New ENY idea

[Blammo]

OK, no secret that I don't like the ENY balance thingie, but I am really trying see practical ways to use a that model.  So, after putting my noggin on it, how about this (and please forgive me if it has already been suggested)

We keep the ENY scheme, but instead of locking out the plane(s) completely, it starts reducing the number available that can be flown at any one time.

For instance:

200 players on.  50 Knights, 50 Rooks and 100 Bishops.  At this point some of the low ENY airplanes start getting limited for the Bishops.  The Rooks and Knights are under no restriction because they have equally low numbers on.  You might say that when the limitation balance thingie when into effect, only 10 to 20 percent of a sides total number would be allowed to fly those planes.  In this example (with 10% limiter), only 10 P-51Ds or 10 LA-7s would be available to fly by the Bishops during the time of the imbalance.

The percentage available could be a fixed number (like 15% of the sides total numbers) or a decreasing variable percentage as their numbers advantage inceased.  You could set the side with the most players limited to 10% of numbers on able to fly low ENY planes, the next side maybe 20% and the side with the lowest numbers would be unlimited.

Hope I am making sense.

I know the numbers in the arena change constantly and maybe it would be too difficult to code (don't think so, since it is just math). However, it would still allow plane types to be available for all sides AND provide a balancing mechanism.  This model could also be applied to all aircraft and not just the 49 ENY or less group (if the numbers imbalance was server enough).  If people wanted to fly a specific plane and there were not enough of them available for a specific country, then they could switch, but at the same time, they might be able to use part of those number of available aircraft and a sustitute for the others.

Well?  Thoughts, suggestions, comments, problems?

[Arlo]

Eh ... if it can be done .. why not. I'm almost deaf now ... I want to hold onto what hearing I got.

[MOIL]

Ok, I gotta step in here,  I just have to know.

Seeing how this "ENY" thing {whatever it does} has so many people up in arms and all, what would happen if HTC just put the arena to even settings for everyone?
The only thing that appears to be such an issue is a certain country's numbers {amount of players}

No limits on planes, fuel {historical load out would be nice I would think}, ammo, ord, boats & GV's.

Then let the arena fight it out, if your out numbered, oh well. You know how many times LTAR defended or attacked a field and we didn't have numbers. He11 we were the "underdogs" 80% of the time, ask anyone. We managed to take and defend many many fields, but sometimes we lost.

I guess I just don't understand it

[Blammo]

Originally posted by MOIL
Ok, I gotta step in here,  I just have to know.

Seeing how this "ENY" thing {whatever it does} has so many people up in arms and all, what would happen if HTC just put the arena to even settings for everyone?
The only thing that appears to be such an issue is a certain country's numbers {amount of players}

No limits on planes, fuel {historical load out would be nice I would think}, ammo, ord, boats & GV's.

Then let the arena fight it out, if your out numbered, oh well. You know how many times LTAR defended or attacked a field and we didn't have numbers. He11 we were the "underdogs" 80% of the time, ask anyone. We managed to take and defend many many fields, but sometimes we lost.

I guess I just don't understand it

MOIL, I agree with you.  However, I am sensible enough, even though I hate the ENY thingie, to realize that this is my dance partner for the time being.  Maybe tomorrow it won't be, but it is for now.  I am going to continue to voice my opposition to it, and probably continue to get my threads locked, but I figured if maybe I put some real brain power into it something can be derived that is reasonable for everyone (more or less since you cannot please everyone).

All that being said, do you have any comments specific to my suggestion?  If not, please let this thread stay on topic.  I think you have some very good perspective to add, but I am looking for comments specific to the system I described (problems with it or whatever).

[hitech]

Blammo: I don't see anything that would not work with your idea other than arguments between players of the same country and complexity. I.E. people would quickly want a que to get the next available plane.

But I'm wondering what advantages you see that is different than how things are now?

[DoKGonZo]

Yeah ... you'd have people sitting in the tower waiting for the next La-7. Meanwhile the people who took the lesser rides would be flying inferior planes at probably even odds because of the people waiting for "their plane."

[Blammo]

Originally posted by hitech
Blammo: I don't see anything that would not work with your idea other than arguments between players of the same country and complexity. I.E. people would quickly want a que to get the next available plane.

But I'm wondering what advantages you see that is different than how things are now?

Well, I did not spend a lot of time thinking about advantage or disadvantage.  Just was trying to think of something that retained the best of both camps on this issue.  I think what DoKGonZo said points out the strongest advantage.  I mean, if I wanted to fly a specific plane, I could just sit there hitting the runway button until I got the ride I wanted OR I could switch sides OR I could take a different ride.  Much better than just logging off frustrated.

I don't know if there would be a lot of intra-side arguing or not.  Maybe, but likely nothing worse that we see about anything as it is now.  This is an arguing group of people so look at it as giving them something to discuss (lol).  Personally, I wouldn't be arguing with anyone because they took a P-38 and that's what I wanted to fly.  Like I pointed out above, I would just switch to another ride or wait for my ride.

As far as the queue thing, well, you are correct: people would ask for that.  Probably could be done or you could just say "no" and point out the three options listed above.  If it were me I would probably just not worry about it until it did become an issue, but of course it is not me, it is you .  One way to look at the queue idea is that it would still balance out the sides once again because if a player really wanted a specific ride, they would need to stay grounded or be bumped out of the queue.

All in all, the main advantage would be that you are both balancing out the sides and offering people the rides they want.   It would greatly reduce the ammo people have against the current lock-out method of side balancing because they could not say you are totally denying them the option to fly specific planes.  You are merely limiting the availability and increasing their current set of options (right now it is ride something different or switch sides).

By the way, thank you for the reply.

[DoKGonZo]

Originally posted by Blammo
We...  I think what DoKGonZo said points out the strongest advantage.  I mean, if I wanted to fly a specific plane, I could just sit there hitting the runway button until I got the ride I wanted OR I could switch sides OR I could take a different ride.  Much better than just logging off frustrated.

...  

Actually I see that as a disadvantage.

Imagine you get shot down and there's no La-7's available, so you up a La-5 to continue the fight. Meanwhile, a third of the guys who were right there beside you before are now sitting in the tower hitting the runway button. Suddenly you're outnumbered in a lesser plane, while your "team mates" are sitting on the ground getting carpal tunnel.

You don't think that's going to cause problems?

Yes, they "could" all get lesser rides ... but you know as well as I that many simply won't. It's "easier" to sit there and wait.

    -DoK

[Blammo]

Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Actually I see that as a disadvantage.

Imagine you get shot down and there's no La-7's available, so you up a La-5 to continue the fight. Meanwhile, a third of the guys who were right there beside you before are now sitting in the tower hitting the runway button. Suddenly you're outnumbered in a lesser plane, while your "team mates" are sitting on the ground getting carpal tunnel.

You don't think that's going to cause problems?

Yes, they "could" all get lesser rides ... but you know as well as I that many simply won't. It's "easier" to sit there and wait.

    -DoK

What you have pointed out is correct, but it would still have the effect of balancing the sides and the rides.  If you get a bunch of guys waiting for the P-51s to become available, they are much more likely to become available. Because you have fewer people flying.

By the way, what you point out about me jumping into a lesser ride: isn't that what we have now?  At least under what I am proposing "some people" could still fly the low ENY plane (if they were willing to wait it out) as opposed to none.  It might, just might, give "countries" more in couragement to coordinate their efforts.  Maybe not, but the side that did would be the more successful.

[DoKGonZo]

Originally posted by Blammo
...

By the way, what you point out about me jumping into a lesser ride: isn't that what we have now?  At least under what I am proposing "some people" could still fly the low ENY plane (if they were willing to wait it out) as opposed to none.  It might, just might, give "countries" more in couragement to coordinate their efforts.  Maybe not, but the side that did would be the more successful.

Yes ... but now you don't have a choice. Planes are clamped and that's all there is to it.

For the people who "can't win" without their La-7, the choice of waiting for their plane rather than go up in something else which they're "sure to lose in" is obvious.

The idea is perfectly fine. The problem is that more players than you'd like to imagine won't do "what's right."

    -DoK