Time to kill the huge maps

[TheRapier]

And as posted, a lot of players these days DON'T WANT to fight others, but avoid them.

Then this game is already dead, we are just playing out the end.

[TDeacon]

Where is the evidence that overall player density (related to map size) affects the chance of finding *a fight*?  

So long as we have radar, it is easy to find “a fight” on any map.  The problem is that most players only want to fight under conditions which give then the advantage, such as numbers, plane type, altitude, or some combination of these or other factors.  If you are one of those exceptional individuals who find this type of opposition acceptable, then you are good to go (American expression).  

If you are not one of those exceptional individuals, then you will be unhappy with the fights you find, and the culprit is *player behavior* rather than the map.  

MH

[TDeacon]

To illustrate this, here is a typical distribution of player activity (simply measured in kills) over time.

What this chart demonstrates is that the best time to take a base when nobody is around to defend it is 11am CEST.  

MH

[Lusche]

Where is the evidence that overall player density (related to map size) affects the chance of finding a fight? 

I could show you that the there are less kills/hour per player at low density times than at high population density times.

Which is all logical, as one who is playing at both times (like me) can see day after day. If there are few players on a large map, the population is generally spread out much more. At 50-60 player on a map like Ozkansas, I often fail to find more than occasional single enemy dot. Players love to do 'their thing' and that results in 4 players attacking 5 different bases, so to speak Offpeak gameplay is often a matter of sneaking bases and avoiding opposition, because it's easily possible.

[TDeacon]

I could show you that the there are less kills/hour per player at low density times than at high population density times.

Which is all logical, as one who is playing at both times (like me) can see day after day. If there are few players on a large map, the population is generally spread out much more. At 50-60 player on a map like Ozkansas, I often fail to find more than occasional single enemy dot. Players love to do 'their thing' and that results in 4 players attacking 5 different bases, so to speak Offpeak gameplay is often a matter of sneaking bases and avoiding opposition, because it's easily possible.

Yes, but I think you are overlooking the qualification on *fights* (numbers, altitude, etc.) I allude to in my post.  If you increase the number of players or shrink the map, you get more encounters, but they are more than likely going to be those which are unsatisfying to all but the exceptional players I refer to.  Most likely, you will encounter hordes.  This is a consequence of player behavior, as is the “doing their thing” behavior you refer to above.  If most players really wanted relatively balanced encouters, you would find them using the radar.  The problem is, they don't. 

MH

[TheRapier]

MH you may not have yet played in one of the slow times.

A huge map and low player count can mean flying for hours without finding ANYTHING to shoot. You can see it on radar and by the time you can get to its gone. A bomber comes into your dar and bombs the field and bails out before you can even get to it.

I saw this on Sunday and it wasn't even and the uber low period. I shudder to think what Lusche and other Euro players must see.

[TDeacon]

MH you may not have yet played in one of the slow times.

A huge map and low player count can mean flying for hours without finding ANYTHING to shoot. You can see it on radar and by the time you can get to its gone. A bomber comes into your dar and bombs the field and bails out before you can even get to it.

I saw this on Sunday and it wasn't even and the uber low period. I shudder to think what Lusche and other Euro players must see.

Hmmm; you're saying that there are no large bar dar concentrations at all??  I guess I haven't experienced that.  What I have experienced is that it is hard to find someone willing to go one-on-one with equivalent aircraft in the MA; it's usually a horde, or someone who doesn't want to fight.  In either case, though, I wouldn't want to sacrifice large maps such as Trinity in a futile attempt to "fix" player behavior. 

MH

[Lusche]

Hmmm; you're saying that there are no large bar dar concentrations at all??  

On a large map that can absolutely happen when there is a total of 50-80 players online. Or there is one single battle, but unfortunately on the wrong side (mostly the result of a failed CV sneak attack).

Regarding the horde - There are both extremes: Too few players in a given area or too many. For the standard player, 50 players on a 400 sector map may as much 'fun' as 400 players on a 100 sector map. In one case you may not find any battles, in the other there is no way to avoid megahordes at all.

That being said, I too think the OP 'solution' is too complex. I just wanted show that timezones one is playing in can result in very different perspectives on the game

Right now, with a mix of large and small maps I see just good days and bad days both at peak as well as offpeak. In the end a good compromise, in my opinion.

[bangsbox]

If maps and win requirements That could grow and shrink with population grades that might not be a bad idea. But I'm thinking hard to do and I rather see the effort spent on Ads, new vehicles/planes/ intricacies and historical details.