Author Topic: How can we keep the small arenas fun? (Read 4765 times)

Simaril · « **on:** October 12, 2006, 09:47:33 AM »

It seems that the small arenas are trending towards effectively 2 countries. Both EW and MW had one side with hige advantage (maybe 50%), another that was competitive but outnumbered (say 35%) and the last with rediculously low numbers.

In MW last night I saw 45 rooks, 24 bish, 5 knights.

I figured, what the heck, and played the 2 country game -- switched from Nits to Bish. I located a certain very large squad, and upped in their zone for an expected fight against the Rooks. I engaged a few, got some assists, and finally succumbed to a perked tiffy...

But the Large Squad had disappeared. I located them on the other side of the map, doing a base capture mission unopposed. I trailed their mission.... and helped take down some ack, grabbed another assist.

Only after I landed did I realise that I had just helped capture a base from the low side Nits-- who had climbed all the way to 7 players. Meanwhile, the Large Squad was upping to take another Nit base. I left.

Since we see these imbalances, wouldnt it be nice for:

1) the high sides to readjust themselves (after all, the rooks were low side in the EW...a few movers would have changed the entire flavor of the MW), either by changing countries or arenas?

2) and, for the two highest sides to at least try to fight each other, instead of worsening the disparity by milkrunning unopposed against a country that simply can't fight bacK? There were more players in the Large Squad mission than there were on the entire low side COUNTRY!

bsdaddict · « **Reply #1 on:** October 12, 2006, 10:07:39 AM »

the MWA last night was rediculous. I guess the rooks were having fun milkrunning, but it wasn't a fun night to be a nit.

obviously relying on the player base to keep the sides even isn't working. It's not that I feel that "even sides" is the holy grail for good, fun gameplay, but it certainly helps. My main beef since the changes simply boils down to time spent looking for a fight versus time spent actually fighting. Since "the change" I've been spending more and more time looking. it's getting old...

a fighter town might help...

BugsBunny · « **Reply #2 on:** October 12, 2006, 10:56:25 AM »

Only solution is to cap the LWA to 200 (or some other small number) and not create new LWA when full. It will force people to go to the other arenas. HT would need to get some disk space to store all the posts about it in this BBS and a new web server, though.
Otherwise, we will end up with 3 CTs with a squad in each acting as if they own the arena and milk run bases freely (with the ocasional break to vulch some guy that happened to wonder in there)

Clutz · « **Reply #3 on:** October 12, 2006, 10:58:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by bsdaddict
the MWA last night was rediculous. I guess the rooks were having fun milkrunning, but it wasn't a fun night to be a nit.

obviously relying on the player base to keep the sides even isn't working. It's not that I feel that "even sides" is the holy grail for good, fun gameplay, but it certainly helps. My main beef since the changes simply boils down to time spent looking for a fight versus time spent actually fighting. Since "the change" I've been spending more and more time looking. it's getting old...

a fighter town might help...

I agree, to much time looking and not enough time fighting. It is getting old. EWA and MWA seem about useless most of the time, and I don't really care to much for what goes on most of the time in the LWA. I hate to say, but I'm getting board with it all. Maybe a fighter town would help????

I struggle looking to find balance to this game. It is either way to much or not enough. Sometimes I find myself just staring at the map wishing something would change.

cav58d · « **Reply #4 on:** October 12, 2006, 11:16:19 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by BugsBunny
Only solution is to cap the LWA to 200 (or some other small number) and not create new LWA when full. It will force people to go to the other arenas. HT would need to get some disk space to store all the posts about it in this BBS and a new web server, though.
Otherwise, we will end up with 3 CTs with a squad in each acting as if they own the arena and milk run bases freely (with the ocasional break to vulch some guy that happened to wonder in there)

I dont think that forcing people into one arena is going 2 play over well with most of us

Sweet2th · « **Reply #5 on:** October 12, 2006, 11:23:43 AM »

they been tellin HTC for the longest time it needs to b just 2 countries.

Clutz · « **Reply #6 on:** October 12, 2006, 11:27:54 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by cav58d
I dont think that forcing people into one arena is going 2 play over well with most of us

Maybe we wouldn't have to force them. If the bases were closer together in EWA and MWA, wouldn't this make more people want to go there and take some of the pressure off the LWA?

BugsBunny · « **Reply #7 on:** October 12, 2006, 11:29:25 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by cav58d
I dont think that forcing people into one arena is going 2 play over well with most of us

I totaly agree, but that seems to be the only solution if HT does not want to change things back.

FiLtH · « **Reply #8 on:** October 12, 2006, 12:25:07 PM »

If out-numbered just join the side with the biggest numbers. Eventually there will be no enemy and people will balance themselves out if they want to have an combat. It works fine in the AVA.

Simaril · « **Reply #9 on:** October 12, 2006, 12:30:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by BugsBunny
I totaly agree, but that seems to be the only solution if HT does not want to change things back.

There IS another solution.

Maybe those who lead groups -- either as Squad COs or as "thought leaders" who can influence opinion -- could suggest that their groups move around to maintain balance. If the group is wedded to a chess piece, there is absolutely no reason why they couldnt shift from an arena where their chess piece is dominant, to one where they are on the lower side. If players want to stay in a particular arena, they could move to another country.

Either way, sides that are more balanced are more fun for everyone. (Note that sides dont even have to be perfectly even, just within Texas spittin' range.)

Of course, this may not happen. It appears that some Large Squads prefer to attack where they know they will win (like the infamous BOPs did last night), rather than enter the fray with equal DAR bars.

Ganging up on an empty country would seem to be about as satisfying as being a player on the Ohio State Buckeyes and defeating a local PeeWee football team...but to each his own, I suppose.

Sweet2th · « **Reply #10 on:** October 12, 2006, 12:43:06 PM »

Quote

It appears that some Large Squads prefer to attack where they know they will win (like the infamous BOPs did last night), rather than enter the fray with equal DAR bars.

I agree that taking unoccupyed bases is fun and easy just not as fun as taking a base that is being heavily defended, and when you took the base it was easy cuz you just smashed all the defenders and steamrolled over everything.Those were the days of AH-1 and the ROCKSTAR missions.

Any more a lot of squad boast of thier numbers and ability to capture a field but in reality when the opposite country puts up a good defense some of the Bold BAse Takers find themselves alone in a sky full of red icons because all of the " people in the big SQUAD mission " have now started attacking another empty field.I have flown in a lot of missions in the past with the largest squads of all 3 country's and what i just described happens alot.One of the best squads to fly in a mission with is the FreeBird's, those guys know how to take a base, right along with the 327th Steele Talons.

DaYooper · « **Reply #11 on:** October 12, 2006, 12:58:10 PM »

If it was reduced to just two countries, a large squad in EW could still have a lopsided balance. It could still be 7 vs. 35.

Changing to two countries would do nothing.

How hard would it be to impliment AI fighter sweeps to suppliment the out numbered sides? Maybe allow a fighter drone/wingman for the weaker sides? The code/technology exists, it would be just like the bombers. You could toggle back and forth between planes, the enemy swarm wouldn't know which plane was smart, and a few players could work this to their advantage facing a swarm.

Maybe the field auto-ack accuracy could be inversely proportional to your numerical advantage.

hitech · « **Reply #12 on:** October 12, 2006, 01:01:36 PM »

Had a new thought today on field capture.

What if each country had only 2 fields that could be captured at any one time.
I.E. Bish would have 1 field on the knight front , and 1 field on the rook front that could be captured.

Once one a field was captured , the next one back would then be available for capture.

HiTech

DaYooper · « **Reply #13 on:** October 12, 2006, 01:03:56 PM »

You could still get steamrollered by a mob. I don't see that changing anything.

bsdaddict · « **Reply #14 on:** October 12, 2006, 01:18:18 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DaYooper
You could still get steamrollered by a mob. I don't see that changing anything.

I agree. I think something like the ENY is needed, but instead of restricting the available planes if the sides are way unbalanced it restricted how many pilots could launch. In other words, once any side has x% (50%? 100%?) MORE than any other side, simply not let anyone from that side launch a sortie until one of them lands.