What if...

[NoBaddy]

That is the clue !

HT has said that he and Pyro have tested 2 side, 3, 4, and 5 sides, 3 works best!

Fug...

Loan the lad your clue rake. 

[PK1Mw]

This has been something debated, long before AH was even around. Was definitely something people kept talking about in AW as well.

But here's my theory on it, for what it is worth.

Three sides is the way to go. The problem is with the maps. Now I'm not here to rag on the maps suck or anything like that. But if you look at the maps, each side of the map is different, but its the same "hot spots" that produce the GV fights, or furballs, which is what majority of the people are looking for. In AW, every side of the map was proportionate to the other. So the same fights could be found, no matter what side you were on. Although it would become an "eye-sore", this seems to be the best way to get all 3 sides to fight on the same scale. And this doesn't always work either.

This is the same reason why people complain about the maps. People are accustomed to certain fights with certain maps, and when the fights are taken away, all of a sudden "this map sucks."

Now I don't know if this has been tested, and if it hasn't, could it be? People who makes maps, take this into consideration next time you make the maps.

[NoBaddy]

The problem is with the maps.

Maps? Actually, the "problem" is with the capture the flag aspect of the game. In the "real world", generals are constantly looking for some kind of advantage. In the real world with real lives it only makes sense. Generals look for ways to imbalance their "game". The same is done by the lil generals here. The only problem is that the MA is designed as a free form, open ended game. That means that there are no natural balancing incentives. HT has tried numerous things to encourage players to balance the game, they consistently refuse.

As conceived, 3 sides would often see the 2 smaller sides working to prevent the larger from dominating. Here, the number 2 side often attacks the weakest....there in, defeating the concept.

Bottomline, there is nothing wrong with the 3 country set up.....fix the damned players...that's what is broken.

[PK1Mw]

Look I hate the base taking stuff just as much as the next guy. But reality is, and this last week proves it, the maps generate the same fights. Starting with Titanic Tuesday, there was a fight at 239. That fight went on for 5 days straight, and it got to the point where Bish owned 214, Knits owned 239, rooks owned 4 and 5. 239 was a constant furball, there was no trying to capture it or anything else, but Knits were still getting beat on pretty good, because they were in the middle of A4 (rooks) and 214 (bish)

Bottom line is, its not just the "capture the flag" types that are responsible for the 2 countries ganging 1. Actually I would say the have the least to do with it, however they are to blame for so many other things, that have nothing to do with this topic.

[The Fugitive]

I agree with NoBaddy.... one of the map makers    There isn't anything wrong with the maps, its how they are used.

PK you mentioned the fight you had and it went on for hours. I'm guessing that you didn't have all that many "generals" on. All it would take is one of those squads that like to grab bases and if they can spoil someones fun more power to them. They would hit one of the out lying base around that fight and use it as a staging point, or a diversion. Then the next thing you know the furball is broken up because they took one of the bases involved with it.

[gyrene81]

Bottomline, there is nothing wrong with the 3 country set up.....fix the damned players...that's what is broken.

So what exactly would you want the players to do? Just fly around looking at each other? MMO games have to be designed with objectives for the players, no objectives no players.

If you're talking about "balancing" the number of players on each side, that doesn't always work either. This game has as many cliques as a suburban high school, and players prefer to play cyber air ace with other people they know...especially if they have built some sort of trust or mutual admiration for each other. Sometimes it's a free for all, sometimes it's a team effort, sometimes it's just people putzing around.


To PK1MW - The maps are designed with "balance" in mind on all sides intentionally...http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,209609.0.html

[The Fugitive]

So what exactly would you want the players to do?

1. Have a little respect for other players fun, knock off the griefing

2. Learn to fly, fight. To many hide in the horde because they can't fight their way out of a bag....and they know it !

3. Learn to play the game. Spawn camping, vulching, bomb and bail isn't playing the game, its gaming the game.

If players learn to play the game, missions with more even numbers so that they are more of a challenge would be the norm in stead of horde running NOEs. Fights would be more than HO and run to ack. GV battle would be more than getting your shot off quicker than the other 5 guys sitting around the spawn point.

The maps are only a place to play ( no offense to the map makers)  the game play and the fun....or lack of it is all player generated.

[PK1Mw]

I agree with NoBaddy.... one of the map makers    There isn't anything wrong with the maps, its how they are used.

PK you mentioned the fight you had and it went on for hours. I'm guessing that you didn't have all that many "generals" on. All it would take is one of those squads that like to grab bases and if they can spoil someones fun more power to them. They would hit one of the out lying base around that fight and use it as a staging point, or a diversion. Then the next thing you know the furball is broken up because they took one of the bases involved with it.

But now we're actually talking about 2 different things. Coprhead's original post was about any suggestions on how to stop the country ganging. What you are mentioning is how fights are being ruined and/or how arena play sucks now. Both of which I agree with you and NB.

The fact of the country ganging though, is IMO due to the maps not producing the same type of fights on all ends. Another example of this would be the V85 GV fight, on Compello. People flock to that area to take part of that "battle". What people don't know, is there is a similar fight between V169 & V180. That fight is nothing compared to the V85 battle, and it could be because of a number of reasons. On Trinity its the A1 fight, On SFMA its A19 & A1.

I guess my point is, its not so much the Rooks and Bish gang the Knits, or the Bish and Knits gang the rooks. Its all in what country is where on what map. On the 3 maps that I mentioned above, those 3 "hot spots" are going on regardless of what country is where. I guess you could call these places the new age V.O.Ds for those who played AW.

Like I said, its not that the maps aren't any good. They produce a lot of fun fights. Its just majority of the maps we have produce fights on some sides of the map more than others. All I'm saying is if the maps were the same on all 3 sides, I think the fights or "ganging of 1 country, would even itself out. I'm not saying this is the only fix, and not saying that this is the best fix. Just stating that in AW we did have issues with 2 sides taking on 1, but no where near as bad as in here. All sides of AW maps were the same, regardless of country, which allowed the same fights to happen on all 3 country fronts.

[NoBaddy]

Just stating that in AW we did have issues with 2 sides taking on 1, but no where near as bad as in here. All sides of AW maps were the same, regardless of country, which allowed the same fights to happen on all 3 country fronts.

...and PK....what is the underlying difference between AW and AH? It's the "capture the flag" aspect of the game. Kesmai dinked with some similar stuff towards the end, making all the fields capturable. The results were similar. AH has the added "bonus" of rewarding the winning side with perk points.

So what exactly would you want the players to do? Just fly around looking at each other? MMO games have to be designed with objectives for the players, no objectives no players.

I can only assume that you have limited experience with this. In previous incarnations, this genre's object was to actually fight human opponents. In today's AH, the object is to reset the map. Any combat that occurs is incidental to that goal.

The original concept was for players to engage in various forms of simulated combat. The capture the flag aspects were added to the game to "enhance" the combat aspects. Unfortunately, the cart has somehow gotten before the horse.

[PK1Mw]

...and PK....what is the underlying difference between AW and AH? It's the "capture the flag" aspect of the game. Kesmai dinked with some similar stuff towards the end, making all the fields capturable. The results were similar. AH has the added "bonus" of rewarding the winning side with perk points.

This is true. This is also why I thing that the maps should include a FT/TT of some sort that is uncapturable. It is some what of a compromise of all sides.

[5PointOh]

Coprhead's original post was about any suggestions on how to stop the country ganging. What you are mentioning is how fights are being ruined and/or how arena play sucks now. Both of which I agree with you and NB.

This is really what i meant...I actually feel kind of bad for the country that is getting hammered from both sides.  Often I feel the players from the ganged side log off or go to the other arena.  Which typically throws the balance in the other arena.  Which to me is unfortunate.

1. Have a little respect for other players fun, knock off the griefing

2. Learn to fly, fight. To many hide in the horde because they can't fight their way out of a bag....and they know it !

3. Learn to play the game. Spawn camping, vulching, bomb and bail isn't playing the game, its gaming the game.

If players learn to play the game, missions with more even numbers so that they are more of a challenge would be the norm in stead of horde running NOEs. Fights would be more than HO and run to ack. GV battle would be more than getting your shot off quicker than the other 5 guys sitting around the spawn point.

The maps are only a place to play ( no offense to the map makers)  the game play and the fun....or lack of it is all player generated.

And I really agree with this statement. But what can we as player do to change the tide.  I love a good quality fight. Its rare that I find one. But when I do it makes my night.

[Shuffler]

Switch to the low number side.....

[5PointOh]

And last night PK, Karaya, Banshee7, ThePimp and myself did...not sure it helped a lot...but maybe its a start...

[Banshee7]

And last night PK, Karaya, and myself did...not sure it helped a lot...but maybe its a start...

Thanks for leaving me out 

[dev1ant]

I think comparing AW to AH is a bad idea...AW was a combat flight sim, with emphasis on aerial combat, more and more AH is becoming a massive albeit more in depth version of Battlefield 2.  When I first came from AW I thought the variety that AH offered was great, that you weren't restricted to essentially one thing.  Now though, I hate the fact that GV's, base taking and all the other side shows take people away from aerial combat, and furthermore promote the idea that you can play AH and have fun without any real need to fight anyone in the air.  I realize everyone pays their 15 bucks and they are free to do whatever they want, this is just my perspective.

In my opinion the problem lies not with the maps but with the community.  Too many toolshedders and horde monkeys who would never dream of switching countries to balance the numbers for fear of not having the safety of 30 team mates flying around them.