125 ppls online , WOW!!!! but with good ping cant login to arena Do we reach maximum number of players? ramzey
the problem with long-distance under-radar attack is that attackers have a long way to go, long time to get a transport there, and defenders usually can take off from a nearby field and be there in no-time. It makes leaves attackers with one chance for a capture. If they fail at instant they wot get another one because Ju/Li2 has a long way to go and defenders have usually 2-3 fields close enough not ot be worried. The other thing about them is the recapture thingie. If we attack a field thats half map away form our controlled area we will get no chance to defend it as there are 2-3 nmy fields around and cons are wiating for irst object to reop and get the field back in no time. IMHO all ths can be altered by introducing a map with bigger distances between all fields...
not to mention the strategic importance of radars. why kill radar if there are another 5 radars covering that field? surprise attacks? only under 100m. in big field, you can kill radars and make buff-raids (isnt this what FH wants?), and once you kill the rdr in under-100m-raids, you are invisible again. big med gives better twists for field attacking. (isnt that what FH wants again?)
Big med makes defense easier, not harder. Replacements for the attacking force, extra ordance and especially more troops, take a very long time to get there. Replacements for the defenders can take off right away from the field under attack. Not much worry of vultures, the attackers can't spare much ordnance and any losses are very serious. Add to this the fact that big med airfields generally have many more targets at the field, which must all be destroyed to close, and it gives defense a huge advantage. Rebuild and restrict times will have to be greatly increased in order to make offense possible on big med, especially in early war. Because as it is now, IMO medrl2 is the furball map. There's no point to even attacking fields when they're so ridiculously difficult to take. I wound up flying without any ground ordnance most of the time, whereas in AWT or med3 I almost never take off without A2G weapons. I really like the idea of the big map, and medrl2 would be much more interesting terrain if it was playable, but FH gameplay is designed for the small maps. Playing a big map with small map gameplay is miserable. We need big map gameplay instead.
hi mekh! i dissagree. attacking in a team makes the big med give the advantage to the attackers, not defenders. 1. a normal team would reach the target before defenders take off. that would give them the E advantage they need to close and clear the field without problems. ive done all big-med ToDs like that, and its true! and once the field is closed, it is down to waiting for your ju52 to reach the twr. in a smaller map, you would close and clear a field, but as you kill cons, they take off from the nearest field (most times 2 or 3 fields) and never stop coming. in big map, you can stop them. in small, you cant. thats what makes the difference. 2. not only that, but the big med makes radar coverage much more limited, allowing radar stealth, and actually making the radar a reasonable target. with AWT or any of the other smaller maps, there are always 3 or 4 radars covering the same field. 3. you complain that it makes attacking alone a problem. well FH needs more teamwork. this isnt only a flight sim. its a WWII flight sim. 4. another factor are the buffraids. and radar coverage applies here too. you takeoff in a small map, and you're in enemy radar. a proof of the frustration of flying in small maps to buffs is KG51. where have they been in small med? have they done the same buffraids in AWT as they did in big med? well.. im sure they can back me up better on this than myself.
Nintendo, Xbox, Windows Vista, Windows 7... 2002 was 9 years ago. People get married, divorced, remarried, fired, hired, die, have children, join the military, fly real planes, grow up, grow old..... times are a changin' At least if there was a simple install for the new softwares... there would be a chance of new people trying .... If things keep going on like this, pretty soon they will put the rest of the FH players into the museum along with the game!
Just if these FH dev's got well and realized to revert to FH server version 1.42 and somehow make old players to get info of that, there will be 'bout 40 players online all the time yeah.
Hey! It will be all good! I found picture taken from FH developer's party where these great bunch of humanbeings were celebrating the starting of planning the new version of Fh launcher that will fkup more playability and push more people out of this once great game, than any new version release has ever done before.
I disagree. The first and foremost priority is an easy install. FHWB has to understand the people with 98/Win2000/XP are diminishing; fewer and fewer people are using those OSes. More and more people are using Win7/Vista and some form of Linux. Most gamers are going Xbox or one of the other game consoles. If people cannot load the game, they will not play. Few people are going to take the time and effort to arrange for an older computer with the older OS just to play a game if they have never seen nor played before. There are many players who have access to the old OS and the hardware but just will not dedicate the time, energy and space for a system just to play one game for a few hours a day or week or month...
Hope we can get some interest in this sim. Being free is good but, usability is lacking quite a bit. Comments from devs?
who can take InstallShield, WinInstall, Wise Installation or like, and develop a one-click installation?
