Author Topic: HT ... idea on Arena population control  (Read 1345 times)

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
HT ... idea on Arena population control
« Reply #45 on: September 22, 2006, 09:02:48 AM »
Oh.. I agree that something like this would be good gameplay... just that the tears would not stop flowing.

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

Offline SFCHONDO

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1817
HT ... idea on Arena population control
« Reply #46 on: September 22, 2006, 10:15:03 AM »
Slap, I understood your idea. My idea (using 300 was just an example, I would rather it be a lot more) was a simple idea based on HT wanting smaller arenas. If you can have tons of people in the arena, then your idea might work. If we are stuck with 200 - 300 I think mine would be better. Just my opinion. But I have no problem with sides being unbalanced for the most part. I actually like it when my country is outnumbered. It's a war game and rearly does everyone fight at 2 bases. Even with sides totally even you will have your hordes going to undefended bases. Anyway it was just another idea thrown out there that HT won't use anyway, so don't get excited. :D
        HONDO
DENVER BRONCOS    
   
  Retired from AH

Offline eagl

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6769
HT ... idea on Arena population control
« Reply #47 on: September 22, 2006, 10:19:40 AM »
fightertown rules :)
Everyone I know, goes away, in the end.

Offline Mugzeee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1650
HT ... idea on Arena population control
« Reply #48 on: September 22, 2006, 01:02:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
that won't work with......

THE RULE

The rule says that anyone leaving the hallowed dildo shaped chess piece will be thrown from the squad in rags....

Soooo...  you will still get the whines when one country has 80 players and 21 squaddies and life partners are not able to get into that arena in a clump.

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's


Aside from your inflamatory and baited BS remark's about a "rule". Lets get back to rational discussion.

This is about not punishing anyone for style of play, no matter how bad each side wants it to be. I also see this rule making it possible for entire squads to join an unbalanced arena. Even in Slaps example, a squad of 30 or even 40 members could all join up on one country. (Of course the code would have to try to digest the details to make it possible.

The more i think about it i am starting to see some promise to it.

Offline Mugzeee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1650
HT ... idea on Arena population control
« Reply #49 on: September 22, 2006, 01:06:25 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by SFCHONDO
Even with sides totally even you will have your hordes going to undefended bases. Anyway it was just another idea thrown out there that HT won't use anyway, so don't get excited. :D


Your are very correct here. But wouldnt this be a seperate issue for HT to deal with.

I think Slaps idea adresses the "Lockout" problem that many face, better than we might realize.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2006, 01:09:22 PM by Mugzeee »

Offline Mugzeee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1650
HT ... idea on Arena population control
« Reply #50 on: September 22, 2006, 01:11:16 PM »
Would there need to be a threshold % of imbalance before the "Soft Caped" arena would open up for Balancing intendees?

Offline SlapShot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9121
HT ... idea on Arena population control
« Reply #51 on: September 22, 2006, 01:41:25 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Mugzeee
Would there need to be a threshold % of imbalance before the "Soft Caped" arena would open up for Balancing intendees?


Yes ... that can be a setting. In my example, the "SoftCap" balancing doesn't kick in until the total population reaches 300 ... in theory, it could be set to any number ... higher or lower.

So ... prior to the total population reaching the MAX (in this case 300), you can go where ever your little heart "last" desired to go in that arena ...

Also, once inside the arena, if you have satisfied the time limit, you could switch sides. That means, that if I were Bish the last time I logged in, but at entry had to choose between Rooks or Knights (and I chose Rooks), as soon as I satisfy the time limit of side switching (1 hour) ... I can then jump to another country.
SlapShot - Blue Knights

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

Offline Jackal1

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9092
HT ... idea on Arena population control
« Reply #52 on: September 23, 2006, 12:50:36 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by SlapShot
Only a chigga-flicker would find that funny ...  :p


I R Teh supreme Chigga Flika. :)
Democracy is two wolves deciding on what to eat. Freedom is a well armed sheep protesting the vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22408
HT ... idea on Arena population control
« Reply #53 on: September 23, 2006, 01:23:28 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by SlapShot
I also would suggest doing away with the chess piece names, coming up with something totally different, so people have no particular loyalty and might be willing to give switching sides a try.


Beat me to it.   I 100% concur.  This "Chesspiece Loyalty" has outlived it's usefulness.   Why should many squads shift, when other's have already stated "Nope".
-=Most Wanted=-

FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline derkojote23

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 95
A 2nd option
« Reply #54 on: September 23, 2006, 03:04:25 AM »
How about just 2 arenas and have them do different times and different maps each reset. Set the cap to 300 and dial down EMI. It would add an extra quark and give incentive to all, to get use to the different equipment. Perhaps even do reigns so Mid W Asia, Lat W Europe, Erl W Europe, Erl W Asia, and so on. Always a random shot and thus really mix it up. I know the equipment issues would be trouble,, they are now any way though.