« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Why not 2 countries?  (Read 1028 times)

Offline BALSUR

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 110
Why not 2 countries?
« on: March 02, 2005, 03:20:12 AM »
Why don't we just have 2 countries? It seems like 1 country just keeps getting the crap beat out of it. It's not the same country everytime either one TOD is this one and the next it's that one. Seems like the 3rd country is nothing more than a perkie hunting place for those who more around to whatever country has the best advantages.

In WW2 it was allies verses axis. The knights, rooks and bishops were chess pieces. Why don't we set up an area thats more USA/british verses german/japan.

Right now, I think the only ones enjoying the game are those who country swap to get more kills or to run in the pack.
Logged

Offline Jackal1

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9092
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #1 on: March 02, 2005, 05:12:23 AM »
There were flowers and a monument placed on this horse`s gravesite a long time ago. The plot gets visited often, but you always leave with an empty feeling. :D
Logged
Democracy is two wolves deciding on what to eat. Freedom is a well armed sheep protesting the vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Offline Charge

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #2 on: March 02, 2005, 05:39:46 AM »
"In WW2 it was allies verses axis."

That is the reason why not. This is not war and such grouping would further induce negative behaviour on boards than an occasional mole poking of the defects on axis/allied aircraft.

I think it would be a bad idea. In scenarios we have two sides. Lets keep it that way.

edit: I mean being in two camps is more dividing than being in three camps. Psychologically speaking...

-C+
« Last Edit: March 02, 2005, 08:41:43 AM by Charge »
Logged
"When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a giant meteor hurtling to the earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much screwed no matter what you wish for. Unless of course, it's death by meteorite."

Offline DREDIOCK

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17775
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #3 on: March 02, 2005, 07:34:54 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Charge
"In WW2 it was allies verses axis."

That is the reason why not. This is not war and such grouping would further induce negative behaviour on boards than an occasional mole poking of the defects on axis/allied aircraft.

I think it would be a bad idea. In scenarios we have two sides. Lets keep it that way.

-C+


Dont see what one has to do with the other.
I've alway been a proponent of a 2 country system with all planes available to each side.

Its been claimed its been tried before and didnt work. But the only place I've ever seen it tried was in Airwarrior Allies vrs Axis arena.

And there the plane choices were limited to that for each side. Being allied planes only for allied side and axis planes only for axis side.

I've never seen it tried with the full planeset available for each side.

So untill I have seen it tried that way I personally wont buy buy into the thought  that it wont work at least as well as the current 3 country system. Which always boils down to the proverbial gangbang anyway.
Typically against whichever country is in the southeaster portion of whichever map is up
Logged
Death is no easy answer
For those who wish to know
Ask those who have been before you
What fate the future holds
It ain't pretty

Offline Ghosth

  • AH Training Corps (retired)
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8497
      • http://332nd.org
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #4 on: March 02, 2005, 08:59:25 AM »
It was also tried in Warbirds, in the so called "Historical Arena" way back when.

I believe its currently the main arena for WB. And we all know how successful THEY are.

Frankly they've all been tried, 2, 3, 4 countrys. They all have problems. HT has flown in all 3 major venues, and built 2 of the 3.  The fact that HTC decided on a 3 country system tells me its got fewer problems than the alternatives.
Logged

Offline Fongman

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 146
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #5 on: March 02, 2005, 09:07:26 AM »
AXIS attack AXIS................
BF109 v.s. FW190......
Logged

Offline Redd

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1316
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #6 on: March 02, 2005, 03:58:11 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Dont see what one has to do with the other.
I've alway been a proponent of a 2 country system with all planes available to each side.

Its been claimed its been tried before and didnt work. But the only place I've ever seen it tried was in Airwarrior Allies vrs Axis arena.

And there the plane choices were limited to that for each side. Being allied planes only for allied side and axis planes only for axis side.

I've never seen it tried with the full planeset available for each side.

So untill I have seen it tried that way I personally wont buy buy into the thought  that it wont work at least as well as the current 3 country system. Which always boils down to the proverbial gangbang anyway.
Typically against whichever country is in the southeaster portion of whichever map is up



WB runs like that.

The only people left there are the hardcore realists and the Mac users.

One of  biggest problems is the angst that develops between the axis and allies caused by the constant whining , and *****ing over the flight models.  Someone will always believe  the other side has the uber planes  etc etc

Go to the CT  and you will see some evidence of it here.

With 3 countries , same planes , everyone chooses from the same plane base - less *****ing.
Logged
I come from a land downunder

Offline SlapShot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9121
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #7 on: March 02, 2005, 04:08:44 PM »
I prefer Captain Crunch over Coco Puffs.
Logged
SlapShot - Blue Knights

Guppy: "The only risk we take is the fight, and since no one really dies, the reward is the fight."

Offline DREDIOCK

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17775
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #8 on: March 02, 2005, 06:41:35 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Redd
WB runs like that.

The only people left there are the hardcore realists and the Mac users.

One of  biggest problems is the angst that develops between the axis and allies caused by the constant whining , and *****ing over the flight models.  Someone will always believe  the other side has the uber planes  etc etc

Go to the CT  and you will see some evidence of it here.

With 3 countries , same planes , everyone chooses from the same plane base - less *****ing.


Im afraid yoru not getting what Im saying.
Im not for a A V A type arena. I'm for a 2 country arena with full planesets available for each side.
Basically
Im for what we have now but with only 2 countries instead of  3.
Which as far as I have seen hasnt been tried

Cant argue over which side has the uber planes if each side has the same planes available to it
Logged
Death is no easy answer
For those who wish to know
Ask those who have been before you
What fate the future holds
It ain't pretty

Offline Sp4de

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1122
      • http://www.freewebs.com/decommissisoned1/
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #9 on: March 02, 2005, 07:07:09 PM »
how about everyone can make a country ? i already picked a island out the spades will pwn you:lol



im really not kidding back in ah i picked out a island and named it.. i loved that island *tear* *hand on heart*
Logged

Offline Redd

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1316
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #10 on: March 02, 2005, 09:13:52 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Im afraid yoru not getting what Im saying.
Im not for a A V A type arena. I'm for a 2 country arena with full planesets available for each side.
Basically
Im for what we have now but with only 2 countries instead of  3.
Which as far as I have seen hasnt been tried

Cant argue over which side has the uber planes if each side has the same planes available to it



You are correct , pardon my reading comprehension.
Logged
I come from a land downunder

Offline Flit

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1035
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #11 on: March 02, 2005, 09:30:45 PM »
Nope, won't work. Too many people would migrate to the winning side.
Logged

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #12 on: March 02, 2005, 10:26:00 PM »
B-17G
B-24J
B-26B
Boston Mk III
Lancaster Mk III

vs

Ju88A-4
Ki-67



Hmmm, that looks fair.  The Axis bombers can carry torps, that makes it all even. ;)
Logged
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline XrightyX

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 277
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #13 on: March 02, 2005, 10:26:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by SlapShot
I prefer Captain Crunch over Coco Puffs.


But Coco Puffs makes the milk chocolicious.  Captain Crunch with the extra Crunch Berries...that's a step up, but still no Coco Puffs.
Logged

Offline wetrat

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2117
Why not 2 countries?
« Reply #14 on: March 02, 2005, 10:37:14 PM »
3 countries provides VARIETY. With 2 countries, there is one front, and no variety. You have no choice where you fight... there will probably only be one at a time. With 3, there are 2 fronts, providing more options and variety. This is a good thing.
Logged
Army of Muppets
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
« previous next »