Topic: Poll/discussion: mission naming policy

[K'Hexx]

That is NOT what it represents. It represents an artificial constraint to give an undue advantage to the single ship player. The team who fields a superior force should have the option of deciding how best to employ it tactically, and not be FORCED into a futile chase by limitations artificially induced by the script.

Sometimes a superior force is due to intelligence and creativity of the pilot and not the concentration of heay metal, I like this as an option. 

[762_XC]

 

Step 1) Move on hex
Step 2) Pick non-3v3 mission

OMG, that's brilliant! teh win!!!11!!!1!!!

[FPF-DieHard]

 - all missions that can only draft 1v1 get named Investigation
 - all missions that can draft 2v2 get named Escort
 - all missions that can draft 3v3 get named Patrol

I'm going to be honest, the "investigation" and "escort" missions will not be used. 

[Dizzy]

unless u put terrain requirements in the script and hex seed the map.

[FPF-DieHard]

unless u put terrain requirements in the script and hex seed the map.

Possibly

[K'Hexx]

Step 1) Move on hex
Step 2) Pick non-3v3 mission

OMG, that's brilliant! teh win!!!11!!!1!!!

That would be one step more than Move onto hex with 2 other  heavy metal ship aces and await draft  

+1 anyhow for semi-clever retort  

[Hexx]

That is NOT what it represents. It represents an artificial constraint to give an undue advantage to the single ship player. The team who fields a superior force should have the option of deciding how best to employ it tactically, and not be FORCED into a futile chase by limitations artificially induced by the script.

Weren't you one of the one's complaining (along with DH oddly enough.. ) that my rules for forcing PVP while being drafted by a bigger fleet was penalizing the side with less numbers/inability to put together 3 ship fleets? ie that the team who fielded a superior force was taking advantage of it?
You're advocating exactly the same thing- different methodology (as of course most servers don't use PVP VP's) -you're claiming that a side that can field 3 ship fleets should be allowed to completely dominate any areas they choose- and since (oddly enough) very few three ship fleets decide to hang out on non VP hex areas you're giving them control of the game.

I'm going to be honest, the "investigation" and "escort" missions will not be used.

And again Why Not? (aside from the fact you don't feel like it  )
A single player jumping into a hex with 3 guys sitting rock is never going to know what missions he'll draw until he's in the hex, assuming the above missions each seed at even odds, he'll still have a 66% chance to draw a misison that will have him outnumbered, but he's got a chance to pick one that will pair him off with a (hopefully)decent fight rather than obliteration.

~ Honestly,if people flew balanced three ship fleets I'd still not like it, but at least I'd admit they're balanced. Right now "strategy" is getting the three biggest /meanest ships that work well together (ie Hydran with fighters, couple of Gorn casual/PF tenders // ISC with as many PPD's and plasma fighters/PFs as you can legally cram in) and sitting on hexes waiting to be drafted or jumping solo players and driving them away from the important hexes.
-And of course then complaining when one player can't hold a connection with 6 ships, asking said player to stay away from the battle areas..

I don't think drafts should always be 1v1, I also don;t think 3 players together should always get drafted. If you want to do wither go play GSA all night.
By having missions with 1v1,2v2,3v3 you're at least introducing some randomness to the process. Not guaranteeing the game goes to whoever can put togetehr the most 3 ship fleets.

[762_XC]

The difference with KCW Hexx is that the outnumbered side was forced to die and give up VC's every time they were caught. On a normal server they just disengage and work somewhere else. This strategy works just fine, ask Chuut.

Chuut, if you think holding a defensive position is an invalid concept in warfare, you should read about Gettysburg, or maybe the Battle of the Somme. Maybe it irks you that such a passive concept can be effective, as it surely irked Lee.

P.S. I didn't claim there was any brilliance behind it, just that it was effective.

[FPF-DieHard]

I'm going to be honest, the "investigation" and "escort" missions will not be used.

And again Why Not? (aside from the fact you don't feel like it  )
A single player jumping into a hex with 3 guys sitting rock is never going to know what missions he'll draw until he's in the hex, assuming the above missions each seed at even odds, he'll still have a 66% chance to draw a misison that will have him outnumbered, but he's got a chance to pick one that will pair him off with a (hopefully)decent fight rather than obliteration.

Because having a script that magically seperates you from your fleetmates is retarted.   It makes no sense, I have to use the Chebaca defense on this one.

You CAN break up the fleets with a little "skill." and timing.  On more than one occasion I've been able to get the massive fleet to chase me around the strategic map by attacking random hexes with a DN.  There are legit strategys to break up concentrations of firepower, relying and a magin script that just has no logical basis is a poor one.

I agree with you about splitting up VC objective and design a server where cancentrating all your forces in 2 hexes is a bad idea.   This makes sense, use it.

Why did I pull the inverstigation and scout missions from past servers?  On GW4, I was in a CVA+ and the Coaltion had nothing big on at the time.  I vas able to jump into hexes select the cheexy 1v1 mission and then chase each pilot off 1v1 as investigation and Scout came up nearly ever time.   Skull (I think it was skuill) pointed out how stupid this was, his side could not form up wing to defend against a single large ship.   I agreed with him, pulled the missions on the spot, and have not looked back.

I miss most fights being 1v1 as well as you Hexx, but artificail stupidity like the 1v1 misions as retarted rules are not the way to go about getting this back.

[Dfly]

then tell us how to get them back

[FPF-DieHard]

then tell us how to get them back

Spread out objectives.

[K'Hexx]

Chuut, if you think holding a defensive position is an invalid concept in warfare, you should read about Gettysburg, or maybe the Battle of the Somme. Maybe it irks you that such a passive concept can be effective, as it surely irked Lee.

Lee and more notably his aide Longstreet, was a master of denfensive warfare, Lee blundered at Gettysburg after humiliating much larger and better equipped Union armies for years.

However, the idea of a defensive position in open space is just plain retarded.  We are talking imense distances of EMPTY space.  We are also talking time as measured in large periods of time, how could  a squadron to remain totally together while maintaining a defensive coverage of the entire area represented by a hex?  They would have to be split up and call for back up if the foe was spotted, or they would only be able to cover a small portion of the hexx.  A draft which split up a squadron such as this simply represents an occassion where the drafter was able to initiate the battle before the reinforcements from the squadron could arrive.  The missions that draft all the squadron represent an occassion when the squadron was able to assemble before the shooting began.   It makes plain sense.

Now when we are talking base and planet hexes the squadron should not be split up as there is a reasonable defensive position involved.

[762_XC]

A defensive position does not have to use terrain to be effective. Maybe Jutland was a better example. But even in naval warfare you have night and weather to give you cover; in space it is not so. Oh sure you have ion storms and asteroid fields and such but these things make up .00000000001% of the total volume of space.

Sensor ranges being what they are there is simply no way a single ship is going to isolate one ship of a squadron of three in open space. The concept is retarded.

That's the technobabble reason it's dumb. For the gameplay reason, see DH's example above.

You want to use your initiative against a fleet sitting rock, outflank them. That's the way it works in RL, not by charging into them and magically getting to fight only a fraction of their force.

[NuclearWessels]

I like the generic name.  Can't the end of mission report be made to give the actual name?  That way if a particular mission is bugged then you get that last moment reminder of what mission it was so that you can record it when needed.

Good point - I'll definitely add the true script name to the end-of-mission reports, I really should have done that a long time ago - thanks!

dave

[KAT Chuut-Ritt]

then tell us how to get them back

Spread out objectives.

another way is secret objectives for each race.  If noone knows for certin what the other sides targets are it opens up the game.