ckammp
Posts: 756
Joined: 5/30/2009
From: Rear Area training facility
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: witpqs
No one forces players to stack high. And no one forces anyone to use stacking limits. You ask why stacking limits are "necessary" but also acknowledge that stacking limits are optional.
Should stacking limits on airfields be removed just because nothing forces players to over-stack airfields? No, because it was explained that players are expected to over-stack airfields at various times and the limits provide the operational penalties for doing so. Likewise with ground stacking at bases that was introduced with the original release. Nothing forces players to over-stack a small island, and nothing forces a player to invade that small island with forces above the stacking-limit. But just like in real life the commanders had the freedom to do that and pay the price it took to do it, the players are given the option to do that and the limits provide the operational penalties for doing so.
It's the same with the new, optional, stacking limits outside of bases. If you choose to stack over the limits then you pay the operational penalty.
But the real thing is that the stacking limits are not even built into the scenarios themselves. They are in a separate set of pwhex files. If the game (Beta releases past a certain version) sees the stacking limits in the pwhex files installed, it uses them. If it doesn't see them, it doesn't use them. So you can play any scenario with or without the optional stacking limits. They don't even require the newer, optional expanded map as there is a version of the modified pwhex files for the standard map.
The real issue you seem to have is:
quote:
...so, again, why are code-changing "options" like stacking limits necessary?
First the "code-changing" complaint. It's an option. What is so offensive to you about other people having options for them to choose to use or not?
Why are stacking limits necessary? Nothing is necessary. You and your opponent can agree on anything you want instead, or not - your choice. And that doesn't affect which scenario you choose, because the stacking limits are not built into the scenario, they are in the pwhex files.
I'm not going to get into defending why some players want to use things like stacking limits.
The stuff about an alt-history mob controlling both this forum and future AE development is so utterly without foundation in fact that it's wacko and I won't comment further on it.
The issue is that no one forces players to create huge mega-stacks of LCUs, they do it anyway.
And then the player moves his mega-stack around, attempting to crush anything in his way. So his opponent creates his own mega-stack, and they fight it out.
And it creates, of course, combat results that are nothing like historical results, and which neither player agrees with; in short it breaks the code.
However, rather than admit it was their fault for creating the a-historical mega-stacks, the players come running to the forum, loudly crying that "The game is borked, and someone should do something about it!"
And then the code is obliging changed to appease the whiners, often immediately and with no consideration for any long-term effects.
It was to prevent these situations that DaBabes was forced to include stacking limits; and it's a pretty sad situation when a mod has to include limits to prevent selfish players from abusing the game.
As for the alt-history, anything-goes mob - it is fairly obvious who controls what is put out in the beta patches.
|
Printable Version
DaBabies Fleet Advance Base Force - 
but with 432 Nav support, 72 Aviation support and 36 Shore Party they help out a lot. 
Even PH is limited, an SL of 170K sounds big but you can max it out if your not careful. 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread