Suggested *Simple* Solution to Balancing Issue

[hubsonfire]

I disagree that the best solution for a problem of numerical imbalance caused, in part, by large groups who refuse to improve the situation, is allowing them to continue to act exactly as they have in the past.

You can't keep everyone in their same comfortable routine, and expect anything to change. There has been an opportunity since day 1 for people to pick the underdog and fly for them, and yet you continue to see people doing the opposite. While you might have the best intentions, I fail to see how this suggestion would do anything but maintain the status quo. You would still have to force them to switch, and you would then force everyone to remain in place, or not play at all, until such time as HTC went about rearranging everyone again. That seems like a great deal of work for them, since the system you've described lacks the flexibility to adapt to changes in the subscriber population.

[96Delta]

So how would you address the imbalance problem hubs?

[hubsonfire]

Having looked at nearly all of the suggestions, the 2 I liked most were waffle's idea for reduced fuel and ord loadouts, and the idea for not allowing people to even log in to the country (or countries) with a pronounced numerical advantage.  The first isn't severe enough, IMO, and the latter would cause mass hysteria.

There are some other ideas that have some merit, IMO, but aren't practical without a great deal of work for HTC. Having thought about it, I liked the queue setup probably as much as anything else suggested, or that I could come up with. It has no effect on those who normally fly for whoever the underdog is, while affecting those who create the imbalances.

This seems like a good compromise, IMO, because it keeps the numbers a bit closer (I think it needed to be more restrictive), while still leaving enough leeway that entire squads could move around to fly together. In theory, everyone wins, while no one is prevented from flying, or talking to their buddies, or violates squad noncompete contracts, or whatever.

[Bronk]

Delta to be brutality honest all i see is another "Hey HT how about this so your plans don't effect ME or MY squad." post .

Just calling it as i see it , sorry .


Bronk

[trotter]

Originally posted by Bronk
Delta to be brutality honest all i see is another "Hey HT how about this so your plans don't effect ME or MY squad." post .

Just calling it as i see it , sorry .


Bronk

And people who are very accepting of these new changes are just saying "Hey HT great job, thanks for not affecting ME or MY squad."

Don't rip on delta, I think his idea has some merit behind it, regardless of how HT's new changes affect him personally.

[hubsonfire]

Originally posted by trotter
And people who are very accepting of these new changes are just saying "Hey HT great job, thanks for not affecting ME or MY squad."

Don't rip on delta, I think his idea has some merit behind it, regardless of how HT's new changes affect him personally.

The people unaffected by the changes weren't the problem in the first place. Just saying.

[E25280]

Originally posted by hubsonfire
The people unaffected by the changes weren't the problem in the first place. Just saying.

But you are saying those that do not switch and never do are the problem?

Or is it those that switch to the higher side?

Maybe its a little bit of a chicken and egg syndrome.  If everyone was always country loyal (by personality or by the proposed restriction), numbers would not have become imbalanced in the first place.  I think this is the basic assumption Delta is working off of.

[hubsonfire]

Probably easiest to say that when people refuse to be flexible when they have an overwhelming advantage through numbers is the problematic behavior. It's impossible to say whether or not the numbers would remain balanced over time using his setup, because you can't safely assume that no one cancels their account, and that everyone flies consistant hours day to day, month to month. My main issue with this suggestion is that it lacks any sort of flexibility. You sign up, you get assigned to country X, and that's where you are, period. It doesn't take anything into account, and it's based on the assumption that there are no variables, and there will not be any. In my experience, that's a really bad assumption.

[Spatula]

The way i see it is, you either enforce balanced arenas with some active mechanism (like queuing, cant change sides etc), or you introduce a carrot-and-stick approach which STRONGLY encourages balanced countries, and strongly penalises those who are inbalancing the arena.
This way you dont get the complaints about how HTC are "forcing" people to do something they dont really want to do, but rather they make their 'own' decision in their best interests - assuming the carrots and sticks are big enough.

Drop the ENY system, make all a/c perkable and make the perk system more aggressive so that it truly encourages and discourages in good measure!