Is this what Hitech wants?

[PJ_Godzilla]

You don't pay pay-per-view to see a string of fights where each one ends not even halfway into round 1. 

No wonder I'm so disappointed with Pay-per-view. I thought I'd be getting an endless series of one chimp beating another chimp into a bloody tooth-spitting pulp... then an actual fight broke out.

Frankly, I'm bored with this thread. The MA is more or less deregulated. As such, behaviors practiced there will continue until effectively countered. That's my stance and it intersects with bits of other's/your stance.

That's all tired to me.

What's NOT tired is the self-induced chuckle I'm getting out of the idea of some drunken simian miscreant sitting agog in front of his screen, paying to watch an infinite series of bloody and lopsided 2-minute beatdowns, all while drunkenly laughing an idiot's duhuhuhuhuhuhuh and thumbing through a magazine entitled "1001 Nicknames for Women"...

[bmwgs]

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

This is a good example of how hording is exasperated since eny IMO is not stringent enough.  These "extra" 40 players had no affect from eny and were able to up with 51D's with ords and freely move about the map.

There is no give and take, it appears to promote unbalanced sides, if a side chooses to stick together and fight primarily one side "horde a side", thats all well and good, but it should also mean that it would leave their other side open for attack and thus would spread the fight out on both fronts since they would have to defend that now exposed side.  That does not happen since there is plenty to thwart any counter attack made by either side they are up against.

HiTech, this 40 player difference is a huge advantage in an of itself let alone the little impact eny really has, I request that eny be reviewed or adjusted and reconsidered to be more stringent in cases like this or eliminated altogether and having arena caps in place.  

I'm curious to see the map showing where the fighting is happening along with the numbers that are being posted.  If the Bishops are fighting two fronts with minimal fighting between the Rook and Knights, then in fact, the Bishops are out numbered.  I have seen this a number of time involving all countries.  Just looking at the numbers does not always reflect what is actually happening.

Fred

[moot]

No wonder I'm so disappointed with Pay-per-view. I thought I'd be getting an endless series of one chimp beating another chimp into a bloody tooth-spitting pulp... then an actual fight broke out.

Frankly, I'm bored with this thread. The MA is more or less deregulated. As such, behaviors practiced there will continue until effectively countered. That's my stance and it intersects with bits of other's/your stance.

That's all tired to me.

What's NOT tired is the self-induced chuckle I'm getting out of the idea of some drunken simian miscreant sitting agog in front of his screen, paying to watch an infinite series of bloody and lopsided 2-minute beatdowns, all while drunkenly laughing an idiot's duhuhuhuhuhuhuh and thumbing through a magazine entitled "1001 Nicknames for Women"...

I mostly agree - furballers can't only sit on their hands (ie furball obliviously) and complain about the strategic guys not playing their way.  A few Arado or Moss XVI formations can take care of bombs across their front fields (unless that's changed); though in my experience the extra sector or two the missions then need to fly from is more or less chump change to them. Once enough people are on the bandwagon it doesn't make much difference. They just get to destination at higher altitude.

I'd take a swing at the PPV thing but I can't think of anything witty enough that it wouldn't get some people reading this indignant.

no one is gonna seriously say the last one is best.

"isn't best"

[Dadsguns]

I'm curious to see the map showing where the fighting is happening along with the numbers that are being posted.  If the Bishops are fighting two fronts with minimal fighting between the Rook and Knights, then in fact, the Bishops are out numbered.  I have seen this a number of time involving all countries.  Just looking at the numbers does not always reflect what is actually happening.

Fred

It was close to a 50/50 at most a 60/40 split on both fronts at times, the rooks were pushing really hard to get a base down there and that fight lasted all day and was finally taken by the rooks, I was bouncing back and forth depending on when the bish horde came in.  I am an equal opportunity pilot shooter downer.......  

There still is no justification for any 1 side having as much as 40+ players advantage which forces more defense rather offense postures day in and day out.  

[68ZooM]

That's probably the kind of subtlety that's lost in discussions on this topic.  The point isn't that you're ultimately winning but that there's no fighting involved in the process. 

Why not pick just the right dose, like counter balancing overwhelming numbers with lesser planes like the 39, or diverting your attacks to a number of bases so that each base isn't just nuked without any contest but actually fought over even if you never really risk a total blunder?  There's no such precision to the proportions, but the point is to make it more like 30-40% chance of defeat instead of 5-10%.

The problem really is finding the right dose.  A furballer/dogfighter analogy:  you go to the DA with someone like Bighorn.  Would you keep coming for more, or say it's worth your 15$, if every single time he kills you within one or two reverses after merge?  Or if he just goes limp and lets you kill him?  Or if he always tries to make the fight challenging no matter how long it lasts, even if a few of them end after less than a minute?  In which one are you most getting your money's worth?  Effectively no one is gonna seriously say the last one is best.

An organized strike force that's dropping and capping bases with each breath is only fair play if the opposition is equally organized.  This is a game, not war.  Sitting in the tower watching bombs drop and frontlines move across the map like seconds on a clock, flying long escort missions where you and a dozen other escort fighters see at most 1 bogie, that's not what the game was made for.   You don't pay pay-per-view to see a string of fights where each one ends not even halfway into round 1.  The cut to commercials and color commentary before after and between fights is all filler, and that's what sitting in the tower or having to turn tail because you don't stand a chance of lasting more than 10sec after merge amounts to.

The same way the game isn't about pushing cockpit buttons and minding flashing lights or fiddling with slide rules, but about the actual air combat.  What's the reward in steam rolling a map while avoiding any combat or contest from the opposition?  A handful of perk points and changing colors on the clipboard, and an opposition that either evacuates your target territory, or logs off. 

That said, as soon as I realized this myself, I never tried to lead strategic missions again, because reading the other country's level of organization was way too dodgy.  It was basically up to chance whether there'd be overwhelming defense, a good fight, or nobody home.  What's for sure is that no one will have a leg to stand on if they're griping about that middle scenario.  If the game was only about strategic combat, it wouldn't need physics or pilots. More like RTS or sports team manager games.

You guys have the strategic side down pat and that's fine.  But you can't expect not to have a big chunk of the players against you if you remove all tactical gameplay.  Tactics are the bread and butter of the game.

Nice writeup Moot  but so few will understand it

[4brkfast]

All those reds, low and slow? With their focus on the ground? Looks like 30 kills to me.

[Scotty55OEFVet]

HT hates teh hordes!!

FRIGGIN HILARIOUS!!!

[Ten60]

Why not pick just the right dose, like counter balancing overwhelming numbers with lesser planes like the 39, or diverting your attacks to a number of bases so that each base isn't just nuked without any contest but actually fought over even if you never really risk a total blunder?  There's no such precision to the proportions, but the point is to make it more like 30-40% chance of defeat instead of 5-10%.

Is this serious?  You expect anyone in their right mind to guesstimate the number of enemies who will or will not up to defend, then adjust our plane choice and load-outs accordingly just so the other side feels good about almost not losing a base...  The point is to take the base, not drop flowers and valentines to the Rook/Nits.

An organized strike force that's dropping and capping bases with each breath is only fair play if the opposition is equally organized.

Its our fault you can organize a proper defense.  Since we don't fight you should be able to bring 5 Spit 16's and have us cleared in no time.

This is a game, not war...You don't pay pay-per-view to see a string of fights where each one ends not even halfway into round 1.

1v1 boxing isn't even close to the same thing as this game.  And if you think those boxers treat their fight like you want to treat AH you really are nuts.  If Boxer A beats the snot out of Boxer B in 45 seconds in a pay per view fight the commentators don't blame Boxer A because he didn't give people their moneys worth and then proceed to lecture him on how he could have not used his right jab until the 6th round, or unless Boxer B started to hit him to much, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING WE DO.  The commentators call Boxer B unprepared and unworthy to have fought Boxer A and without questions will say that Boxer B didn't deserve to win the fight.

If the game was only about strategic combat, it wouldn't need physics or pilots.

And if the game was all about tactical gameplay we'd only be allowed to fly one plane, and only 1v1, and only bomb while being shot at.

...you can't expect not to have a big chunk of the players against you if you remove all tactical gameplay...

True, but you don't hear us crying because people are fooling around in TT or furballing and not wanting to roll in the missions.  We don't care how you want to play or what you want to do.  Wanna come with us, cool nice to see you.  Wanna fight all by yourself, we'll give you a WTG when you land kills.

Nice writeup Moot  but so few will understand it

It's not that we don't understand it, we think it's crap for him or anyone else to tell us how and under what circumstances we 'should' play.

With great success comes great hatred.

[Vudu15]

Ten60 

But just let you know you cant talk to these folks their just as deep seated in thier views as us.
but they cant look over the fence and see what anyone else is talkin about.

[Chilli]

I thought about it, and this really boils down to wishing that folks played the way that "I" wanted them to.   There are certain squads that usually bring large numbers in on an attack.  Also, there are many of us that like to run missions that essentially do the same, bring numbers to obtain superiority over a target.

< Hijack>  Before the split arenas where the only reason some of our squadees were flying in another arena was his choice, I remember the squad chat box being full.  As a unit we seemed to get things done, whether it was taking a base, running a fighter sweep, or running missions.  After a number of changes, that group just logged in and went their different ways.  Pretty soon (in about a year) the squad only consisted of about 3 or 4 die hards, left to carry on the name. 

My point:  HTC won't force you to play their game a certain way, they only work on ways of making it challenging and balanced.  Complaints about large squads, timid squads, NOE missions, etc, come from players (including myself) that the pendulum balance has swung away from.  The equalizer has always been the mission planner, which has the ability to swing the pendulum back in your favor.  Yet, it is the most ignored part of the game.  Sure, there are those that spy on missions.  I would say that is the largest contributor to it's non use. 

Here again, the action of a few gamers, has defeated hours of coding, and the usefulness of a tool that should be bringing like minded players together to increase their odds of playing the game the way they envisioned it.

[ROX]

It's OBVIOUS what HiTech wants....

It's high-end Scotch.

Buy him some.

Send him some.

[GNucks]

It's OBVIOUS what HiTech wants....

It's high-end Scotch.

Buy him some.

Send him some.

Don't we already?

[Megalodon]

Tune in for ........"As the Social Experiment Continues."

How many years for a PhD?    

[ROX]

Don't we already?

$14.95 don't buy the kind of Scotch he wants.

[bj229r]

Is this serious?  You expect anyone in their right mind to guesstimate the number of enemies who will or will not up to defend, then adjust our plane choice and load-outs accordingly just so the other side feels good about almost not losing a base...  The point is to take the base, not drop flowers and valentines to the Rook/Nits.
Its our fault you can organize a proper defense.  Since we don't fight you should be able to bring 5 Spit 16's and have us cleared in no time.
1v1 boxing isn't even close to the same thing as this game.  And if you think those boxers treat their fight like you want to treat AH you really are nuts.  If Boxer A beats the snot out of Boxer B in 45 seconds in a pay per view fight the commentators don't blame Boxer A because he didn't give people their moneys worth and then proceed to lecture him on how he could have not used his right jab until the 6th round, or unless Boxer B started to hit him to much, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING WE DO.  The commentators call Boxer B unprepared and unworthy to have fought Boxer A and without questions will say that Boxer B didn't deserve to win the fight.
And if the game was all about tactical gameplay we'd only be allowed to fly one plane, and only 1v1, and only bomb while being shot at.
True, but you don't hear us crying because people are fooling around in TT or furballing and not wanting to roll in the missions.  We don't care how you want to play or what you want to do.  Wanna come with us, cool nice to see you.  Wanna fight all by yourself, we'll give you a WTG when you land kills.
It's not that we don't understand it, we think it's crap for him or anyone else to tell us how and under what circumstances we 'should' play.

With great success comes great hatred.

I never argue with M00t, he uses too many big words . This is the thing tho:

The same way the game isn't about pushing cockpit buttons and minding flashing lights or fiddling with slide rules, but about the actual air combat.  What's the reward in steam rolling a map while avoiding any combat or contest from the opposition?  A handful of perk points and changing colors on the clipboard, and an opposition that either evacuates your target territory, or logs off.

There are a fair number of people who could care less whether a victory comes from a challenging fight, or from a simple execution of afk/outnumbered/taxiing plane. If they stay here long enough, they start to care about that difference