Author Topic: Future of main arena ? (Read 695 times)

AwTD · « **on:** December 20, 2003, 11:12:59 AM »

I have asked this question before but ...The main arena is a permanent component of AH ? This is about all I fly in . I hope the effort your putting into AH 2 "Tour of Duty" doesn`t overwhelm what makes AH so perfect FLEXIBILITY . Flying anytime you like , doing what you want , the ability to fly as a group or solo . If I wanted a role playing game I wouldn`t be flying sims . Opening the game to a new market is fine but please don`t kill the old one . Rumors abound ...hope the death of main arena is only one of those . .........................TD

guttboy · « **Reply #1 on:** December 20, 2003, 11:16:38 AM »

AwTD,

Not to worry...from reading other posts there will be the "Classic" version and the "TOD" version. I will be (like you) staying with the "Classic" MA style of play!

Cya there!

simshell · « **Reply #2 on:** December 20, 2003, 01:50:20 PM »

i think TOD well take a nice bite out of the main numbers

il be going to the TOD for sure:aok

Toad · « **Reply #3 on:** December 20, 2003, 02:04:26 PM »

Actually, TOD is aimed at the "box set" sim players. It's not expected to draw that many from the current subscription list, I think.

Shane · « **Reply #4 on:** December 21, 2003, 12:42:02 AM »

I'm sure the MA will experience a temporary fluctuation as every dweebling Generalreichfieldmarschallism o tries to progress beyond cadet. the ones who stick to it with dedication will be the aforementioned box-simmers and those who think they'll have mad skillz killing ai drones.

Toad · « **Reply #5 on:** December 21, 2003, 01:56:01 AM »

Apparently, you get almost nothing for killing a drone. To advance the mission objective has to be attained. Killing folks is a sideline and not necessarily the path to high rank.

Arlo · « **Reply #6 on:** December 21, 2003, 09:33:31 AM »

As an interesting tidbit for those who think it'll be about nothing BUT shooting AI down ...

There will apparently be player-pilots on BOTH sides of the fight and although the battle will be supplemented by AI aircraft (giving more "round the clock" battle immersion) there should be ample opportunity for humans to fight humans in TOD. Does anyone really think there will be no "fighter sweep" missions available? That the only options players will have will be bomber or bomber escort? I've seen disgust, anxiety, critics critisizing something they've read scant descriptions about.

Face it .... we're all still "blind men describing an elephant" here. I may end up critical of it myself, someday. But that day will come AFTER I've tried it ... and tried it more than once.

Ghosth · « **Reply #7 on:** December 21, 2003, 10:25:25 AM »

Well said arlo!

beet1e · « **Reply #8 on:** December 21, 2003, 10:55:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AwTD
doing what you want

Unfortunately, that would also include kamikaze fuel porks for those who want to do them, as they too have paid their $14.95. Thus the freedom of choice policy has led to crap gameplay, much to the chagrin of some of its most ardent plaudits.

Toad · « **Reply #9 on:** December 21, 2003, 11:04:01 AM »

However, the players do not set the limits of gameplay. There's a company management team that does that. We all know those people read these boards and thus must be aware of both/all sides of the discussions. Yet gameplay remains essentially unchanged.

What do you make of that?

Arlo · « **Reply #10 on:** December 21, 2003, 11:23:15 AM »

That blitching will get ya nowhere?

Heh ... I've seen complaints bout:

Chute shooting
Chute using
HOing
Fuel porking
FH porking
BH porking
Suicide Jaboing
Milkrunning
HQ bombing
Spawn camping
Gang banging
Cherry picking
Furballing
Fleet parking
The guy you just killed re-upping and killing you back
Too much moderation
Not enough moderation
Just not the right type of moderation
Aircraft overmodeled
Aircraft undermodeled
GVs undermodeled
GVs overmodeled
Ships undermodeled
Ships overmodeled
Terrains too big
Terrains too small
Bases too far apart
Bases too close together
Too much strat
Strat broken/not enough strat
Sheep undermodeled
Sheep overmodeled
Not enough sheep models
(and several other things)

And now ... dammit .... someone needs to blitch that all of these issues haven't been addressed and addressed properly!

Personally .... I think the MA works exactly the way it was designed to (as do you, it appears) and doesn't need changing.

I still look forward to seeing the debut of TOD and hope it offers some alternatives ... but no need to "fix" what ain't broken.

Toad · « **Reply #11 on:** December 21, 2003, 11:33:33 AM »

No, what I see is this:

There's some people that, given the present game/gameplay, just want to do what they personally want to do. All they ask is that the game accommodate that.

Then there are players that want the game to force other people to play a certain way. Conveniently, that particular way is the one espoused by the poster. All others must be denigrated and disparaged as children or quakers.

Arlo · « **Reply #12 on:** December 21, 2003, 11:43:49 AM »

Hmmmm .... somehow I managed to miss how our viewpoints diverged, Toad.

beet1e · « **Reply #13 on:** December 21, 2003, 01:23:01 PM »

Yes, Mr. Toad... I also noticed some being denigrated as sky accountants, strat potatos etc. You wouldn't hang out with anyone that did that, would you??? psst - correct spelling is "accommodate" - catches a lot of people out

Arlo - have you been to Alice's Restaurant lately?

Toad · « **Reply #14 on:** December 21, 2003, 01:40:40 PM »

I most certainly would. They fly like I like to fly. Even if I don't approve of denigrating comments.

Like "Quake With Wings" or "Children's Maps".