Thanks Fugi. I wonder what their definition of 'works best' was at the time? Was ENY part of the game then? If some of the load-levelling parameters are new it is time to retest the hypothesis.
Having one map with bases opening and closing strikes me as the most elegant solution...at least as an early concept. Limiting the number/amount of uppers/resources based on field size would be fairly complicated I think. Might be an interesting strategic aspect.
Certainly worth kicking it around though.
Another thought: Assuming that HTC believes that being in a squad is good for keeping players, perhaps he should allow squad members to join a closed arena IF there are already N squaddies in that arena. Be nice to give squads a tangible benefit for being a squad.
Not that I'm trying to shot down your ideas here, but ....
Building something to FORCE players to defend a base, or hold a freshly captured base will not work. Some people are just after captures, and couldn't care less if they lose the base while they are capturing the next. Other play to fight and don't care which base they are upping from, as long as they can up they are ok.
At this point, I don't think the game has enough players to support a split arena. So personally I don't think we need caps at this point either. Should the economy turn around or a new commercial run on the History channel and the numbers go back up to that "unhealthy" point again, I'd be happy to see the split come back.
With the caps in place however, letting squad mates join their squad in a capped arena would cause more trouble than just opening it. Figure that even if it was 50% of players (I'm sure it is much more) are in squads. As long as one of the squadmates are in the capped arena they could get in. That could be adding 50-100 especially if a squady "squats" the arena to get his buddies in that night for squad ops.
