Third Week of Italy or not?

[TheBug]

I had originally intended Italy to run for three weeks and have setup the arena for the last stage to recreate the breaking of the Winter line.  I have added a late-war Mediterranean plane set and arranged the bases.

But I'm starting to wonder if maybe three weeks is a bit too much for one map, even with the changing plane set.

So I am opinion to ideas here.

Do we keep with Italy for one more week with the new planes?

Do we setup a that small map with All Axis planes on one side and all Allied on the other for a week break?

Do we roll into a new setup??  Thinking of going with a two week Hungary setup??

For now I will just leave Italy till some kind of consensus can be formed.

<S>  Sorry for being a little out of touch the last few days, but real life has been throwing me some pretty good twists, to say the least.

[Damionte]

We need a open week for a break. In between all of the scenarios.

I agree though that Italy has run its course. We've generally stopped logging in again now. Let go a week with an open planeset on any old small map before going into what ever we do next.

[choppit]

Seeing as the excitement of these events last for only about a week, why not make a setup like this twice a month every other week, with the old setups running in the off-weeks. 

[Damionte]

Yeah that would be more like it.

It's just real tiring to log in for this type of thing every night for more than a week at a time.

[TheBug]

Ok this is where I seem to always end up confused.  I guess I'm really missing what you guys are calling "The War".  I'm fine with changing the planeset/map each week if that will keep interest up, but I don't really see what you guys mean by the "old setups".  As far as I can see my setups differ from the old setups by only the fact that I have base capture on, strat on and they go longer than one week, with an evolving plane set.

I just don't see, other than reducing the setup time back to one week, what the big deal is??  Where does all the stress come from.

Since becoming a staffer, I've thought a bit more about what the AvA could/should be, etc..  Really don't see why it can't be run like the MA as far as capture and strat is considered.  But with the added bonus of a planeset split by time period and Axis/Allies and historical maps.  With the ability to create no capture bases now, the fight can exist no matter captures.

I mean it really all comes down to the fight doesn't?  Whether it is a dogfight or a fight to capture a base.  I really think working within the game system is the way to go, it has been proven to work by the MA numbers.  If we take the good of the MA and mix it with the good of the AvA and SEA I think it makes a nice recipe.  Historical, easily managed and fun.

I would really like someone to give me their definition of "The war" cause mine doesn't seem to fit multiple concerns I've seen mentioned.

I propose 1 week setups, with base capture and strat on. 

[Chilli]

TheBug has presented us with some fresh kickaz setups   The enthusiasm for any particular style of play seems to fade as time rolls by.  Having said that, I am supportive of whatever setup that keeps the arena active. 

Someone pointed out that I was excited about BOA.  Although, not as vocal (personal reasons) on TheBug's setups, I have been very excited about good fun that I have had flying in the AvA during these setups.  

Human nature is what it is.  If there is nothing to get all worked up about (i.e. base capture, win the war, crush those ***** bazturds, etc.)  most folks don't bother to spend their $15 bucks cruising empty airspace. 

What excited me in the past:

• Eye Candy - - Ribbons, Medals, new maps, new settings (wind, weather)
• New Objectives - - New Victory conditions, Field deployment, Chain of Command
• Historical Planesets - - Balanced planeset / tactical conditions, Pacific, Italian, Russian Theater matchups

Anyone else care to add to the list?  I believe that is what the staff would like to hear.

[Chilli]

Sorry TheBug, you posted while I was, so I may have put my own twist on the thread.  As I see it now you are asking what is the difference between your setups and the "old AvA"?   That is a good question. 

Well, I think it is just a matter of what kind of reward is in it for the average Aces High player.  In the MA, we have 3 countries, every available plane, and a perk award system.  Squads flock towards the MA to compete for stats, the same with individuals ( so much so that on occasion cheats have been discovered -- although not the norm ). 

Before the invention of the Dueling Arena Furballing area, the AvA was the best relaxing atmosphere to just sharpen your skills and get into some excellent fights.  Most anytime of day that I want I can do that now in the DA.  The only difference being, that at some point in time some dweeb will up a jet, tempest, or bomber and the dogfight at some point becomes ridiculous (sometimes I r teh dweeb).

My advice is to give the setups time between to really get out and promote it's arrival.  Build up anticipation and understanding of what planesets and AvA expectations there will be.  In the meantime, unleash the hounds and maybe allow Mid War aircraft (NO JETS) to compete with the DA furballers. 

(Hoping I am making sense -- sleep deprived)

[a4944]

Ok this is where I seem to always end up confused.  I guess I'm really missing what you guys are calling "The War".  I'm fine with changing the planeset/map each week if that will keep interest up, but I don't really see what you guys mean by the "old setups".  As far as I can see my setups differ from the old setups by only the fact that I have base capture on, strat on and they go longer than one week, with an evolving plane set.

I just don't see, other than reducing the setup time back to one week, what the big deal is??  Where does all the stress come from.

Since becoming a staffer, I've thought a bit more about what the AvA could/should be, etc..  Really don't see why it can't be run like the MA as far as capture and strat is considered.  But with the added bonus of a planeset split by time period and Axis/Allies and historical maps.  With the ability to create no capture bases now, the fight can exist no matter captures.

I mean it really all comes down to the fight doesn't?  Whether it is a dogfight or a fight to capture a base.  I really think working within the game system is the way to go, it has been proven to work by the MA numbers.  If we take the good of the MA and mix it with the good of the AvA and SEA I think it makes a nice recipe.  Historical, easily managed and fun.

I would really like someone to give me their definition of "The war" cause mine doesn't seem to fit multiple concerns I've seen mentioned.

I propose 1 week setups, with base capture and strat on. 

The war periods typically have assigned commanders and set objectives.  Most people stick to one side although some side-balance.  There is a bit more vested in winning the war. 

Non-war periods are free-for-alls.  No commanders and free to switch sides at will.  Nobody cares if you capture a base as there are no set objectives.  This is why some say it's a break as there are no overall objectives.  There is not a winning side and a losing side. 

So, based on my definition (which may differ from others) ...
"I propose 1 week setups, with base capture and strat on."

This is non-war.  People can do whatever they want to do and it does not require commanders.  The dedicated furballers would probably prefer base capture off so everyone flys air-to-air.  Personally, I think it's fine to have a typical MA setup for non-war with the AvA equipment. 

I think we should try a squad tag-team match in the next war period.  We don't have that many squads in the AvA.  It would be nice if squad leaders worked together to come up with good even matchups for one week wars.  Squads tend to be the main drivers for AvA.

Venom

[Damionte]

The snake pretty much hit it on the head.

The low numbers in the AvA puts a lot of stress on those who are going after the objectives. You feel oblidged to be in there. In the MA there's no real pressure for that. You know if you can't make it there are 100 other guys logged in that night for your chess peice to help things along.

In the AvA if we're missing 3 players it makes a big difference. Especially since we've changed all of the settings to make obtaining the objectives even harder than they are in the MA.

Thus the war becomes a bit of a drain.

That's why we I'm calling for breaks between the set ups, and to make the set ups shorter. Especially since we're not all going to like all of the set ups, having them only last for a week means you don't have to grin and bear a set up you don't like for too long.

[TheBug]

One week setups in a non war fashion is no problem.  But what do you want for a war setup?  From Venom's post Italy was a three week "non-war" setup, so I don't understand what you need a break from.

I will continue to just run 1 week non-war setups till we hash out a clear definition for a "War" setup.

[Damionte]

Italy was a war set up, just no one told Venom. Besides he doesn't fly the strat side anyway.

[TheBug]

<scratches head>