Author Topic: Changing some host items today.  (Read 2485 times)

Offline Simaril

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5149
Changing some host items today.
« Reply #30 on: August 19, 2004, 06:22:02 PM »
Thanks, HT. Appreciate the thought going in to refinements -- adn not that one guy's opinions matter, but I agree with these adjustments.

Especially thanks for the big map!
Maturity is knowing that I've been an idiot in the past.
Wisdom is realizing I will be an idiot in the future.
Common sense is trying to not be an idiot right now

"Social Fads are for sheeple." - Meatwad

Offline me62

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 66
Changing some host items today.
« Reply #31 on: August 19, 2004, 11:48:13 PM »
Sounds good to me, lets go fly!

Mike

Offline GunnerCAF

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 946
      • Gunner's Grange
Changing some host items today.
« Reply #32 on: August 19, 2004, 11:55:09 PM »
Good changes!  Thanks HT!

Gunner
Gunner
Cactus Air Force

Offline SFCHONDO

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1817
Changing some host items today.
« Reply #33 on: August 20, 2004, 01:10:39 AM »
Excellent, I like the new changes HT. WTG!!!
        HONDO
DENVER BRONCOS    
   
  Retired from AH

Offline beet1e

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7848
Re: Changing some host items today.
« Reply #34 on: August 20, 2004, 03:46:02 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by hitech
5. Added a minimum total player count setting that is needed before the ENY values kick in.
I don't understand the reason for this modification. The MA tells me that the arena attendance must be 140 before ENY balancing takes effect. But this was the situation this morning at 0820 UTC (0920 local time here, 0420 eastern in the US).



This means that the Bishops can be gangbanged, if Rooks/Knits force them into a two front war, ie. 10 Bish to fight the 38 knits, and 10 Bish to fight the 41 Rooks. And because of this modification, those Rooks/Knits will probably be pork-hording in P51/LA7 etc.

Why should one side suffer just as they did in the bad old days (before last week) because of relatively low arena attendance? In the situation depicted above, Bish need the help of ENY balancing, but are not getting it.

Offline Replicant

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3567
Re: Re: Changing some host items today.
« Reply #35 on: August 20, 2004, 04:49:01 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by beet1e
I don't understand the reason for this modification. The MA tells me that the arena attendance must be 140 before ENY balancing takes effect. But this was the situation this morning at 0820 UTC (0920 local time here, 0420 eastern in the US).



This means that the Bishops can be gangbanged, if Rooks/Knits force them into a two front war, ie. 10 Bish to fight the 38 knits, and 10 Bish to fight the 41 Rooks. And because of this modification, those Rooks/Knits will probably be pork-hording in P51/LA7 etc.

Why should one side suffer just as they did in the bad old days (before last week) because of relatively low arena attendance? In the situation depicted above, Bish need the help of ENY balancing, but are not getting it.


That's a very common occurance Beetle.  I think it's because most of the Japanese squads are Rook and the US Bish squads have gone to bed and hence not many left in Bishop land.  During this time Rooks often steam roll through Bishopland but by the looks of it, the new rule doesn't apply now unless it's prime time I guess.
NEXX

Offline ET

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 325
Changing some host items today.
« Reply #36 on: August 20, 2004, 04:53:42 AM »
I agree wth Beet1es post. Even if all countrys fought each other equally, the Bishops would be outnumbered 2-1 on both fronts.
 
ENY balancing should not be turned on in some cases and off in others.

Offline Schutt

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1138
Changing some host items today.
« Reply #37 on: August 20, 2004, 04:54:44 AM »
Nice changes keep up the good work !

Offline Shane

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7945
Changing some host items today.
« Reply #38 on: August 20, 2004, 06:42:35 AM »
I'm sure the min # will be tweaked somewhat.  personally i feel the 140 limit is on the low side. an arena is almost never reset with less than 300 on anyway...  so perhaps it'll get tweaked upwards toward that #.
Surrounded by suck and underwhelmed with mediocrity.
I'm always right, it just takes some poepl longer to come to that realization than others.
I'm not perfect, but I am closer to it than you are.
"...vox populi, vox dei..."  ~Alcuin ca. 798
Truth doesn't need exaggeration.

Offline Zanth

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1052
      • http://www.a-26legacy.org/photo.htm
Changing some host items today.
« Reply #39 on: August 20, 2004, 02:31:36 PM »
I saw that this AM EST, I log on for a flight or 2 before work during this time.  Bishops were really getting a beating

Offline Simaril

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5149
Re: Re: Changing some host items today.
« Reply #40 on: August 20, 2004, 03:42:09 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by beet1e
I don't understand the reason for this modification. The MA tells me that the arena attendance must be 140 before ENY balancing takes effect. But this was the situation this morning at 0820 UTC (0920 local time here, 0420 eastern in the US).



This means that the Bishops can be gangbanged, if Rooks/Knits force them into a two front war, ie. 10 Bish to fight the 38 knits, and 10 Bish to fight the 41 Rooks. And because of this modification, those Rooks/Knits will probably be pork-hording in P51/LA7 etc.

Why should one side suffer just as they did in the bad old days (before last week) because of relatively low arena attendance? In the situation depicted above, Bish need the help of ENY balancing, but are not getting it.


I can see your point , and if this happened regularly then another idea might be to half the eny penalty calculation when total numbers are low....


Here's why i beleive some total number adjsutment is necessary. When the totals are, say 40/30/30, the two low sides are outnumbered by 33% -- which would take away almost all planes for the high team, except amybe the goon.   ;)

However, the total advantage is only 10 pilots, or 5 per opponent. That's not going to impact the gameplay AT ALL, and clearly doesnt deserve the draconian ENY penalty that would otherwise be in store with a % only calculation.

I suggest that under a set number, like 100 pilots total, the NEY be left in force but that its effects be rduced by 50-75%. That way there still is some help for the low guys, but the team with only  afew extra players -- representing a disproprtionate % -- aren't hi too hard.
Maturity is knowing that I've been an idiot in the past.
Wisdom is realizing I will be an idiot in the future.
Common sense is trying to not be an idiot right now

"Social Fads are for sheeple." - Meatwad

Offline Overlag

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3888
Changing some host items today.
« Reply #41 on: October 30, 2004, 09:39:08 PM »
why did you make it almost impossible for a HQ to be killed?

i hope its almost impossible to resupply it now.....but i bet thats not the case






welcome to fighters high!!!!!! :rolleyes:
Adam Webb - 71st (Eagle) Squadron RAF Wing B
This post has a Krusty rating of 37

Offline ghi

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2669
Changing some host items today.
« Reply #42 on: October 31, 2004, 01:58:11 AM »
HITECH,
    If you can do it for HQ, why not for CVs??!!
 Lot of fun around CVs fights, but are going down too eassy
     Me110 can kill CVs eassy with 30mm ,2-3 passes, but 8''guns, SB need 12+ hits!!??  Why??

Offline Flyboy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1582
Changing some host items today.
« Reply #43 on: October 31, 2004, 02:25:56 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Overlag
why did you make it almost impossible for a HQ to be killed?

i hope its almost impossible to resupply it now.....but i bet thats not the case



welcome to fighters high!!!!!! :rolleyes:


i do not agree with you overlag, before a single formation of B17s could destroy the HQ completely...which is completely gamey.

now you actually need to work for it... form a raid or something, that can be reral cool 5-6 forms of B17s..

Offline Simaril

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5149
Changing some host items today.
« Reply #44 on: October 31, 2004, 06:07:01 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by ghi
HITECH,
    If you can do it for HQ, why not for CVs??!!
 Lot of fun around CVs fights, but are going down too eassy
     Me110 can kill CVs eassy with 30mm ,2-3 passes, but 8''guns, SB need 12+ hits!!??  Why??


Ditto.

Plane cannons have limited effect on armored vehicles; why can they sink more heaviily armored ships? Unarmored gun emplacements should go down under cannon fire, but the 5" armored turrets should be tough as nails.

However, if the intent is to simulate loss of flight deck function, taking away the only reason to have a carrier, then "sinking" the ship would be reasonable stand in -- which allows us to have a replacement sooner. The armored big guns go down way too easy, though, especially in comparison to the protection GV's now get.

Even so, from a game play perspective, the carriers are removed from play too easily. (IMHO)
Maturity is knowing that I've been an idiot in the past.
Wisdom is realizing I will be an idiot in the future.
Common sense is trying to not be an idiot right now

"Social Fads are for sheeple." - Meatwad