn into a combat area in fairly close proximity to each other. While the bases can be captured, by flying troops in, the owning country has 2 gv spawns into it. This better allows recapture, if the base is taken unexpectedly.

I am currently working the elevations at each base to insure practical drive times for M3's and other gv's, hills that are scalable. I am also working the terrain to insure there are not too many trees while insuring the field is not wide open. Shore Batteries are going in where needed. Out of 99 bases, I am currently working on Base 37 on the map.

The map could be uploaded at this point for you to fly and review, just know it is still a work in progress. I am still enjoying myself, I love doing this, would just like to see the maps get into rotation, or at least know what was wrong if they don't make it.

Stay in touch  :salute
Kenai77
CO Sic Puppies MWK
USAF 1971-76

Offline JimmyD3

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3754
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #73 on: January 24, 2022, 06:28:04 PM »
Oboe, this may help on the Green distance issue...
Kenai77
CO Sic Puppies MWK
USAF 1971-76

Offline oboe

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9753
Re: Has anybody ever tried a ETO MA?
« Reply #74 on: January 24, 2022, 09:40:59 PM »
Quote
Oboe loved your rendition of Greebo's Crater map btw.

Thanks, it was just a goofy idea I had that wouldn't go away, so I had to try making it.

Regarding NHawk's post of MA Terrain tips, he recommended base distances between .75 and 1.0 sectors.  I've made a white ring around Green A39, which shows this sweet zone in white.   You could move A62 northeast into the ring to solve it here.

RE: Tank town, I would go ahead and move the 3 VBases real close to each other make itr clear that is what it is - perhaps players will respect that and leave those bases out of the capture action.  If not, I agree with your idea of other bases supporting the VBases.

I've also shown one additional small field for each country and giving A4 to Green to address Devil's concern about the port at Hamburg.   I gave Blue a Small AF along the North African coast and moved A69 toward the real-life location of Algiers.   Red lost A4, so gets a new small AF near the old location of V15 to make up for the loss, and it's new additional small AF is located in the west portion of Ireland.



Just suggestions on my part - it's easier to describe what I mean with a picture.   Can't wait to play it, regardless!    Its looking great!
« Last Edit: January 24, 2022, 09:44:18 PM by oboe »