Author Topic: AH is loosing its essence (Read 5318 times)

Platano · « **Reply #150 on:** November 20, 2006, 01:49:12 PM »

<------One happy customer

Two thumbs Up for the New patch!

Good work HT and Staff

And for all those complaining about ack...Well its just That...acK...its supposed to protect an airfield its supposed to Rip your wings Off, and it supposed to discourage all the 15k Runways Divers...

one again its SUPPOSED to make things harder for you... get over it..

Noir · « **Reply #151 on:** November 20, 2006, 01:55:27 PM »

thanks for your work Kev, it allowed me to play almost as usual with my squad this week end. I count on you for the next patch

BTW those CT testers obviously didn't up bombers (same bug on first version with drones) or aimed at the 2D cv with the SB. The skin problem jumped to my eyes when I saw a B17 changin skin in mid air with the zoom, with the freeze that goes with it.

Some beta testers choosed at random can't compete with a real "Quality" department.

Kev367th · « **Reply #152 on:** November 20, 2006, 02:01:58 PM »

Ask all the people who were getting the screen freezes if they consider it a "small" bug?
Was almost nothing but complaints on CH200 and country channel Fri/Sat/Sun, about it.

Invis hills - Is there a GV aspect to CT, if not if wouldn't show up.

Skins on buff drones - Yet again should have shown up unless something is different.

Maybe there is something different in CT from "Classic AH" that prevented the bugs from showing up?

It may point to needing seperate testers for "Classic AH", more than likely seeing the CT testers reported neither of the big two bugs.

As I said the offer is there, and I'm sure many more would volunteer also, it helps you, it benefits all.

Major Biggles · « **Reply #153 on:** November 20, 2006, 02:08:02 PM »

well if HT has been adding groups to a closed alpha testing thing for CT, then they probably aren't testing all that stuff. didn't HT say they were testing the parts and systems of CT?

and if it is a small group, i'm sure it's much harder to come across bugs. the 6000 strong community works better and faster at finding bugs than a group of what, 5 - 20 guys?

why everyone's so mad at there being a bug a few days after release is beyond me, they should all know that it's likely in the first few days of a new version

Simaril · « **Reply #154 on:** November 20, 2006, 02:29:57 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Major Biggles
...snip
why everyone's so mad at there being a bug a few days after release is beyond me, they should all know that it's likely in the first few days of a new version

I think s few are MAD because they havent been getting their way lately -- so they're shooting off at every possible opportunity.

And they ought to remember that things here are better than with jsut about any game you can think of. When one of my son's shooters gets a patch, they count on weeks to months of problems until there's a patch to fix the bugs they see in the first few days.

Kev367th · « **Reply #155 on:** November 20, 2006, 02:31:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Major Biggles
well if HT has been adding groups to a closed alpha testing thing for CT, then they probably aren't testing all that stuff. didn't HT say they were testing the parts and systems of CT?

and if it is a small group, i'm sure it's much harder to come across bugs. the 6000 strong community works better and faster at finding bugs than a group of what, 5 - 20 guys?

why everyone's so mad at there being a bug a few days after release is beyond me, they should all know that it's likely in the first few days of a new version

Well if in HT opinion I am clueless, then you are both clueless and blinkered and obviously didn't bother reading his response.

Wasn't 5-20 guys, he clearly states 70.

Shows up the pitfall of writing a patch and testing it in one part of a game, not all of them.

I have offered to help, many others would also, not much else I can do.

hitech · « **Reply #156 on:** November 20, 2006, 02:42:34 PM »

Kev you are still arguing what you really are clue less about,your guess about totally untrue items, the bug where there in the test. We asked the tester to test the upcoming release of AH. And not CT.

My point is you have no idea about what you are trying to argue , have you considered scheduling, have you considered the financial consequences of what you are arguing for? Have you considered how to actually release such a thing?
Have you considered that not a lot of people would participate in the test.

And yes I do consider these very small bugs. For instance the freezes would fix them selfs just by playing. No need to go threw your hole method.

Put it this way, Sunday night was the 2nd highest night ever of people online playing AH. If the bugs were really that bad do you think that would be the case?

My point is, it would neither help me nor benefit anyone.

And your continued attempts at trying to be write, about stuff you seem to know nothing about , gets under my skin big time.

Add to that your moving target of argument, trying to do nothing but either slamming us, or wanting to win the argument because your first statment was completely incorrect is getting very tiresome.

Hap · « **Reply #157 on:** November 20, 2006, 02:46:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by RDSaustinTX
his gameplay intuition is on par with his spelling.

[/B]

Austin, your statment is false. 1) hitech's spelling is worse. 2) the game is too good to be created and developed over the years by someone who lacks intuition.

Quote

Sneak attacks got impossible with base flashing

[/B] This statement is also false. We sneak bases.

Quote

Now the field can't be attacked unless you're a horde.

[/B] Also false. Today, I took out ord in a jabo at a field by myself. Nothing special either. Anyone with the will and very little skill can do the same.

Quote

Can't stop the horde from taking fields unless you want to goon hunt under a horde.

[/B] Not true. 2 to 5 guys can pork barracks at any size field. Retards/Stops advance.

By the way, what is "klooge?"

Regards,

hap

VERTEX · « **Reply #158 on:** November 20, 2006, 02:47:47 PM »

Simaril,

My apologies for misinterpreting your first reply post, I re read it and see it in a different light now, thanks.

Also, I am new to the forum, and did not even relalise my start date was shown, your assumption would then not be a stretch. I thought you were assuming I was new because of what I said. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

General question, I have been playing the game for years but only started participating in the forum for a few months. Is it always this negative???
And if so why, we have had changes and bugs before, they always get fixed or minimized, the game has not really changed. Just play and have fun. There is enough diversity to do many things, furball, bomb, GV, take bases, squad missions, fly alone, or with a wingman etc etc. Adding some base ack has a minimal change overall.

Simaril · « **Reply #159 on:** November 20, 2006, 03:31:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by VERTEX
Simaril,

My apologies for misinterpreting your first reply post, I re read it and see it in a different light now, thanks.

Also, I am new to the forum, and did not even relalise my start date was shown, your assumption would then not be a stretch. I thought you were assuming I was new because of what I said. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

General question, I have been playing the game for years but only started participating in the forum for a few months. Is it always this negative???
And if so why, we have had changes and bugs before, they always get fixed or minimized, the game has not really changed. Just play and have fun. There is enough diversity to do many things, furball, bomb, GV, take bases, squad missions, fly alone, or with a wingman etc etc. Adding some base ack has a minimal change overall.

No problem on the misreading. I've done it before myself...its too easy when whipping through stuff!

As for the negativity....well, this has been a particularly negative stretch, no doubt about it. There are a LOT regular guys who just come in to banter about this and that part of the game, but the recent changes have cranked up emotions. Add in the guys who like to just keep the pot stirred, and, well, it seems that someone's always PO'd about something.

Its also the nature of the beast on a BBS. Remember that anybody who's cranked up over something is more likely to post about it -- but if you think things are going great, you may not even stop by to see what everybody's talking about. There's a built in slant towards the negative, no fault of the game. And yeah, I think its a great game overall....maybe some who are upset let small troubles blind them to the positive, dunno.

Check out the Aircraft and Vehicles forum, or the Help and Training, or the Skinniers forum. You'll see a very different attitude -- sometimes from the same people who complain loudly in here!

hubsonfire · « **Reply #160 on:** November 20, 2006, 03:34:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by VERTEX
General question, I have been playing the game for years but only started participating in the forum for a few months. Is it always this negative???

No, only when there are changes. You can pretty much count on the sky falling everytime there's an update or a patch. Once the initial panic subsides, things return to what passes as "normal" around here.

hitech · « **Reply #161 on:** November 20, 2006, 03:35:33 PM »

Vertex: Not exactly sure of the why, but it is the norm for all bbs's. Ours is fairly tame as compared to some.

Anyway read the link see who fits into what category.

http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,72119-0.html

HiTech

Murdr · « **Reply #162 on:** November 20, 2006, 03:39:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
Any read the link see who fits into what category.

http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,72119-0.html

HiTech

lol, that's pretty good.

BansheCH · « **Reply #163 on:** November 20, 2006, 03:48:41 PM »

The Eternal Quitter

Just comes on the forum to let everyone know he's quitting for good and to spend a dozen paragraphs explaining why. Then does it again three months later.

Sample Quote: "For real, this time."

Punishment: Forced to actually quit.

shawnfain · « **Reply #164 on:** November 20, 2006, 04:59:51 PM »

I agree the changes are for the better. Ack making it hard to vulch is good, more realistic. You should have to fight to capture bases.

Now that the ack is so effective. And bombers are the best way to hit a base and live....

It's time for B-29's and nukes!

SINNER