Author Topic: Suggestions for arena numbers balancing (cont.)  (Read 174 times)

Offline MANDOBLE

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1849
      • http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s
Suggestions for arena numbers balancing (cont.)
« on: June 18, 2001, 07:00:00 AM »
Dont know if this is new idea or not, but I like it:

Countries with less than 1/4 of total players have 0 cost perked planes while the "less than 1/4" condition is accomplished.

Countries with more than 3/7 of total players have doubled the cost of perked planes while the "more than 3/7" condition is accomplished.

Offline AKDejaVu

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5049
      • http://www.dbstaines.com
Suggestions for arena numbers balancing (cont.)
« Reply #1 on: June 18, 2001, 10:11:00 AM »
I like the discount for the less than 1/4 country.

The other wouldn't matter at all.  How often do you see perked aircraft used these days?  The country with numbers has all the advantage they need... its not the time to run out and spend perkies.

AKDejaVu

Offline DmdNexus

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 901
Suggestions for arena numbers balancing (cont.)
« Reply #2 on: June 18, 2001, 10:36:00 AM »
IMHO, there's just not enough planes perked to make the perk system work.

I have nearly 400 perk points.

Even with plenty of perkies, I never fly tempest, CHog, or TA152. There's no challenge in flying those dweeb planes.

In fact, I hardly ever see any one flying these.

And when someone does, everyone tries to kill them. So they end up flying defensive most of the flight.

But let's say this idea is implimented, and everyone in the country with the least plaers can fly tempest and they do fly them, will that make a difference when the odds are 4 to 1?

I don't think so.

What I think will happen is the gangbangers will get more perkies because they'll be able to kill more perk planes.

So the effect is reverse of what you would expect, this system would favor the the country with the most players.

I can see it now 12 vulche kills in my F4U-1D all against tempests tyring to take off - wow wonder how many perkies I'll get with that.

It might be fun to implement - just to see how it plays.

Nexus

Offline MANDOBLE

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1849
      • http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s
Suggestions for arena numbers balancing (cont.)
« Reply #3 on: June 18, 2001, 10:46:00 AM »
Imagine next situation:
Country A with 1/5 players.
Country B with 2/5 players.
Country C with 2/5 players.

Country A has no cost to fly perks, so, coutries B and C will need to pay for them if they want to really be able to compensate the Tempest/Ta/Arados from country A, only number advantage will not be enough.

They can spend perks to stop country A perk planes, or they can try to redistribute their players for a more balanced arena.

Offline DmdNexus

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 901
Suggestions for arena numbers balancing (cont.)
« Reply #4 on: June 18, 2001, 11:02:00 AM »
You're assuming people would choose a country based upon perk points and numbers.

I know that assumption is not true for my self or any one in my squad (that would be 63 people).

We fly bishops because that's where our squad decided to fly - regardless of the numbers. In our case, it's more important that we fly with our buddies than chasing scores.

I honestly don't think most of the players chase the perk points.

But for those who do - you're probably right this system would work for them.

Nexus

Offline AKDejaVu

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5049
      • http://www.dbstaines.com
Suggestions for arena numbers balancing (cont.)
« Reply #5 on: June 18, 2001, 01:20:00 PM »
Mandoble, the assumption that most people would grab perk planes to combat perk planes is flawed to the core.

Why risk 70 perk points when I could take a decent non-perked aircraft and get 20 perk points for a kill instead?  One perk plane vs 4 non-perked planes... it doesn't matter there.

Like I said before... there is no need for the large country to fly perked planes... so the extra added expense is irrelevant.

AKDejaVu