New Rules: Bombed Fuel to 0%, Streak of 2 gives 100%

Hi everyone,

As I'm sure you've noticed, we're back on the small map.

Distances between the fields are short, there are many small fields all over the map, and attempts at field capture often result in fruitless furballs.

Not there's anything wrong with furballs But dedicated bomber and fighter bomber pilots like to destroy stuff, have an impact on the enemy, and contribute to painting the map in the colour of their country. The endless furball at F19 just doesn't cut it for them.

Here's my suggestion about how to keep the good aspects of the map while creating enhanced tactical possibilities:

1) Make it harder to kill fuel. To kill fuel, it should be required that all of the fuel tanks AND all of the hangars are down.

2) Minimum fuel must be 0%. To bring an airfield to 0%, ALL of the hangars and ALL of the fuel have to be killed. However ...

3) A streak of just 2 kill gives any player 100% fuel again. (That's what you get today with 6 kills.)

Which effect will these new rules have?

a) A team attack can seriously reduce the defenses of a field, giving tactical players who cooperate well a chance to take a field without an endless furball.

b) The team attack has to be quick, as thanks to the close proximity of all fields, the defenders can be at the attacked field in less than 5 minutes by taking off from a neighbouring field.

c) The attackers still have to figure in defenders, as anyone with a streak of 2 can still take off from the attacked field normally. However, they will encounter fewer suicidal attacks as any bandit they kill loses his streak and then cannot take off as long as fuel is down. This limits endless respawning.

(For a smart defender, keeping the streak isn't that hard since he's fighting over a friendly field so that either ditching or bailing will mean he's OK, but he's to be more careful than with the current rules.)

d) The furballs above fuel-restricted fields will be more equal since both sides will come to the scene of the action from a neighbouring field. This makes for a fair fight and less vulching.

e) Since hangars are involved in the fuel restriction, it won't last as long as it does now, and it takes more bomb tonnage to achieve it. So though the fuel restriction is more serious, it's less permanent.

Conclusion:

My suggestion will open new possiblities for people interested in tactical game play, encourage cooperation and teamwork when attacking a field, award smart flying for the defenders, limit respawning and vulching, and generally lead to better balanced and fairer fights.

I'd like to ask the Freehost team to consider my suggestion for implementation in the arena. Thanks a lot!

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

With 100% fuel restriction one side by well coordinated buff attack can finish off ALL enemy flights.

 

Hi Rgreat,

>With 100% fuel restriction one side by well coordinated buff attack can finish off ALL enemy flights.

Actually, only for those with a streak of 0 or 1 And they could still man ground vehicles!

OK, I admit it's a highly unlikely occurence, but theoretically possible. I'd suggest that if it really happens, the server just rebuilds a random fuel. (Maybe the one that has been down for the longest time.)


Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

hmmm sounds fairly resonable, maybe this could be tested in the training arena first? and i didn't know about the 6 kills streak you could have unlimited fuel. thanks for the info

bullet

 

yeah those killer tank with 75mm...
is it made to kill by make enemy pilot laugh and crash the ground?

 

Hi Esp,

>yeah those killer tank with 75mm...
is it made to kill by make enemy pilot laugh and crash the ground?

I'm sure ground vehicles are going to be improved in the future

But I already pointed out a way around the total fuel restriction, so that's not really important any more.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

your counter-solution seems very good hohun!

even if your idea does not come into play, we NEED the "hangar+fuel = restrict" thingy in! just killing the tank makes it too easy to ruin flights.

 

Hi Nicae,

>even if your idea does not come into play, we NEED the "hangar+fuel = restrict" thingy in! just killing the tank makes it too easy to ruin flights.

Actually, I think the more important point is to give full fuel for a shorter streak. Only a small proportion of players can maintain a streak of six, and that are those who'd not hestitate to take off from hinterland fields anyhow.

In my opinion, everyone should be given a chance to get the benefit of full fuel everywhere - and for many players (including some of my squadron mates), a streak of 2 is an ambitious goal.

I'm sure they'd really enjoy the feeling of accomplishment from getting full fuel cleared for them!

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

something needs to be done..
map just resetted, and in 5 minutes, only 1 out of 6-7 fields has full fuel.... THIS suxxxx, not big maps!

 

Hi Nicae,

>something needs to be done..
map just resetted, and in 5 minutes, only 1 out of 6-7 fields has full fuel.... THIS suxxxx, not big maps!

I agree.

That's why I think it's important to couple both fuel tank and hangar destruction to fuel restrictions! I noticed that fuel tanks can be destroyed easily by 50 kg bombs, and both the Ju 88 with the forward bomb bay enabled and the new Il-4 can carry a larger and more varied load than the bombers we had before.

Accordingly, we see heavier damage on the fields from the same number of attacks, and inevitably, the fuel tanks go down particularly quickly. And the fields are so close together that a single bomber can quickly achieve a long-lasting fuel restriction for several fields!

With the hangars included in the fuel restriction formula, it would finally be more difficult to impose a fuel restriction on big field than on a medium, and a medium would be more difficult to pork than a small.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

once again i show my support on this.

but i need to point out another good point!
hangars stay down for shorter time than tanks. that would make the fuel restrictions shorter too.

i also support shorter streaks for being restriction-free.

 

bump!

this is not something that makes the game better. its something that makes the game less worse!

 

Great idea Ho-hun!

Finally we would see an usage for hangar. A little senseless as it is now.. Requires a 500kg bomb to play nothing on the role, except for the required field close. Let's make that 500kg worth the price.

 

I like the look of this one (and I would be penalized a lot)

I always wondered what the hangers could be used for.

 

I like this idea.

But I think it would be better to enable the old hmack too,
for those who lost their streak and want to denfend their field.

greetings
Freadward

 

to kill other's streak without risking yours?

 

nope, my streak is usually anyway lost
, but I think it could be frustrating,
if you want to defend your airfield, but cannot take off, because of nofuel.
on the other hand ,I personally think the old hmacks have been much more useful and more fun as these new tanks, but other topic.

greetings

Freadward

 

well the way things go, we wont have 0% fuel restriction
30% is well enough to defend, so you could always take an airplane ;-)

the problem about the hmack is that the fun of the defender is at the cost of the attacker(s). it should be pushed the other way around.

 

I think jeeps are fun to attack They make you actually worry about flying low over a field, and they keep an enemy in the jeep, which only has an effect close and low to the field, instead of trying to take off, where they would have an effect all around the field or farther.

 

i remember a red attack to medium f3 in small med, several ToDs ago. my team had just captured a field, so we were all in the twr. then we noticed this raid in the rdr, and in the country radio you could read: "F3 IS UNDER ATTACK! ALL TAKE HMACKS!"

well, there were only 8-10 hmacks on the field.

that would make 32-40x12mm guns, in up to 10 different placements, with the enitire field still intact, including acks. thats pushing it towards defence. if all took planes, they would be safely killable without losing the precious A2G ordinance.