NOT FUN ANY MORE!!!

[grizz441]

The folks asking that the challenge of capturing a base be lowered to make it easier for them to get it. Without regard to making a fight of it.
It seems the fight is not so important to them as it is to get a base. Their gratification is in getting that base... not the fight for it.

The WAR as so many like to call it will ebb and flow no matter what terrain is up. You win some, you lose some.



Now one might suggest HT setup a base room for those that just want to capture to fullfill their desires. There would be no flack guns, no defences, nothing but a big fat bases fit for the taking. No need for different sides.... everyone can be on the same side. To keep from folks not being able to fly there because of their chess piece they could simply call the single side "The Winners".

The gratification would come firly quick and the war could be won while on their lunch hour.


That is a bit overboard but just how easy do they want it?

Here's someone who doesn't "get it".

[betty]

Fish is an easy game all you need is cards.


Anyone else have some easy games to help this hand full of folks out for the instant gratification quest?

how bout UNO or skipbo?

[Shuffler]

how bout UNO or skipbo?

 

[krazey]

The folks asking that the challenge of capturing a base be lowered to make it easier for them to get it. Without regard to making a fight of it.
It seems the fight is not so important to them as it is to get a base. Their gratification is in getting that base... not the fight for it.

The WAR as so many like to call it will ebb and flow no matter what terrain is up. You win some, you lose some.



Now one might suggest HT setup a base room for those that just want to capture to fullfill their desires. There would be no flack guns, no defences, nothing but a big fat bases fit for the taking. No need for different sides.... everyone can be on the same side. To keep from folks not being able to fly there because of their chess piece they could simply call the single side "The Winners".

The gratification would come firly quick and the war could be won while on their lunch hour.


That is a bit overboard but just how easy do they want it?

I dont recall seeing anyone say they wanted it that easy to take a base but being one of those who likes to "win the war" I do believe that the current set-up is far from perfect... I like the fact that we dont get 4 or 5 resets a day anymore but in all honesty since i came back to the game earlier this year I havent seen ONE reset caused by a " win" , that to me suggests something is off-kilter. I'll admit its possible that "wins" have occured while ive been offline but I havent even heard of such happening. Mind you IMO it doesnt help when people who would like to win the war get told not to take this or that base because someone wants to have a constant GV battle there or wants to have a non-stop furball. I understand that we all enjoy differnet aspects of the game but feel it should be possible to combine all those elements and still have fun.

[Lusche]

The folks asking that the challenge of capturing a base be lowered to make it easier for them to get it. Without regard to making a fight of it.
It seems the fight is not so important to them as it is to get a base. Their gratification is in getting that base... not the fight for it.

The WAR as so many like to call it will ebb and flow no matter what terrain is up. You win some, you lose some.



Now one might suggest HT setup a base room for those that just want to capture to fullfill their desires. There would be no flack guns, no defences, nothing but a big fat bases fit for the taking. No need for different sides.... everyone can be on the same side. To keep from folks not being able to fly there because of their chess piece they could simply call the single side "The Winners".

The gratification would come firly quick and the war could be won while on their lunch hour.


That is a bit overboard but just how easy do they want it?

So when most of us in this thread are pointing out the importance of having a goal within the game beyond purely "mixing it up" - are we the easy way crowd?
If we feel that the "war winners" should actually have a chance at winning the "war" - Are we catering the easy moders?
If we do think about possible way to balance the different game modes out, thus (hopefully) increasing appeal to many different kind of players in order to keep this game going and maybe even get the numbers up again - is that just egoistical looking for instant gratifcation?

[Shuffler]

I dont recall seeing anyone say they wanted it that easy to take a base but being one of those who likes to "win the war" I do believe that the current set-up is far from perfect... I like the fact that we dont get 4 or 5 resets a day anymore but in all honesty since i came back to the game earlier this year I havent seen ONE reset caused by a " win" , that to me suggests something is off-kilter. I'll admit its possible that "wins" have occured while ive been offline but I havent even heard of such happening. Mind you IMO it doesnt help when people who would like to win the war get told not to take this or that base because someone wants to have a constant GV battle there or wants to have a non-stop furball. I understand that we all enjoy differnet aspects of the game but feel it should be possible to combine all those elements and still have fun.

My post was to ask "just how easy does it need to be?"

The easiest would be as I described. Someone can post what they consider easy enough to make them happy. I would be interested in reading folks suggestions. Simply saying "easier" has no bounds.

[CptTrips]

My post was to ask "just how easy does it need to be?"

That is a fair question. 

It was discussed earlier that there is obviously some "Fun Curve" here.  If it’s too easy, its no fun.  If it’s too hard, it’s no fun.  The trick is indeed to find that "how easy?" balance point.

I believe it also probably has an effect on promoting hordes.  If you increase the difficultly and ordinance needed, they will simply bring along a bigger horde to get the job done.  If that’s what you want to promote, fine.

I personally feel the sweet spot is somewhere around where a team of 5 decent squad members with some skill and a little luck can have a 50/50 chance of capturing a field themselves.  That requires allowing a little stealth to be able to get within striking distance before all heck breaks loose, and requires they can reasonably carry enough ord in fighter/bombers to get the job done considering somebody has to fly a goon.

I assert that because that is a common size a squad might be fielding on a given night.  If you balance things so they can have a reasonable chance at success, they will be more motivated to go off and do some squad ops themselves, spreading out the fights and thinning the hordes.   In the end, I believe creates a bunch more varied encounters at the bases they are trying to capture and along their ingress route if they are discovered.

If a squad feels they aren’t wasting their time, they will go off on their own and raise little clouds of heck around the map. 

If you make it a waste of their time to try, they will simply come in 30 plane armadas to make sure of the job.

Which do you want?
 
Regards,
Wab


 
 

[Yeager]

Heres my idea:  Eliminate the "win the war" idea altogether.  Rotate the maps once a week and let it go at that.  The "win" can come from base captures.  Perhaps the more people logged in at the defending base the more perk value the attackers get for it.  

Jeeze, the number of different scenarios one can conjure up is almost endless.  I doubt any of them have much more merit than any other.  Success of AH all comes down to how imaginative the individual player is with a relatively rigid set of game mechanics.

[Yeager]

I personally feel the sweet spot is somewhere around where a team of 5 decent squad members with some skill and a little luck can have a 50/50 chance of capturing a field themselves. 

Should a decent team of 5 squad members  be able to defend a base against an attack from a another decent team of 5 squad members? 50/50? 

[CptTrips]

Should a decent team of 5 squad members  be able to defend a base against an attack from a another decent team of 5 squad members? 50/50?  

Yeager,

I think that sounds about right.

However, I’d assert that it doesn’t take that many.   Defense would always require a lower number to be successful than attack. I’d say 3 guys could defend against 5 (given equal skill level).  If for no other reason than cycle time.

A defender ups and kills one of your guys then you kill him.  He can re-up and be back in the fight immediately because he is AT the scene of battle.  The dead attacker would have to come back from a sector away.

A defender runs out of ammo, he augurs and reups a fresh plane AT the scene of battle.  An attacker runs out of ammo and they are finished.

Regards,
Wab

[Guppy35]

Here's someone who doesn't "get it".

Thank heaven's you are here to enlighten us Grizz.

It seems to me that no matter what is done, you will have folks complaining it isn't to their liking.  How is it so many of us have been around such a long time if the game is so messed up?

Could it be we accept the fact that we have some say in whether we have fun within the parameters of the game?  There are a ton of choices in how you play, a ton of options as to what you can fly, drive, etc.  People come and go and come back again.  Sometimes folks just need a break too.

Maybe the people who play need to modify their game, instead of the game designer needing to constantly adjust it to the latest complaint?

Could be the whiners don't get it?

[betty]

Thank heaven's you are here to enlighten us Grizz.

It seems to me that no matter what is done, you will have folks complaining it isn't to their liking.  How is it so many of us have been around such a long time if the game is so messed up?

Could it be we accept the fact that we have some say in whether we have fun within the parameters of the game?  There are a ton of choices in how you play, a ton of options as to what you can fly, drive, etc.  People come and go and come back again.  Sometimes folks just need a break too.

Maybe the people who play need to modify their game, instead of the game designer needing to constantly adjust it to the latest complaint?

Could be the whiners don't get it?

i agree with you dan, people seem to complain no matter what HTC does or doesn't do to the game. people need to realize that HTC wouldn't make changes to the game if they didn't find it necessary. even if HTC makes changes and later finds out that they didn't work, they always try to do the best thing for the game along with giving the members what they want. we are all human and at some points we are never satisfied but many that are unhappy just seem to like to whine and cry about it a little too much IMHO.

[Lusche]

Could be the whiners don't get it?

Why is everything instantly called a whine? Should we never think about the game, look for possible improvements or adjustments? Never gather any ideas or opinions on how things could further evolve? Just because "you can't please everyone all the time" we should stop to think about how to increase AHs's appeal? Should I just shrug my shoulders when I see my fav game has much less people playing than years ago? (Yes, the business side is not my business, but I want a thriving game population just for egoistical reasons )

[CptTrips]

Why is everything instantly called a whine?

Because dismissing it out-of-hand is easier than actually thinking it thru carefully?

,
Wab

[grizz441]

Maybe the people who play need to modify their game, instead of the game designer needing to constantly adjust it to the latest complaint?

Maybe they have tried but aren't having fun? If that's the case, they need to quit.  Numbers are on a decline if you haven't noticed.

HiTech said himself that he is considering raising the time limit of downed buildings in the town because he himself knows that the game is not balanced.  Personally I don't think this is enough in itself, because a small squadron still can't kill a town by itself efficiently anymore because it is too spread out.  The point is, HiTech knows that the new town that he implemented has caused balancing issues and the complaints are warranted.