Why not fix what's broke?

[baine1]

With bugs still left in AHII, no new planes added to the game in more than a year and TOD seemingly DOA why does HTC tackle a project sure to anger at least a third of their customer base instead of spending its time on things that need doing???
Instead of taking the time limiting the planes I can fly, why not give me a B-24 (then maybe I wouldn't feel so bad about losing the B-17, or fix whatever happened to gvs (rounds routinely bounce off the teflon panzers these days) or fix it so I can alt-tab without encountering the white screen of death.
Instead we get a draconian measure that doesn't take into account any of the nuances of the three country system and leaves me flying Lancs against players from two countries who can buy 262s cheap and combine their numbers if they can ever get their act together.
This system actually penalizes teamwork _ something that (from what I read about TOD) HTC seemed to want to encourage.
MAybe if I whine long enough...

[humble]

The problem is that IT IS BROKEN. At least thats what the powers that be decided. Otherwise they wouldnt have intervened. Is the method choosen draconian...not really...come up with an alternate solution that you think will solve the problem.

[Chortle]

I think adding a B24 takes a little longer than knocking up an excel spreadsheet, and there's like, only 6 of em in the office.

[Westy]

After being a player for whopping two months (going by your board registration date) how are you able to discern what is broken and what is not?

[Stang]

This system actually penalizes teamwork

Teamwork and hording are NOT the same thing.  Just ask Beet

[baine1]

Chortle _ How long has it been since they added a new plane? Yes, it takes time, but we have been waiting a long, long time.

I didn't think the old system was broken. At no time since I've been playing can I remember being on when the Rooks outnumbered the combined bish/nit players. I have been on on days when the Bish and nits have gotten together and reduced the Rook real estate considerably. I've also been on on days when Rooks were outnumbered by one or both sides and got whomped. I've also been on when Rooks had the numbers but couldn't make headway against a well-organized defense.

Now we have a system that discourages teamwork and encourages stagnent maps.

The fact that rooks have managed to get together and say "Let's all show up on a certain day and really kick some tail" isn't something that should be penalized. If Knights or Bishops could do it, more power to them. Instead they choose to whine and complain.

In the past we had a system that rewarded the sides that couldn't get their act together by giving them cheap perk planes and awarding them higher perk points if they did manage to shoot down some planes.

That wasn't enough. 125 point 262s didn't do enough to balance things, they whined.


So now we have a system that
1.) Rewards them with higher perks

2. Allows them to get perk planes for fewer points

3. Now makes the best fighters, and the only heavy buff with a slight chance of surviving an encounter with a 190 or Typhoon, unavailable.

What's next if this doesn't work? Cash payments to the sides with the lowest numbers?

I can live without flying a 51D or La7. But I think including the B-17 in the mix is the wrongest thing in an ill-considered solution. Yes, they can pound bases, but they can also be swatted down quiet easily by a stiff defense, believe me, I've flown through some stiff defenses.

If we are going to take the "Let's level the playing field" to its next logical step, why not start limiting the planes that the best players can fly. A lot of people who play this game aren't very good at it. Is it fair that they get shot down so much (See, I'm thinking of you Westy.)
Why not say that the top 100 players can only fly the Il-2, the Kate and drive the M3. This will give the lesser players a chance to get some kills.
The top 200 can also fly the SBD, the Val, the P-40 and the zekes.
Nobody better than 1,000 can get their hands on any Spit, P-51 or La. Westy can only get a PT boat _ with no torpedos.
That should make things fair.

[TequilaChaser]

Originally posted by baine1

Why not say that the top 100 players can only fly the Il-2, the Kate and drive the M3. This will give the lesser players a chance to get some kills.
The top 200 can also fly the SBD, the Val, the P-40 and the zekes.
Nobody better than 1,000 can get their hands on any Spit, P-51 or La. Westy can only get a PT boat _ with no torpedos.
That should make things fair.

what makes you think that some one with a score lower than 100, or even a thousand is any better than some of the awesome fighter pile -its that don't care about score or point munching and hover in the 1200 to 1800 range?

this scenario is a bad choice if you base it on someone's over all score,  you will have people crashing, augering bailing and not landing kills just to keep their score above the limits imposed if this was put into action.

[SFCHONDO]

Hate to bust your bubble, but rank means absolutly nada....Some of the best pilots in this game have terrible ranks. That's due to them mainly just flying in fighter mode. If they don't GV, Bomb, and Attack. The rank in these areas will make there overall rank poor. Since this new idea has been incorperated the sides have seemed to be overall more balanced. If and when your side gets there B17's limited, just go try something else. With a positive attitude you may just have fun trying to bust through the enemy lines with say a 234....Hec; what else do you have to do with those bomber perks. use em up and just enjoy what you have, not worry about what you don't have. That or you could swap countries and help balance out the MA. Which is the intent of doing this in the first place. just my 2 cents is all. have a Great day.

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by Stang
Teamwork and hording are NOT the same thing.  Just ask Beet

OUTSTANDING point

[MOIL]

Originally posted by Chortle
I think adding a B24 takes a little longer than knocking up an excel spreadsheet, and there's like, only 6 of em in the office.

Ask for help ?

Not starting any fights here, just a thought.

[Shane]

Originally posted by baine1
This system actually penalizes teamwork _ something that (from what I read about TOD) HTC seemed to want to encourage.
MAybe if I whine long enough...

i'm guessing here that teamwork doesn't include using that numerical superiority to utilize a proper and tactically effective flight of escorts?

[Chortle]

Hey, I'm just trying to be reasonable. I could argue that since AH2, we've got 65 new planes but I dont suppose many would agree.

Ask for help ?

Who knows? Maybe getting bigger creates more problems? Maybe everyones 50 cents a day doesn't stretch as far as some people think? If I ever see someone from HTC on the equivalent of MTVs cribs ... 'This is my P51D, yeah I took the engine out to make more room for my sneakers' then I might get a bit arsey.

[Kev367th]

With bugs still left in AHII, no new planes added to the game in more than a year and TOD seemingly DOA why does HTC tackle a project sure to anger at least a third of their customer base instead of spending its time on things that need doing???


Hmmm, does this mean around 2/3 aren't angry?
Seems fair enough then, the majority wanted no night, result - no night. The majority wanted fuel, result - min of 75% fuel always.
The majority must have wanted a change, result - the current ENV system.
Still don't see how it penalizes teamwork, unless teamwork means you can get an overwhelming number of players on and kick the snot outta the other two countries.
Seems people want to have even planesets on an uneven playing field.

[4510]

Hmmm, does this mean around 2/3 aren't angry?
Seems fair enough then, the majority wanted no night, result - no night. The majority wanted fuel, result - min of 75% fuel always.
The majority must have wanted a change, result - the current ENV system.
Still don't see how it penalizes teamwork, unless teamwork means you can get an overwhelming number of players on and kick the snot outta the other two countries.
Seems people want to have even planesets on an uneven playing field. [/QUOTE]


I think it is a bit difficult to say what the majority wanted.  I've certainly not seen any voting mechanism or any figures released.
If the majority of the arena wanted things to be level... I suggest they would have cross-leveled the arena.  From the discussion it would seem that numbers are so unbalanced that the majority sits in Rookland.  Many of the arguments in favor of this "fix" point to the fact the Rooks won't cross-level.  Well if they won't cross-level, and they have the majority.. then I find it hard to believe the majority supports this "fix".  If the majority sits outside of Rookland we didn't have a problem to start with.

GhstDancer posted a bunch of different figures... snap shots in time etc.... but data every bit as valid as other data talked about.  His data didn't show any overwhelming numbers imbalance.  (Sunday excluded)  I've certainly not seen any data released from system logs etc. that validate this argument that a numbers imbalance exists on a large scale over extended periods of the day.  No.. I have to disagree... lacking any numerical data that supports your statement... I don't think we can say that the MAJORITY wants this.

[Kev367th]

Well I suppose as HT has already said it would have only taken 1.7% of the Rooks to move you could go from that.
That leaves 98.3 / 3 countries. For the hell of it say 32.5% per country.
So that becomes Knits 32.5, Bish 32.5, Rooks 34.2 (rounded yes I know its just under 100%) and I am assuming Bish / Knits even split which isn't the case.
Still leaves 65% other countries 34.2% Rooks.

From reading posts it seems the majority of other countries are happy with new system, which would put Rooks in the minority, and thats assuming ALL Rooks are dissatisfied.
I can only guess the imbalance was that bad (and we didn't fix it ourselves ) that HT had to step in.
Agree with it or not, it's a gutsy move.