only to find out that the restriction applies to him again. Wouldn`t that be frustrating?
Yes it would. Which is exactly why I don't advocate that idea as MY PERSONAL preference OR the perk controls that Gyrene prefers. I don't believe players should have to fly countless hours to achieve the ability to play better aspects of the game.
I do believe certain things need to be moderated which at this point is only accomplished by the perk system.
If Gyrene is right, then there wont be that many people interested in flying large formations so the limit wouldn't be a problem would it?
Anyhow, by your logic, we should do away with the perk system and let 262s run amuk because it's too frustrating.
I don't like the restriction but it was suggested as a concession until other game changes provided different means of control.
I was merely trying to make a humorous hint that the current system of 3 buffs may be better restriction than what you had in mind. Did not want to be rude or make fun of somebody.
You know what I think? I think Hitech had my idea in the first place but was worried about computing power and overwhelming numbers 15 years ago so he settled on 3. Now I think he may soon have to consider the games future and that computing power is 5x what it was when he added formations.
24 seems too large of a force to be controlled by a single player, that is why I called it unbalancing. Say every country has 25 online players during offpeak hours. 4 people decide to make a strats bombing mission. 1 person could take 1 formation of 24 buffs because of the formation restriction. Other three could take escort fighters. 24buffs with 3 escort fighters vs 4 attacking fighters would be unbalancing although the number of players would be 4 vs 4. 24 buffs with 3 escort fighters vs 8 attacking fighters seems better, but there would be 4 vs 8 players. this would create imbalance in other fights happening at the same time.
Actually, that would be realistic. Bombers almost always outnumbered the attackers and escorts in the ETO strategic offensive.
Your definition of unbalanced seems to be anything that is not 1 player to 1 player or that an encounter has to result in one team losing and one team winning. It's not that simple.
The game is for fun. Why cant the bomber pilot survive and the fighter pilots land a few kills? You said it yourself, frustrating customers is not a great idea. Don't you think a new guy might be less frustrated if he survives some of his first missions? Do you think 3 bombers is enough to give him that fair chance?
Large formations of 24 bombers would cause unbalance by dominating the game by destroying everything. We already discussed that problem by suggesting changing the strats along with other possible game changes.
Balance has absolutely nothing to do with how many fighters attack a bomber formation. Htc has repeatedly rejected suggestions to "auto balance" the game population and there are lopsided fights and hordes every day. The 4 v 4 scenario is not in the realm of logical possibility because we don't balance attackers and defenders when we launch missions and we never will because unpredictability and chaos are part of what makes it fun.
I believe that large formations should consist of many players because player vs player experience is the main thing that draws me to online games.
Stop exaggerating. Don't tell me you have never shot down a drone in the game or never will.
We choose online because 1v1 FIGHTER COMBAT is better than fighting drones. Bombers fly in a straight line while you shoot them down. It's like clubbing baby seals. That's NOT the challenge you are referring to is it!?
I am not talking about technical issues involved with large formations, but emotional. For me it just feels different to attack something that has a real person at the controls to fight back.
So when you attack drone formations now, you dont allow any of the guns to kill you other than the one with a real person behind it?
You are trying to suggest to me that it's better that a bomber pilot has an equal chance as you do in your fighter. It's skill v skill right?
Wrong. The bomber pilot has to jump from one gun to another to shoot at you. Then he has to understand that the lead from every gun on the bomber is different. He has to lose sight of you because he cant just turn his head as opposed to RL when there are multiple people on multiple bombers tracking your every move. F3 helps mitigate those disadvantages, but doesnt make it an even fight.
Bomber pilots are at a disadvantage in AH and always have been. Killing them is easy. You're inflating your ego if you think that taking out bombers as they are now is a fair fight.
Thanks for expressing your views.
<S>
