Here's what's wrong with the arenas

[Warspawn]

Last night was one of the few nights I finally logged off in frustration.  I often don't mind fighting against superior odds, but it was virtually impossible to find a base that wasn't getting pounded by the Rooks and Bishops last night late in the evening.

What happened to all these people switching sides to prevent this?  The knights had 18 people on in the LW arena I was in.  The other sides had a huge population advantage...and they decided for some reason it was fun to gang the knights.  Vulching, toolshedding...it was a hmm...knightmare, lol!

Anyways...it's not really a rant, just something I noticed.  If I was frustrated enough to just log off, I wonder how many others this happens to?  I could have switched to one of the sides that was running a 58-18 advantage, but that didn't appeal to me either.

I guess I should have just popped into the EW or MW arena where there were 2 or 3 people and worked on my score by bombing undefended CV's or factories, but scores don't really mean much to me.  How do we fix this to encourage people to keep playing?

[Tilt]

The imbalance is not new......it happened before.

The difference now is that an inbalance is frozen into the arena when it hits max numbers.

Go to the next arena and an inbalance favouring another chess piece will most probably be in play...........

Country orientated milk runners will not stay in arenas where the balance is agin them.......they will move. Hence the player choice mechanism makes the inbalance worse not better


If you want to correct imbalance by force then you have to cap country numbers as a % of the max arena population.

One idea is suggested above....... another is to allow the arena to over populate (when the arena is maxed out) provided it addresses balance ie an attempt to join an over populated but inbalanced arena will force you into the minority country. You and others will find it impossible to change country (whilst the arena is in this "state") other than toward the minority country.


I disagree that smaller arenas per say promote a "sub comunity" where folk know each other better. For this to happen the player must be able to choose which arena he wishes to play in.

Most often I have no choice re which LW arena I play in ........I am forced into the one that is not maxed out. Indeed this may separate me from those I know best.

....and of course we see here that some would change the gameplay to suite their version of how things should be....infact it seems that some would prefer no game play provided they could enter mass duels add nausium and others would (or so some claim)  like to play in some sort of "off line mode" the sole out come of which is to spoil the fun of those others.

The truth that is repeated every day is land grab. It is a contest between three sides to capture territory..one that requires the exploitation of all types of weaponry for a side to win. This is the gameplay that should be perfected IMO to create an environment where the mix of rides not only the provides variety but also provides a place for all players (types, skills and interests) in the main thread of  game activity.

[hitech]

For this to happen the player must be able to choose which arena he wishes to play in

Or forced to always pick the same arena of like types.
 btw I am open to any suggesting on how to accomplish either, while still maintaining small arena numbers. If a way can be found arena country % will also stabilize.

[Laurie]

dont know wether it would help but.., maybe limitng number of planes up for each country at one time may help stabilise,  maybe put in beneits for squads to rotate or switch teams now and then,as these are the "lng termers". also 3 arenas may make it easier to stabilise than 4. whatever is done, keep it simple, confusing things just get you bogged down. dont know about others but.. when i log in, i want to browse map, go to hangar, and fly. no swanning about with looking at areans e.t.c :)7

regards , and things like squad roster are usefull

[68ROX]

Slapshot has an excellent suggestion, posted on another thread.


ROX

[Tilt]

Do you ever achieve three LW arenas?


Some mechanisms

Subscription.

Basically each month the player is asked to choose his preffered arena. His choice gets coded into his settings somewhere.This arena then has #% higher max limit for him than other arenas and he can only visit those other arenas when they are #% below the max.

Purchase

If you want into a max'd out arena you have to buy in with perks. (and then only if the population is no greater than #%)

Balance this with a change to the perk multiplier that allows greater perk rewards in arenas with smaller populations.


Both the above

........... subscribe to one, pay for others when they are near full.



Problem here is that the two LW arenas have no real uniquely identifying features. So you would have to create some.



eg terrains

LW1 = Baltic, ND isles, etc

LW2 = another set of terrains.

eg theatres

LW1 = ETO (east & west)

LW2 = PAC & Asia

eg game play

LW1 = Land grab

LW2 = Furball (no bombers or gv's)

eg Realism (shudder)

you get the drift...........

[JB88]

Originally posted by hitech
Or forced to always pick the same arena of like types.
 btw I am open to any suggesting on how to accomplish either, while still maintaining small arena numbers. If a way can be found arena country % will also stabilize.

HITECH,

let me begin by saying how much i appreciate what you are trying accomplish.  

i have had a great time playing your game and i have met some really stellar people.  i am so glad to hear that you are open to suggestions on the matter of it's structure and i would like to share a few thoughts.  nothing too special, but there may be a few kernals in them to toss around.

i keep thinking that the separate arenas are becoming more like a bowling alley where you might have to reserve a lane in advance.  is there a way to do this for squads and such on squad nights?  to reserve a space?  or even to have a squads only arena perhaps?  

i know it's a stretch but...

second thought. let's say that you could view ALL of the arenas simultaneously...sort of like how it is in the DA at present...

a larger WAR MAP or table that covered all of the arenas as they exist real time.  

it would essentially be the old MA, but with limits placed within it so that gameplay could exist in a better state of being.

that we have the .commands right now is better, but i think that one of the major issues that might be happeing is that people suddenly feel separated from all of thier friends and enemies alike.  it's as if individual cells have been drawn between people.

a full roster of all players playing aces high (in real time) might be a great addition.

i read where you said that you had begun creating the game from the clipboard and worked outward...perhaps it, being the core,is where the first new steps would best be focused? all of these issues seem to stem from what is happening and what is presented on that clipboard.

okay..

so, lets say that a player could view numbers, they could see where everyone is playing etc...still each sector or area has a number cap like it is now...real time...

maybe a request is made.  a reservation made.  dear computer, we need 10 players to get into arena x.  it puts those 10 in que.

to move wouldnt require a relog to move into a different part of the war, just a bit of patience.  

also, visually, when maps or arenas are placed side by side, there is probably a better chance that people will spread out over them than if they are written and placed in hieretical order.  i keep thinking about the word "flow"


if i were playing and i just wanted to find a good fight, i might look on the overall war map and see that there is a good fight brewing in the mid war arena...



i feel that the problem with splitting the main arena into two is somehow antithetical to the engrained mindset of the community (due to its even properties)  the teams are in now threes..i know this sounds strange, but if there were another late war arena...i really do think it would balance out.  


i also feel that one should be required to play for the same country unless they switch sides for ALL arenas...for some reason i feel that this would help balance it out too.

lets say the nits are getting thier butts handed to them in one arena...they just send out an SOS and a bunch of nits come from elsewhere.  or rooks or bish...just a thought.


but i digress.


thanks for listening and thank your for the great game.  



88

[hitech]

JB88: I believe you are working in the opposite direction as me, I.E. Your still trying to put everyone in a single virtual world.  

s there a way to do this for squads and such on squad nights? to reserve a space? or even to have a squads only arena perhaps?

Keep in mind you still will have arena caps of 200 - 300 range.
Only way I see to accomplish squad arenas , is to force squads to one arena or other. Then what happens during lower peek times? Btw, this is looking like the least of all evil options to me.

Also keep in mind that the point of this is to absolutely not return to 600 people trying to interact with each other during game play. But rather creating groups of 250 who play with each other  most of the time.

[SlapShot]

Btw, this is looking like the least of all evil options to me.

That maybe true ... but your ears a gonna bleed !!!

[hitech]

SlapShot: You didn't know I have HiTech Kevlar  Ear plugs?

[CHECKERS]

Originally posted by hitech
SlapShot: You didn't know I have HiTech Kevlar  Ear plugs?

  LMAO ......  



 CHECKERS

[Overlag]

Originally posted by hitech
Or forced to always pick the same arena of like types.
 btw I am open to any suggesting on how to accomplish either, while still maintaining small arena numbers. If a way can be found arena country % will also stabilize.

me slap and kev posted a great idea in a 4 page thread called 4 unbalanced arenas (at least i think it was that one)

[kamilyun]

Originally posted by hitech
Or forced to always pick the same arena of like types.
 btw I am open to any suggesting on how to accomplish either, while still maintaining small arena numbers. If a way can be found arena country % will also stabilize.

If I follow the current line of thought correctly, 1 imbalanced arena leads to other imbalanced arenas b/c members of losing side simply switch to another arena where they are a winning side?  Generalization, I know, but if only 10-20% of players do this, it leads to big changes in smaller arenas, correct?

I don't know if this addresses the imbalances or arena numbers per se, however, I think it might limit hordes with imbalanced countries.  And therefore, makes it more attractive to stay and fight, or at least have a fighting chance:

Could LOCAL fuel and ord be linked to ENY and SECTOR population imbalances?

i.e.  If total populations are A-100 B-80 C-40 we might find 2 types of scenarios:

I.  A's and B's have a good solid back and forth battle with a few on each side attacking C's.  Fine, no problem with limits

II.  A's and B's decide to crush C's.  So what do we find in sectors of C countries?  Huge populations of As and Bs against a much smaller population of C's

So fuel availability for A's = 125% x (sector pop of C) / (sector pop of A) x (ENY factor??)

Similarly ord availability (size of bombs or max bombload available) follows similar formula.

A couple of key points:

1. You are NOT limiting plane choice...so no whining about that
2. Local population AND ENY are both factors, so if As and Bs want to fight each other...no limits on fuel and ord
3. If only 20 As + 20 Bs are fighting the 40 Cs, then again, no penalty on fuel and ord b/c local population is balanced
4. Missions and ad hoc missions would probably not be affected?  Why?  Any good mission planner goes to a base slightly farther away so that the planes can up without getting vulched.  So if you take the time to properly plan, you can still up with ord and fuel.  
5.  Furballs are not affected.  If the sides are roughly balanced (or even 2:1) you can still up with 50% fuel which is enough to furball when bases are only 1 sector apart (1/2 sector flight to fight...)


Alright...please pick apart

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by hitech
Or forced to always pick the same arena of like types.
 btw I am open to any suggesting on how to accomplish either, while still maintaining small arena numbers. If a way can be found arena country % will also stabilize.

Could cause even bigger problems if squads are forced into specific arenas.

What happens if a few don't show up? Bigger numbers imbalance.

Dunno, maybe what we have is as good as your get it, given the inherent problems balancing 3 sides.

Should even out in the long term as/if the player base increases.

[Simaril]

I know creativity makes us keep coming up with new ideas -- but wouldnt Slap's idea involve less force, more choice, and squad preservation?

It seems to me that seeing WHY immediate entry was denied would reduce to "pizzed off" effect. And, giving the squad a choice -- to go to another arena, hang out wating for slots, or split the group up -- gives even less room for complaints.

The slot formula could get pretty sophisticated, and could allow the cap to go higher for balancing purposes. For example, in an arena of 250 lets say that current numbers were: B120 N90 R40. The goal would NOT be to get all sides to 83. Instead, it could prohibit Bish from entering, allow up to 40 rooks to join (EVEN IF the cap set by the other arena would be exceeded), and only allow nits to join if the spread between the 3 countries had narrowed. If a Nit squad wanted to join, they could enter a queue as a unit of 15 guys and wait...or they could try another arena....or they could (ONLY if they wanted) switch to rooks to stay together. If their main goal was to stay together, then they'd be willing to pay the cost of flying in MW instead of LW...etc.


Lets say that squad of 15 decides that they only want to play as knights, so they look at LW2. There, the numbers are more even right now: B60 N80 R100. They could join immediately as bish, but they are side loyal. So, they get in the queue as a 15 slot block, and lets say they are first in line. While they wait, Bish can enter as they arrive, but rooks who leave couldnt be replaced until the spread was narrowed. Single nit players wouldnt enter even if a slot was available until the squad was in...and lets say the whole process takes 15 minutes. All 15 are taken to the arena, even if they were AFK at that moment. But lets also say they knew a squaddie couldnt be there until 40 minutes after quese time --- you could allow them to save a spot for him when they entered info for the queue. By time limiting and quantity limiting holds, you can prevent abuses; likewise, using the same dynamic slot system to limit side switches INSIDE the arena transparently allows better balance and minimizes gaming the caps.
 

Most online combat games have side balancing thats FAR more intrusive than this. Dynamic slots accomplish most every goal I've seen discussed here: squads can stay together, "alamo syndrome" is minimized, and players get to choose (even if it means choosing the least painful alternative).

In short, what's bad enough about the idea that it shouldnt be implemented?