Downtime for Strategic Targets

Discussion in 'Warbirds International' started by fuhrer, Aug 30, 2002.

?

Should the downtime of Strategic Targets be raised?

Poll closed Sep 6, 2002.
  1. Yes, raise it up to 7200 seconds (two hours).

    30 vote(s)
    71.4%
  2. No, leave as it is.

    4 vote(s)
    9.5%
  3. Either one I'm fine.

    3 vote(s)
    7.1%
  4. Yes, raise it up to more than 7200 seconds.

    5 vote(s)
    11.9%
  5. No, reduce it to below 2000 seconds.

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. fuhrer

    fuhrer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    647
    Location:
    Curitiba, PR, BRASIL
    The way it's set now, it's almost worthless to spend time bombing strategic targets because, by the time you're back in tower setting up the next attack, they will be coming back up soon, in other words, a complete waste unless you're in just for the fun of bombing bridges, refineries, etc. which I sometimes am but that's rare and there is no point in doing so unless it's a scenario or something.

    I think that if we raise that time a little bit, it might pay to use strategic bombing and also introduce a new kind of behavior: Strategic Target Patrolling. If you don't take care of yours, enemy will.

    Let me know what you think. I'm looking forward to opinions :)

    Warm regards,
     
  2. chebi

    chebi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2002
    Messages:
    66
    Location:
    Madrid, Spain
    TOTALLY AGREE!!!

    How many time is needed in RL to rebuild a bridge in a war situation? Same for refineries and so one.

    I.e.:deal:

    Bridge, 21 days (FHWB days), as it is rebuild to emergency purposes.

    Refineries. at least 1+1/2 Month

    ...

    But it's my suggestions, of course :shuffle:
     
  3. Perdomo

    Perdomo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2002
    Messages:
    1,783
    Location:
    Spain
    I voted to raise it to 7200 secs, but I would even raise it more, as I would raise the time field structures are killed, that 2000 secs time isn't enough.
     
  4. Broz

    Broz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    8,830
    Location:
    Salamanca (España)
    The other day, Edinor and me, got 2xb17s, started in F15, we went to F38, and attacked the convoy SW of it. We were carrying 6x1600lbs each. Results of the attack:
    Broz: 4x CA destroyed for 1400sec. Gold economy: from 102% down to 102%. Why?? :dunno:
    Edinor: Radar F38 (must cover our way back home), and 4xCA destroyed for 1400sec. Gold economy: from 102% down to 102%!! Again why??? :mad:

    But the worst is: we return home, and i get 0 points!! Edinor got 7500 due to his streak, but only counted the radar kill. Why is it like that? Convoy's acks can kill you. Why can't they be killed?
     
  5. fuhrer

    fuhrer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    647
    Location:
    Curitiba, PR, BRASIL
    Yes, perhaps 3 hours (10800 seconds) would be a better fit but I'm not sure the server can go over 9999 seconds.

    2000 seconds is also very fast, that means the maximum you can keep a field close is 33 minutes and a few seconds... those field workers must be REALLY fast :D

    Then you add: low field structure downtime and low strategic target downtime and the result is worthless bombing efforts ... it doesn't really excite me to go out bombing anymore. These times definitely need to be raised.

     
  6. okitel

    okitel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2002
    Messages:
    48
    Location:
    United States
    Salute!

    By all means raise the time. I've been wanting a strategic aspect to Freehost for a long time, and at present, the restrict time is not enough to allow for valued strategic bombing.
     
  7. -nicae-

    -nicae- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2000
    Messages:
    6,363
    Location:
    Brazil
    check TA. it goes up to 12200s ;)

    i like chebis idea, but not for 21 WBFH days. becuase each WBFH month has only 5 WBFH days.

    so '21 days' would be '4 WBFH days'. that would be about 6:30 real hours. sounds good :)

    refineries '1.5 WBFH months' would be about 12 real hours. sounds good too :)

    i noticed an error in the WBFH-RL time relations at nicae central's FAQ. ill have to get the correct relation. then ill pass it on.
     
  8. fuhrer

    fuhrer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    647
    Location:
    Curitiba, PR, BRASIL
    Nicae,

    Can you modify the poll to "7200sec or more", everyone is asking for it anyway :) Thanks!

    Yes, it all sound pretty good, I wonder how should we approach the development team so they modify these settings to what most people want.
     
  9. -nicae-

    -nicae- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2000
    Messages:
    6,363
    Location:
    Brazil
    edited poll :)
     
  10. fuhrer

    fuhrer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    647
    Location:
    Curitiba, PR, BRASIL
    Thanks nicae but I don't think that's fair with the people that already voted and with the poll... Most of the ones who voted on the 7200secs wanted it raised to a bigger number...

    What I asked you was to *modify the text* and not add more options. That way you'll confuse people and moreover mislead the poll.

    I would like you to fix that if isn't ask too much... :shuffle:

    Thanks! :cheers:
     
  11. grobar

    grobar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2000
    Messages:
    3,497
    Location:
    Пловдив, Тракия, България
    maybe make new poll?
    im for 6 hours but i already voted. :(

    if 6 hours - f d time may be left at 2000s.
    I`m up to making raids for leveling to the ground ALL enemy indutry, gnah-hah-hah! Revenge for "Point Blank"!!!
     
  12. -nicae-

    -nicae- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2000
    Messages:
    6,363
    Location:
    Brazil
    yeah, poll is already screwed up ;)

    if you post another, make sure to make all possibilities available!
     
  13. beerme

    beerme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2001
    Messages:
    430
    Location:
    Malabar, Fla USA
    O.K. I'm for longer rebuild times BUT I think fuel rebuild should be as short or shorter. In real life planes were regurlarly refueled directly from 55 Gallon (or equivelent) drums. Fuel bombing should only effect fuel until the next truckload or trainload arrives not until a bulk storage system is rebuilt. of course i guess bombing bridges would effect delivery of fuel but not to the extent people are proposing.

    While on the subject of fuel is it possible to make the default fuel load 100% as in real life or is this built into the FE?
     
  14. thomba

    thomba Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Messages:
    709
    Location:
    germany
    set it to 3000s as default.
    why are all these changes?????

    murphy says:
    never touch a running system
    :znaika:
     
  15. fuhrer

    fuhrer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    647
    Location:
    Curitiba, PR, BRASIL
    ok, I'll post another poll ... :(
     
  16. fuhrer

    fuhrer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    647
    Location:
    Curitiba, PR, BRASIL
  17. -exec-

    -exec- FH Consultant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2000
    Messages:
    24,690
    Location:
    xUSSR
  18. TAN-GO

    TAN-GO Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2002
    Messages:
    12
    i vote for 7200 sec :turret:
     
  19. -nicae-

    -nicae- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2000
    Messages:
    6,363
    Location:
    Brazil
    wrong thread, tango ;)