Is this what Hitech wants?

[mtnman]

Most players lack a few thousand perks some have to risk on a 262 mission into a horde. I for one lost all my perks from several years due to a name change which I didn't know would cause such an event. I personally am not afraid to use the perks I have now collected again but I know the majority of players lack the perk buffers to casually take one.

So either it's the dissatisfaction of surrendering under the horde or trying to fight desperately - both cases is a loss for the victim of the horde. If I have to give up to a horde it usually means the game just stoped being fun for me and I log off for a week. If it happens often enough it may mean I no longer see paying the monthly payment feasible. And that's not good for HTC. If hordeing produces player logoffs and/or quits, the balance gets shifted even worse gradually with the problem feeding itself.

I remember back in 2002 when euro-primetime login would in most cases produce a situation where your country was being horded to death with a couple remaining fields vulched non-stop. Whenever you took up you stood 10:1 odds - if you got up at all that is. That's by far not the only reason I quit subscribing back then but it was certainly a factor why I stayed away for years.

You don't need a perk plane to fly against the horde, but you do need a pretty fast plane to have any long-term success.  P51's, P47's, F4U's, 109's, etc, can all be used.  And the beauty of it is that you'll generally build perks pretty quickly, especially if you switch to the lowest-numbers team.

Personally, this is the type of fight that I love the F4U-4 for.  I love that plane, but I really want to fly it in a challenging situation, too.  Sure, it's perked, but not all that much.  And I don't like jets...

It's a different type of fight, going against the swarms.  It's a heck of a challenge, and it's satisfying when you can do it and get away with it.  To be honest, I find it much more entertaining than a bunch of 1v1 fights.

[Urchin]

Bit harsh its the guys living

I'm not trying to be harsh, HT is running a business. He has said many times that he expects people to burn out and quit playing.

[Yeager]

I'm not trying to be harsh, HT is running a business. He has said many times that he expects people to burn out and quit playing.

yup.....I would hazard a guess here and say the current player base today is a single digit percent (7% maybe?) of everyone who has ever come and gone in-game since 1999.

[Urchin]

I beg to differ. Simulated air combat is a niche market as it is, every customer counts for HTC. MA playerbase is in 3 thousand range, the MMOG move in 3 hundred  thousands to 3 million player range. So no, it really is not the same who quits.

Ah, but a true simulation of a war has slightly wider appeal than a combat flight sim. Some of the tools are already in the game, we have tanks with a detailed model for damage and ballistics, and troop carriers. All that is really needed is artillery along with some sort of spotting system, and new terrains that are better suited towards a ground campaign (with choke points, urban areas, roads and railways, areas with tactical and strategic importance, etc). What we have now for ALL of the terrains amounts to a campaign in Siberia - just tons and tons of wide open spaces with no strategic value whatsoever. I'm not even sure HTC would need to add infantry, I think AH could become a great combined arms sim with just what we have now, with some tweaking.

[The Fugitive]

Ah, but a true simulation of a war has slightly wider appeal than a combat flight sim. Some of the tools are already in the game, we have tanks with a detailed model for damage and ballistics, and troop carriers. All that is really needed is artillery along with some sort of spotting system, and new terrains that are better suited towards a ground campaign (with choke points, urban areas, roads and railways, areas with tactical and strategic importance, etc). What we have now for ALL of the terrains amounts to a campaign in Siberia - just tons and tons of wide open spaces with no strategic value whatsoever. I'm not even sure HTC would need to add infantry, I think AH could become a great combined arms sim with just what we have now, with some tweaking.

I agree with that 100% !Put the strategy back in, put tactics back in! I love all the option that this game has even if I suck at most of them. Most however are not used, or twisted to game the game.

[SPKmes]

It's a different type of fight, going against the swarms.  It's a heck of a challenge, and it's satisfying when you can do it and get away with it.  To be honest, I find it much more entertaining than a bunch of 1v1 fights.

I like this thought...although some days I'm just not in the mood for that rubbish (and have a little cry on 200 haha.)so then I will go elsewhere pop onto some radar somewhere (usually the country that's hording) and wait for the uppers to come Try and divert some from the base they are all at,at the time and start a whole new rumble..

although in saying this I do find it hard to comprehend the thought processes of those who travel in a group to sit over a field and drop in on any uppers as soon as wheels are up with absolutely no intention of trying to take the base....It is even worse when you find name players are in on it too..

After saying all this I know that I have the luck of playing in a timezone that doesn't hold multitudes of players like during the American prime time..When I play at that time it is actually a totally different game..and yet still the same.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Ah, but a true simulation of a war has slightly wider appeal than a combat flight sim. Some of the tools are already in the game, we have tanks with a detailed model for damage and ballistics, and troop carriers. All that is really needed is artillery along with some sort of spotting system, and new terrains that are better suited towards a ground campaign (with choke points, urban areas, roads and railways, areas with tactical and strategic importance, etc). What we have now for ALL of the terrains amounts to a campaign in Siberia - just tons and tons of wide open spaces with no strategic value whatsoever. I'm not even sure HTC would need to add infantry, I think AH could become a great combined arms sim with just what we have now, with some tweaking.

LOL! Who are you kidding? The player base IS 3000+ that is a fact. The number does not even fluctuate much. I've been on AH since 2000ish I don't recall exactly when I started playing. Right after the beta anyway. That way of thinking is like pissing in your pants at winter, it warms for a second but then it gets oh so cold when you realize it wasn't 'real' warmth.

Now, unless HTC works on a non-profit basis its goal should be to drive expense down and gain more yearly turnover. Only 2 ways to achieve the latter - either increase sub price or get more paying customers.

[Scotch]

Urchin is usually 110% spot on before he posts anything.

[Crash Orange]

Actually I dont think the arena size is the problem. I think its always been the lack of a forced balanced side system. I like the idea of a max per side and think its a time that never should have left. As even with ENY you can still end up with 100 team "A", 100 team "B", and 60 Team "C"

Wouldn't help anything because it's a 3-way war. It's the same problem as ENY: if all the teams are dead even, but two of the sides aren't fighting each other, then one side is getting horded 2-1 across all its fronts. It's no different for that team than if it's 100-100-50 but half the first two teams are fighting each other. As things stand now, in the first scenario teams A & B have no ENY while in the 2nd they have a high ENY, even though the actual situation on each front is the same in both scenarios. This is why people have asked for field- or zone-based ENY or caps.

(It's also why I see ENY is so useless as far as side balancing goes. If one side getting ganged 2-1 is a problem, then ENY is broken because it does absolutely nothing to prevent the problem as long as 2 sides can ignore each other and gang up on the 3rd. If one side getting ganged 2-1 isn't a problem, then why have ENY at all?)

[Getback]

You don't need a perk plane to fly against the horde, but you do need a pretty fast plane to have any long-term success.  P51's, P47's, F4U's, 109's, etc, can all be used.  And the beauty of it is that you'll generally build perks pretty quickly, especially if you switch to the lowest-numbers team.

Personally, this is the type of fight that I love the F4U-4 for.  I love that plane, but I really want to fly it in a challenging situation, too.  Sure, it's perked, but not all that much.  And I don't like jets...

It's a different type of fight, going against the swarms.  It's a heck of a challenge, and it's satisfying when you can do it and get away with it.  To be honest, I find it much more entertaining than a bunch of 1v1 fights.

Spot on Mountainmn! I was telling Joach1m that in the MA it is really a matter of SA more than ACM and especially true for a horde. Nothing can save you if you slow down or get more than 2 planes on you. People in hordes seem to get more feral with the numbers advantage and hence more aggressive. However, once you drag them out, not so much. So a good pilot can whip on quite a few even in a horde.

[Urchin]

LOL! Who are you kidding? The player base IS 3000+ that is a fact. The number does not even fluctuate much. I've been on AH since 2000ish I don't recall exactly when I started playing. Right after the beta anyway. That way of thinking is like pissing in your pants at winter, it warms for a second but then it gets oh so cold when you realize it wasn't 'real' warmth.

Now, unless HTC works on a non-profit basis its goal should be to drive expense down and gain more yearly turnover. Only 2 ways to achieve the latter - either increase sub price or get more paying customers.

If I had to hazard a guess I'd say you've probably been around AH as long as me (and believe me I'm always slightly amazed every time I think about it). AH did not have 3000 players when I started playing. When I started a busy night in the MA was 100 people. The game did expand quite rapidly as its competitors went under. I believe according to Lusche's analysis the game got up to around 5000 subscribers a couple years ago and has been falling since then then. I think part of that is the crappy economy in the U.S., but I think another part is the player base changed. The game isn't made up of people who share a common interest in WW2 planes and combat flight sims, and it hasn't been for literally years.

Scotch, thanks for the vote of support, I would definately say I'm 100% confident in what I'm saying anyway. That is, of course, different from being RIGHT about it .

[skribetm]

bloody fools, you all have been here.. how long?
this is what hitech wants:



 

[Getback]

Urchin, I think it's mostly the crappy economy. I love this game but had to take a couple of years off because of the economy and shouldn't be playing now. I want Hitech to succeed in every way. I also think many folks here enjoy the WWII era of planes. Sometimes I think they are a bit too fanatic. Still though they show so much respect to our WWII heroes.

[Lusche]

I believe according to Lusche's analysis the game got up to around 5000 subscribers a couple years ago and has been falling since then then.

Quick clarification: I had never stated anything about the number of subscribers.

What I did show was the number of active players (at least one kill or death) in the main arena, but that includes a great (but varying) number of trial accounts and excludes players only flying FSO or other special events, didn't use their active accounts and so on.
That's why I called it "activity index"
Bearing that in mind: Yes, we had a peak of activity about two years ago, with about 50% more "activity" than today.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

If I had to hazard a guess I'd say you've probably been around AH as long as me (and believe me I'm always slightly amazed every time I think about it). AH did not have 3000 players when I started playing. When I started a busy night in the MA was 100 people. The game did expand quite rapidly as its competitors went under. I believe according to Lusche's analysis the game got up to around 5000 subscribers a couple years ago and has been falling since then then. I think part of that is the crappy economy in the U.S., but I think another part is the player base changed. The game isn't made up of people who share a common interest in WW2 planes and combat flight sims, and it hasn't been for literally years.

Scotch, thanks for the vote of support, I would definately say I'm 100% confident in what I'm saying anyway. That is, of course, different from being RIGHT about it .

I understand the economic problems in US at the moment but otoh HTC is on a global market. If my business would stop growing let alone have a 40% drop in turnover, I'd be extremely worried and try to figure out whats causing the customers to leave. I'm sure HTC has done that.

My opinnion is that like in nature, MA needs to have a balance to thrive. Without balance things tend to wither and die sooner than later. An odd horde now and then doesn't matter in grand scale of things. But if it's a constant phenomenon it's about as profitable for HTC as the locust swarms are for African farmers.