Arena cap is getting out of hand

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Caps are not a problem - squads separating are. Yesterday I couldn't join orange where the rest of my squad was. I think I might as well quit being in squad since arena caps make it practically impossible to fly with them.

[LLv34_Snefens]

Ive never played it, but WW2online doesnt seem to have a problem with 1000 players arenas that Ive heard of. And not to pull any punches here, but I think they are <<<<COOUU-winningtherace-GGHHH>>>>

I wonder how you can make a judgement about it when you haven't played it?

[SlapShot]

I am curious how the rest of the player base views the giant maps compared to the smaller ones though, just from a gameplay perspective.

Personally, I could care less if I ever see a "small" map again. For me, the larger maps provide the fights that I am looking for.

When a small map is up in the LW arenas, there are fewer points of conflict offered. This leads to large amounts of people fighting in the same area and large amounts of countrymen trying to kill the same target(s). The small amount of conflict points does not allow enemy satellite groups to try and attack different areas of the map/front.

When a large map is up, I don't regularly participate in the massive horde on horde attacks. On a large map, I usually see an ongoing conflict between 2 bases with full green and red dar bars going on for hours. Nothing wrong with that, it's just not my cup of tea. What I do is scan the outer edges of the front to look for smaller satellite groups of enemies trying to take base with a moderate amount of players. That is where I get my "juice" and there are a fair amount of people like me that look for the same conflicts.

So, while all the others are fighting in a massive furball between 2 bases (getting their juice), I am able to do my thing and also provide a defense against attacks on the outer edges of the front. When small maps are up, there just aren't that many opportunities for satellite attacks and I find myself weeding my way thru a sea of green trying to get to a target before 5 or 6 of my fellow countrymen get to it.

Remember, Grizz is asking a question, so this is just my personal opinion and what I like. I'm not trying to say this is the way that it has to be, it just the way I like it. When I log into a LW arena and I see a small map, I will either go to the MW arena or log out.

[SlapShot]

That is where I got the idea, but things currently work a little differently here.  For one how would you deal with the "closed' bases?  The apparent answer is make them immune to damage so they couldn't be porked before they opened up, but even then any player that monitored arena numbers could figure out when they would open and set up a cap/vulch or roll GV's in there and not present any potential defenders with much of a chance.  

Most FPS that use this method have a way of preventing the players from accessing the off limits part of the map which we don't have here.

Well, HT has a way of moving the "capital" from the front to the rear. Why not make the bases that are out of play invisible until the front needs to be expanded and then make them appear?

[kvuo75]

Well, HT has a way of moving the "capital" from the front to the rear. Why not make the bases that are out of play invisible until the front needs to be expanded and then make them appear?

wasnt something like this already tried? there were only a few bases available to capture on each front. I think the vestiges of it still appear if you right click on clipboard map. "field order"

[The Fugitive]

Slap, I don't think the size of the map is the reason we have horde issues.  

On the other hand, a small map, once a certain number of players over populate that map you DO lose those smaller fights going on around the edges. The larger maps were made because the "average" population had increased to the point that a small map was ALWAYS over populated. The problem we have now is most times we have too many for a small map, but not enough for a large map.

wasnt something like this already tried? there were only a few bases available to capture on each front. I think the vestiges of it still appear if you right click on clipboard map. "field order"

I think they were talking more along the lines of "undiscovered country" behind country lines. Start with a front or 20 bases to each side, and as you lose them and pull back new bases "appear" that you can use. This way the fronts are smaller (like a small map) but stay small instead of stretching out all over (like a big map).

[SlapShot]

wasnt something like this already tried? there were only a few bases available to capture on each front. I think the vestiges of it still appear if you right click on clipboard map. "field order"

Yes ... that was the predetermined attack track.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Yes ... that was the predetermined attack track.

Interesting, that must have been happening during those years I had to skip. All new to me! 

[Dadsguns]

From what I've seen most of the global numbers have no bearing on what is actually happening on a small scale.  So many times the "low numbers" side has no fights and green hordes and the "high numbers" side is getting ganged on both fronts.  So...

I was hoping you would give more detail in that statement, not sure where your going.  I find it to mean the cart comes before the horse if you will.

Global numbers has everything to do with what is happening on a small scale in so many different ways that you cannot simply ignore that, It has even a more profound effect when there is such an imbalance in the arenas and which is the common denominator with almost every issue there is in this game to some extent.

As I have pointed out, no matter how many players are in a particular map either it large or small, caps or no caps, if the imbalance between the sides is not addressed in these arenas then we will end up with more of the same that we have now no matter what HT does with the arenas.  

Your statement of "So many times the "low numbers" side has no fights and green hordes and the "high numbers" side is getting ganged on both fronts.  So..."
So.... As you see here you have made my point. Cause and Effect, but lets look at the other side of that coin, how about when the high numbers side is steam rolling a field because the "low numbers" cant put up any defense to it when both low numbers side are fighting it out.  You chose to look at one side of the issue and ignore the other?  Why?  Which is more healthier for the game?  Why should any 1 side or 2 sides be able to outnumbers any other side with such a large amount of players?    

I haven't seen too many if at all that have come on to the boards and proclaim their profound love of being railroaded from the "High numbers" side that is able to steam roll bases or any opposition and having their bellybutton handed to them day in and day out, matter of fact I would say you have seen the complete opposite of how many players are dissatisfied with that..... So..  

[SlapShot]

Slap, I don't think the size of the map is the reason we have horde issues.  

On the other hand, a small map, once a certain number of players over populate that map you DO lose those smaller fights going on around the edges. The larger maps were made because the "average" population had increased to the point that a small map was ALWAYS over populated. The problem we have now is most times we have too many for a small map, but not enough for a large map.

Fugi ... I'm not buying it. Every time there is a large map up, there are always 2 or 3 base points of conflict that attract massive players vs massive players that goes on for hours. If there was say only 100 people in the LW arena, on a large map, then why is there not also this same conflict but with lesser numbers? Does there have to be 300+ players on a large map for this type of conflict to take place ... I think not. Those that enjoy the ongoing conflict between 2 base will be there and it has nothing to do with the amount of players in the arena ... the amount of players participating in the conflict may be smaller, but it will still evolve in time.

I don't think that you can force a certain type of map upon an LW arena using population because you can never really know how an arena will grow. I have seen LW Blue out populate LW Orange on occasions and I wondered why. I logged into the LW O and instantly knew why ... the map sucked compared to the map that was in LW B.

And for those who say .. "I can't find a fight" ... when LW Blue is what they consider low numbers ... I call bollocks on that too. I have no trouble finding fights under those conditions, especially when I go looking for one. Those that say they can't find a fight actually mean that their isn't an instant fight that they can jump into the second they enter the arena.

You want a fight in an under populated arena ... grab a handful of guys with rockets and bombs ... attack a town just to attack it with no intention of taking the base ... and you will get a fight. This is the seed for all fights in AH ... some just don't want to plant them ... then just want to be there for the harvest ... and those are the ones that cry "I can't find a fight".

I can't tell you how many times when I flew with the 13th TAS, Toad and I would up F6Fs or FM2s with rockets ... fire them at a town ... and they start upping like mad hornets ... and then the "fight" was on ... sometimes for hours.

[SlapShot]

Interesting, that must have been happening during those years I had to skip. All new to me! 

Yeah ... it was a kind of cool concept but HT canned it. It was meant to quell the hordes from not fighting each other and milking different parts of the map. The intention was with the predetermined attack track, horde would be forced to face horde ... if they wanted to take base. It did not stop fighting in other parts of the map that were not on the track, you just wouldn't be able to capture a base that was not on the track.

[The Fugitive]

Hordes are hordes and your going to find them on ANY size map, period.

300 players on a small map is about the limit from what I've seen. Anything over that and the fronts lose those bases where you can up a couple of F6s and start a fight. If you try they quickly become part of the main battle. With the large maps these little battles can and often do go un-noticed. To some this is the advantage they want to grab a base quick (if you up to defend they disappear). If you up F6s and try to start something you either get in clean and nobody ups to defend, or you get a quick token defense by they disappear as soon as they know it's not a capture attempt and they run back to the "main battle". Or finally you run into like minded players and get a nice little battle going.

The large map has TOO many places to hide/watch and dilutes the fights, and small maps get over populated leaving little room for small side battles.

I'd love to see a "medium" map (69 bases) designed totally around strategic tactics. Meaning not so much a "capture path", but with each "path" of capture to have different challenges. Say while capturing  V12 looks good because it has a spawn to A22, A22 doesn't have spawns to V12, but it does spawn to the 2 bases they are the only ones to cover V12. Causing the fight to spread out from V12 if they want to keep it. Or, and airfield that spawns to 4 bases all close by, but is protected by a 7k base 20 miles out. The challenge being either take the high ground first, or grab the low and defend while grabbing a few of the others around to use in support to grab the high ground.

Today the challenge is to grab the base and they have figured out how to do that with ease..... bring lots of friends.  Make the maps the challenge to the win the war types. If you are the western country on Mindenao you KNOW your not going to lose that war, not because you team is better, but because the map is better on that side.

[SlapShot]

Hordes are hordes and your going to find them on ANY size map, period.

I'm not sure if this is directed at my responses or your just stating this in general. For me, I could care less about the hordes in LW. They mean nothing to me ... I don't participate in them, nor do I oppose them ... not worth my time in either case. They can horde all they want ... it does not effect me or what I look for. I avoid them at all costs.

The large map has TOO many places to hide/watch and dilutes the fights, and small maps get over populated leaving little room for small side battles.

This is where I disagree ... I don't think the fights are diluted ... how many planes does it take to make a good fight? For me it can range from 1 v 1 up to 20 v 20 or anything in between. Once it starts to get higher than that, I becomes more like a hyena pack and each hyena is fighting for a small piece of meat. At that point, that is when I start to look for another fight.

What I am trying to say is the quality of a "fight" is not determined by achieving a fixed number of planes in conflict, so as far as I am concerned there is no such thing as a "diluted" fight.

I love scanning the map looking for that obscure base blinking and try to figure out the possible attack strategy that may be coming its way ... or seeing the base on the outer edge blink because a handful of guys are upping off a CV to try and sneak a base. There are a fair amount of players that do the same thing as I do. Almost every time I move to base on the outer edges that is blinking, I see the same guys upping right along with me.

[muzik]

Muzik: In your last 2 posts.

HiTech

Out of respect for you Im going to respond to this one by email!

[grizz441]

Personally, I could care less if I ever see a "small" map again. For me, the larger maps provide the fights that I am looking for.

When a small map is up in the LW arenas, there are fewer points of conflict offered. This leads to large amounts of people fighting in the same area and large amounts of countrymen trying to kill the same target(s). The small amount of conflict points does not allow enemy satellite groups to try and attack different areas of the map/front.

When a large map is up, I don't regularly participate in the massive horde on horde attacks. On a large map, I usually see an ongoing conflict between 2 bases with full green and red dar bars going on for hours. Nothing wrong with that, it's just not my cup of tea. What I do is scan the outer edges of the front to look for smaller satellite groups of enemies trying to take base with a moderate amount of players. That is where I get my "juice" and there are a fair amount of people like me that look for the same conflicts.

So, while all the others are fighting in a massive furball between 2 bases (getting their juice), I am able to do my thing and also provide a defense against attacks on the outer edges of the front. When small maps are up, there just aren't that many opportunities for satellite attacks and I find myself weeding my way thru a sea of green trying to get to a target before 5 or 6 of my fellow countrymen get to it.

Remember, Grizz is asking a question, so this is just my personal opinion and what I like. I'm not trying to say this is the way that it has to be, it just the way I like it. When I log into a LW arena and I see a small map, I will either go to the MW arena or log out.

And that's a completely valid argument.  You play mostly at peak US times yes?  Imo those smaller fights on big maps that you enjoy dry up when it is not a peak time.