Arena Reset.... ROTFLMAO! Later.... WTF did I do?

[Dingy]

 

The obvious need, is for some sort of reward/recognition for a country to "win the war".

Need to be careful here....depending upon how it was implemented this could just exacerbate the problem.  If the "winner" is the country to make the field capture that triggers the reset, once a country is down to 2 or 3 bases it becomes a "race" for the other countries to be the one that triggers it.

This MIGHT work if, on the other hand, the country that "wins" is the one with the most fields captured at the time.  In this way, if one country is seriously dominating the two others, it gives the other two reason to attack it.  

-Ding

[Gadfly]

I could only go with what was in the posts, since I wasn't there, but realize that it doesn't take much to demoralize a throughly confused newbie.

The best solution for bombers is to hit the strategic targets and deny the enemy resources, not bases.

[Lephturn]

Verm and Dingy I think this is a good idea.

How about a banner on the HTC page with the running country "War Wins" tally?  I like Dingy's idea of the country with the most fields being the winner, that evens the thing up.

This would provide some public glory to reward those players who worked their butts off to capture bases.  I like it!  Good to see some positive ideas  coming out of this thread.  

------------------
Lephturn
The Flying Pigs

[Lance]

Good thinking.  I like both of those ideas.  Bragging rights for a country is always good incentive, some sort of lasting bonus after the reset is as well (whether it is in the form of additional bases on the map or something else).  And as Dingy noted, it should be awarded to whatever country has the most bases active upon reset.

Gordo

[Ping]

 Untill an HA arena is implemented, The main will be used for whatever an individual decides to do.
 If I choose to bounce between sides, I will do so. Same goes for vulching, shooting at bailed pilots, and all other dweebishness.
 HTC has enabled, or allowed, certain features for use in the arena. Ragging someone out for using such features has gotta be one of the most ignorant attitudes a person can take. What gives anyone the right, to tell a person what they should be doing in an unstructured and open arena.
 Some may call it "Gaming the Game", but is this not what it is? a game?
 I really believe that some are taking themselves too seriously, and attach too much importance to how they feel the game MUST be played.
 Ping (who himself is tired of being told how to play the game.)

[Lephturn]

I like that idea Lance.

I was mentioning how cool it would be to have a base in the center of the mountain area among the hills.  Wouldn't it be cool if the side that "won the war" got control of this single base at the reset?

It may not be reasonable to do, but it's an interesting idea.

------------------
Lephturn
The Flying Pigs

[blitz]

Hi markVZ,

hope u do the 180° move and come back soon to AH. It's just a game and i know u as a pretty nice member of AH . Loved all your deepstrikes in enemy teritory and your calls for the 47....
In the night we're talking about i remember that i personally disliked ure move to rooksside (and i feld pretty good while blasting ure 26 out of the skies over f2),but i respected it as one way to play the game.
Don't think 2 much about a few people who attacked  u way 2 harsh, there a lot of others who allways like 2 fly with u :-)

blitz out

 


 

[Lance]

Yep, the base in the center of the map would be real snifty.  It'd set up all sorts of nice king of the hill battles.  But I can't take credit for it going to whoever won the war, Vermillion was the first to suggest that.

Gordo

[Hollywood]

Just like to add myself to the list saying Mark please don't go.  I've always noticed you up there flying Bishops trying to gain fields and get some strategic operations going.  It always helps to have someone organizing the troops as long as they aren't to insistent about it.  It's also good if it can be different people on different nights.  I've always thought you were a great teammate to have and have tried to help in the cause when you were trying to organize things by defending bases.  I know sometimes people get pretty steamed up in the arena enough to make you wonder how they could be so immature at their age.  It is only a game after all (oops sorry, I'll take that back before I get flamed  ).  I find it's best just to shrug things off when people get this way and not take it personally.  It's really more their problem than yours.  They apparently have some issues if they can get upset about a simple game (oops, sorry again  ).  The squelch command works very well too.  You can please some of the people some of the time...  I'll be glad to fly with you any day bud.  

To Lephturn and the others I mean no insult.  I wasn't there and don't know what happened.  Apparently it was enough to upset Mark quite a bit though.  To CaveJ, I don't know what part you had in this but if you were ragging on Mark excessively then I am dissappointed in you because I know you know how it feels and I stood up for you on that occasion, and I know your a good guy most of the time(I'll fly with you any day as well, and I'll definetly look you up if I'm ever in your neck of the woods.  Btw you still haven't come over for some fighter pointers).

In any case I think we all need to learn how to shake things off and act like grownups around here.  Name calling and excessive arguing are definetly uncool.  Please stick around Mark, in the world of AH you are an officer and a gentleman.

[Kieren]

I can say that I was perilously close to switching sides to cause a reset last night-

We were having people logging on for the Scenario. Only problem was, Rooks owned 2/3's of the map. No way a Scenario can happen that way.

I had been on earlier in the day, and Knights had 3 fields and 6 flyers, agains 16 Rooks and 16 Bishops. You can guess what was happening. I had to leave, but announced on open I hoped the Rooks would have the class to reset, as Knights had no numbers to defend. The response? "We might, or we might just hold it like this for a week."

Now, I could care less about the "then", because I had my mind on the "later". When I logged in later to see the situation still the same, well...   I could see we weren't going to get to start the Scenario on time, if at all. Yes, I was about to switch sides to help effect what apparently was not going to happen, and would have if necessary.

Lord, I hate the 3-side map. As a result, I won't think twice about switching sides to end a farce dominance by the large side wanting to rule the world. The only other option would be to log in disgust.  

The shame of the current set-up is that what could have been a much better Scenario was disrupted negatively for the Allies. Yes, the LW did very well, but I have to wonder what might have happened had we grabbed a bit more alt first? Had the LW not had the headstart due to our delay? Had there not already been "shadows" lurking in our territory even before we were airborne?

All because we want to "own the map".

[This message has been edited by Kieren (edited 02-11-2000).]

[214CaveJ]

Kieren I remember telling you that we were tryin to push the reset for the scenario last night, and it wasn't a maybe we will, maybe we won't either statement.  Those started when the nits decided they wanted to fight and not let us push the reset.  We started going for the reset around 7-7.30pm est last night, and dinnae get it until about 9pm est.

[Kieren]

Cave-

I haven't mentioned any names, nor will I. The events I described occurred over the course of the day, with my request to the Rooks to reset coming at 5:45 PM. That is when I received the "maybe we will, maybe we won't". When I came back at 8:30, it was an obvious "won't". Rooks owned at least 2/3 to 3/4 of the map by then. Seems like a reset could have been effected by then, certainly, if that had been the goal.

The original post in this thread discusses the virtues of switching sides to get a reset. Yesterday, to me anyway, displays a perfect reason to do so. It also showed me once again why 3-side is bad. That 16 pilots can dominate the arena against 6-8 defenders is no surprise; spread all 16 guys to different fields and you will mathematically have to take fields in 2-3 quick trips. Tell me how I might be wrong there?

To be fair, the Bishops were taking fields too. Still, it is obvious there wasn't as much a push to end it as to see how many fields could be acquired. Even that I don't mind, but an event that was scheduled for a week was marred. That does bother me.

We need an HA, or we need a 2-side war. Otherwise any future player-generated event is in danger of being upset.

Cave, you have an event set for next Sunday. How are you going to feel if the Rooks own 3 fields at the start? How successful a bomber raid do you think you'll stage? What if the enemies are on you before you get any alt? You may or may not mind, but I'll tell you this; your formation will never reach the target if that happens.

I don't wish that on you. I will fly bombers with you, escort, whatever, because I want these events to succeed. I want people who work hard to set them up have a fair chance of pulling it off.

Understand, my argument isn't against winning the war, ganging up on the weak side, any of that. It's that desire to grind the other sides down and hold them there at the expense of all else that I dislike. And, under the current arena, it is an all too simple thing to accomplish.

[Tern]

 

Originally posted by Lephturn:

Switching sides to force a reset is lame.  If you can take a base for one side, you should be able to find a way to take one for your team that's on the down side.

 I am disappointed in you Laphturn.  If I didn't know better, I'd swear you been once too many times around the track.  
I support what Mino did 105%!    Why?  Because there was danged little cooperation on the Bish side at the time.  Who wants to cooperate when the only fields they have are all pounded and vulchfeasts abound for the enemy?  That's also why I am against three sided wars.  Too danged easy for the other two ta gang up and rape the third.
Now I said my piece, where's my payolla, Mino?  


------------------
O.E. 'Tern' Dillon
"Live to Fly!  Fly to Fight!  Fight to Live!"

[214CaveJ]

 

Originally posted by Kieren:
Cave-

I haven't mentioned any names, nor will I. The events I described occurred over the course of the day, with my request to the Rooks to reset coming at 5:45 PM. That is when I received the "maybe we will, maybe we won't". When I came back at 8:30, it was an obvious "won't". Rooks owned at least 2/3 to 3/4 of the map by then. Seems like a reset could have been effected by then, certainly, if that had been the goal.

As I said, we started pushing for the reset around 7.30est, so the arena would be fresh for the event.  There were a few knights who put up a resistence were prepared for, because we thought just about everyone would welcome a reset, especially with the planned event.  We finally got it with Cobra practically screaming on the world channel for the knights at 24 to let us have it so the map would reset.

 

Cave, you have an event set for next Sunday. How are you going to feel if the Rooks own 3 fields at the start? How successful a bomber raid do you think you'll stage? What if the enemies are on you before you get any alt? You may or may not mind, but I'll tell you this; your formation will never reach the target if that happens.

I wouldna be very happy, but I damn sure wouldna be launching to try and stop either the bishops or knights from reseting the arena.  I sit in the tower nice and warm and tell all other rooks to let them capture the field and reset the arena.

[Kieren]

Cave, let's end this.

I never intended this to be a personal attack on anyone, and if you have interpreted it that way, I'm sorry.

I am discussing what I perceive to be a problem with the current set-up. Like it or not, in the above situation let's consider a few "what if's":

What if, as I hypothesized, the Rooks get closed to 3 fields just prior to your event? You say you'll wait for a reset. What if the opposing team has no intention of resetting? You'll be cooling your heels a long time as people pop in and ask "when's the scenario start?" over-and-over. Now, will you change sides to get the reset yourself? If so, you are stuck because of the 12-hour limit. Your other choice is to try to quickly take a couple fields so you Scenario might be able to launch. At least this way you get to lead your formation and help with the coordination as you had planned all week. What if guys who cleared their schedule for a short time for your Scenario have to Alt-F4 10 minutes into the mission because their time is up, due to the delayed start? What if the whole business upset the timetable to the point that your mission is a fiasco from the beginning?

Bear in mind this is not merely hypothesis, but in large part precisely what occurred. If you say that the Rooks were trying for a reset, I have to take your word for it. It sure didn't appear that way from my side.

Again, back to Minotaur's original point. Is it dishonorable to change sides to cause reset? Absolutely not. Do I think the 3-sided war is a bad idea? Yes. Do I wish we had an HA? Absolutely. Do I blame this whole situation on you? No way. Don't read it that way. But surely you can see the truth in what I am saying.

Again, I hope like heck your event goes better than Rojo/Cobra's, because it ruins the fun for a lot of people. It will be much harder to get buff pilots next time, because not many will be willing to be such easy pickings. I'm sorry too that your group didn't cross over and help bomb, as we could have used you. Again, country loyalty/desires take precedence over the event (this from one of your squaddie's remarks on the BBS). Without cooperation these events are doomed to failure, and people will stop trying to set them up. Then we all lose.