Author Topic: System: Country is not accepting new pilots (Read 2685 times)

Murdr · « **Reply #60 on:** August 04, 2004, 07:44:58 PM »

Quote

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One thing that I think HTC should do is only allow players to change sides if their country has more players at the time than either of the other two sides. If you want to have a rule to switch sides I think that should be it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I sorta like this idea.

HiTech

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
Dislike the idea Jackal1. But like the flip side that the high number country can change regardless of time limit.

HiTech

Trying to figure out how this would be applied. I log on, see my normal country has low numbers. Switch to the high number country, dogpile awhile. No time limit on the high number country that Im now in, so I just switch back to my normal country before I log. The next evening I can do the same thing again.

Isnt it easier to dogpile then, or am I misunderstanding the scenerio?

ghi · « **Reply #61 on:** August 04, 2004, 08:00:12 PM »

If we want realistic planes,flight model why not 2 sides fighting in MA, to make it more realistic.

Murdr · « **Reply #62 on:** August 04, 2004, 08:09:27 PM »

Im too lazy to look the quote up, but HT has said he has experience with 2,3,4+ country "free-for-all" arenas and they feel 3 is the best, with no further elaboration.

RT · « **Reply #63 on:** August 04, 2004, 08:17:14 PM »

I have been trying to do my part to alleviate the number problem for some months, when I decided to switch to the out-numbered side for the best interest of fair play in the game.

I understand that some squads are basically dedicated to countries, and respect that. I also know a lot of the pundits haven't done a thing but give the subject lip service.

If players feel country loyalty, I respect that. Personally, having experienced a couple years as a Rook playing out-numbered, and feeling at times that the situations were not very fair, I would feel like a hypocrite if I did unto others what I would not have them do unto me.

My point is that we each have the freedom to ask ourselves to step up, and not necessarily ask someone else to do what we could be doing for ourselves.

I disagree with any of the ideas suggesting that HT manage the numbers. The number imbalance goes to the integrity of the community, which speaks for itself.

ghostdancer · « **Reply #64 on:** August 04, 2004, 08:21:11 PM »

I believe a large map is now in play. Will have to wait to see what effect it has on game play .. hopefully positive.

X2Lee · « **Reply #65 on:** August 04, 2004, 08:55:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Murdr
Im too lazy to look the quote up, but HT has said he has experience with 2,3,4+ country "free-for-all" arenas and they feel 3 is the best, with no further elaboration.

What happens in a 2 country setup is that when the second country gets banged down half the players are porked instead of
a third of the player base.

It was tried in AW also and it really messed up the game.

SlapShot · « **Reply #66 on:** August 05, 2004, 08:27:59 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Murdr
Trying to figure out how this would be applied. I log on, see my normal country has low numbers. Switch to the high number country, dogpile awhile. No time limit on the high number country that Im now in, so I just switch back to my normal country before I log. The next evening I can do the same thing again.

Isnt it easier to dogpile then, or am I misunderstanding the scenerio?

I believe that you have it backwards Murdr.

The way I read it ...

If the country that you are flying for has MORE numbers than the country that you want to switch to ... you can. This allows those players to switch to another country and try to obtain balance.

If the country that you are flying for has LESS numbers than the country that you want to switch to ... you can't. This doesn't allow players to switch to more populated countries and cause more of an imbalance. It would effectively stop those who "bail" out and move to the "other" country.

ghostdancer · « **Reply #67 on:** August 05, 2004, 08:49:34 AM »

I am not sure of this but have read that the 2 country system over in WWII Online basically also has a number disadvantage. The allies consistently field more players than the Germans. Supposedly the Germans have developed a culture to counter this and a tighter organizations and multi-unit game ethic to counter being out numbered.

If what I have read is correct then it is also like it was in AW when two countries was tried. You never reach a point of balance and what is consider major imbalances are always argued over.

Are things massively disadvantage when its 120, 120, 160? 120, 120, 140? .. When its 120,120, 200 yes. But you will hear people scream about it when only 30+ more or 20+ more.

I think the idea here of not letting people switch from their country to another country if that country has more players (or is a certain percentage larger) is worth looking into.

Although truthfully I am not sure just exactly how many independents switch to the larger country. I think some but I don't think its a massive ground swell ... I haven't noticed large swells in numbers as the independents switch.

I have noticed that at certain point when a country gets reduced to just a few bases that many times you just see a large amount of people log. That goes for all countries. Oh, and then you will always see a fall of numbers at a certain point when the east coasters and mid america have to get ready for bed and work the next day.

Jackal1 · « **Reply #68 on:** August 05, 2004, 10:03:42 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by SlapShot
I believe that you have it backwards Murdr.

The way I read it ...

the country that you are flying for has LESS numbers than the country that you want to switch to ... you can't.

Not true according to HT. Read up and in another thread I suggested this and HT said he did not like the idea.

Murdr · « **Reply #69 on:** August 05, 2004, 06:20:57 PM »

ghostdancer, I wouldnt call independents a groundswell either, but their net effect of reducing one countries roster and padding the others in essence doubles their effect. If its 150/150/190 (the high# country up by 40) and only 5 pilots from each switch to the high number country it becomes 145/145/200(the high# country up by 55).

The only problem I see with the idea where HT said "I sorta like this idea." (above) is that 2/3rd of the people couldnt switch at a given time. That is actually what caused me to consider the scenerio described in my first post.

Was hoping someone could shed some light on my interpretation of

Quote

by HiTech"But like the flip side that the high number country can change regardless of time limit."

Which was:

Quote

"Trying to figure out how this would be applied. I log on, see my normal country has low numbers. Switch to the high number country, dogpile awhile. No time limit on the high number country that Im now in, so I just switch back to my normal country before I log. The next evening I can do the same thing again.

Isnt it easier to dogpile then, or am I misunderstanding the scenerio?"

phookat · « **Reply #70 on:** August 05, 2004, 09:22:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Jackal1
When it gets to the point to where you log on to find that dar is porked, numbers are ridiculously against your country and there is not even a slim chance of enjoying some time in the game, then IMHO it`s time for some changes.
I just hope the purist "furball only" crowd is satisfied. This is what your whines has done to the game.

Really? How? What does a furball-friendly map have to do with a numbers imbalance?

NM, I see that you've been asked already and weren't able to answer. Carry on.

phookat · « **Reply #71 on:** August 05, 2004, 09:40:44 PM »

I agree that it would be a nice thing to find a solution to the numbers imbalance.

But I don't think perks will do it. I think the people who switch to higher numbers do so because they want to join the horde, not anything related to perks (resets don't happen often anyway). Any side-switchers here to confirm or deny this?

Also, Murdr, I'm not sure if your suggestion will have much of an impact. I get the sense that the imbalance is not caused by switching, but rather the fact that people and squads tend to stick with a single country. Does anyone (i.e. HTC) have figures as to what percentage of players switch countries to the higher numbers, sampled say every night and averaged?

If it is actually a large percentage, then I say great idea! And the idea should also be applied if the numbers are something like 200-200-50. I.e. largest is 25% or more, or smallest is 25% or more.

Murdr · « **Reply #72 on:** August 05, 2004, 10:23:25 PM »

Rgr pookat, I understand your points.

The numbers are like a pendulum that swings back and forth, that's just the way it is. I am looking at the fact that 5 people leaving 1 country for the high number country impacts the net difference between the 2 as 10. I feel the "pendulum" would swing a little more freely if that effect was curbed in some way. Also it would discourage a whole squad moving where its presence isnt really required.

Basically though I dont like how people wanting to take the easy route (however small a group) can have a magnified infuence (net difference) on the arena. Since the issue has been batted around lately I might as well add my opinion.

Simaril · « **Reply #73 on:** August 05, 2004, 11:22:16 PM »

HT has addressed the preponderance of the top five popular planes (more commonly known as the "dweeb planes") indirectly, by adjusting the perk ratios. Although its early, I am seeing a few less of them and a bit more variety in the air -- not much change, but some.

Why not use the same indirect approach, tweaking rather than more radical change?

Now the most populous country gets fewer perks for kills, and pays less for perk planes. This helps play balance some for the night, and indirectly for the campaign.

Why not just add a multiplier? Double the ratio, so the outnumbered country gets twice its current perks for a kill, and finds perk planes half their current calculated cost. If that's too radical, then increase the ratio by 50-75%.

I really think this would work well, without adding a completely untested element.

Murdr · « **Reply #74 on:** August 05, 2004, 11:47:16 PM »

You know Simaril, when perk incentives were brought to the discussion, I had a similar thought regarding a modifier. I wouldnt have a problem with the approach you mentioned. Perks have very little bearing on when/where/how I fly, but I know some people like to perk farm. Encouraging a portion of the pilots to switch where they are needed, is as good as discouraging a portion from switching where they arnt needed as far as Im concerned.