What are we gonna do to make this work?

[K West]

JAB I'm not surprised much at your posts seeing how you've been a longtime disgruntled 'AW expatriate in AH' even before AW died but I am wondering what is the point of your posts in this topic. All I see are insults and personal slurs slung by you left and right not only at the CT but the CT team themselves. Yet I see nothing from you as to what YOU think they should be creating instead. You allude to things but are very vague.  The only concrete idea or suggestion from you was that the planes should rotated on a monthly basis instead of two weeks.

 The CT team was picked very recently by Pyro after he called for volunteers to help create an alternative to the MA. This may have stemmed in part from years of customers calling for an HA type of arena here.  Pyro chose the few CT TEAM members out of all the applicants for good reasons.  Still, anything they propose and do is overseen by Pyro and HTC.  It's not like they were given an arena and Pyro said "Go hog wild. Do whatever you want with it boys!"

 The bottom line is nothing they have done warrants your abuse and imo you are way off base. The CT is "costing"  you nothing. The arena has existed for quite some time and the CT members as well as map makers work for free to try and make somehting out of it.  So what does it matter to you that they have been empowered to? You have the DuelingArena to use freely as a fighter-town, the MA is still there just as you like it (ref our past 'discussions' about radar and the MA in the General forumn a while back) and the TA is there if you're into a frag fest.

 Why not lambaste HTC for wasting resources on the DA (or even TA) when you could possiby get one of those set up the way you think it should be. Which only you know about as you've not expressed it here very well, if at all.

   Westy

[J_A_B]

Insults?  Personal slurs?  Abuse?

Hah!

"I do not for an instant think ANY of the CT team members are incompetent, let alone all of you. "--said by me.

[sarcasm] Yeah, that's soooooooooo insulting!

I don't feel I was particularly harsh, any more than I feel YOU are being especially harsh right now.  If the CT team were to respond and say they think I was out of line, then I'd apologize to them.

I simply stated my opinion without "tidying it up".  That is how I FEEL about the CT--and actually I wish I didn't feel that way.  But I do, so why should I lie and pretend I feel otherwise?

Your own post highlights what I see wrong with the CT setup--it was created, in your own words, as "an alternative to the MA".  In this regard it fails miserably, unless you consider an arena that's generally out-populated by the TA to be a rousing success.  Interestingly, you don't actually disagree with my opinion, only with my presentation of it (and I was admittedly a bit "controversial").  Do you agree then, that the current CT setup has no mass appeal?

The CT team's responses suggest that they know things which I don't, and this is very likely (as in 100% likely).  Unfortunately they don't use that information to explain WHY they stick with such an obviously flawed system, so I am forced to assume they are keeping it because that's what they want regardless of popularity.  I actually am hoping for a response from them that explains what's going on better than what I've seen in this forum.  Just because I feel a certain way doesn't mean I LIKE having that feeling.

As for me being a "disgruntled 'AW expatriate"....no, actually I am more like "An AW expatriate who is proud of his heritage".  

J_A_B

[Oldman731]

Originally posted by J_A_B

Do you agree then, that the current CT setup has no mass appeal?

Well...OK, J_A_B, so it clearly does not presently have mass appeal, and perhaps never will.  What would you do to change it, while still maintaining a historical arena approach?

- Oldman

[Wotan]

i've been here over 2 years my squad (5 guys) we average prob around 2700 kills a tour in the main and none of my guys ever even seen a jabbunch o'numbers in the main.

I've flown in the ct since its first day and I aint seen a jabbuncho'numbers in there either.

Im sure he has main stats i just dont care to look.

Hes said before all he flies is a p51 so the ct will never be for him so what.

in every game that has had or has a ha ct ava its the same. a small group folks (no more then a handfull) fly it regularly.

So what.

Its up to the guys that fly there to make it what it is.

No "tweak" of the arena settings will change who flies there.

All we need is a good map and a good planset The rest is all bs.

Field capture didnt bring in numbers, more strat didn't, scoring, shorter flying times  didn't and nothing in this thread will.

Laz is right people enjoy quick fast fights even if ya make the ct a "main arena" with a different name it probrably wouldn't work.

Do a search of this guys threads everyone I have ever ready sounds like hes an aw refugee malcontent but it could be just me.

If ya dont like the main try the ct if ya find ya dont like it well I dunno what to tell ya I have fun there but I haven't left the main for it.

[K West]

So just what is the CT to you? Someone who obviously and admittedly does not fly in there? Very loudly does not like the it's existance least and has nothing to add to the discussions but lots of "ugly."  Why do you care so much?

 As for your posts you were indeed insulting. Directly, indirectly and not just towards the CT and the CT team but also the people who like the CT and it's concept.

 To start claiming those who fly in the CT are bored with the MA or that HTC is using it as a tool to retain AH players who otherwise would be off to other games is bull and I found that your reasons why I like the CT to be very insutling. I'm do not fit your "profiling" of the CT player in the least bit.  I simply like the CT because it creates an environment more towards what aircombat in WW2 would have been like than the MA can.  It's that simple. I'm not looking to recreate WW2 itself. I know that is hard to get that across to many people it seems but thier inability to comprehend that is thier problem, not mine.  The changing of different settings is all that is available to try and make the CT environment closer to that that found in early-mid 1940's than the late 20th century MA - given the current state of PC technology.  I also like meet an aircraft historical counterpart more than I do fantasy mathc ups dound in the MA.  I have no problem with the MA though and I like
to fly in thier at times too. Not as much anymore since the CT has some resources put towards it.

 But you really got rolling with the insults (which you call opinion but it's still insulting no matter what YOU wish to call it) when you said "the current CT setup is stupid and shortsighted and the people running it are more interested in themselves..". Not stopping there kept on reenforcing your contempt for HTC and the other kids for having thier very own playground to use with "IMO the CT team is more interested in creating its own little world than in making something that the average AH player will enjoy, and that's a dang shame considering that ALL of us are paying for their little playground"

 How the hell do you know what the average AH player will enjoy? Give me a break. Speak for youself please.  The CT is in the creation phase and if it's dead a few months from now you might be able to deduce that the average AH player did not want a CT after all.

 However like I said earlier I do not see you on any crusade against the unused Dueling arena and ill used Training Arena. I think you have a problem and you're not letting it out. I think it has something to do with a "Fightertown" or maybe you simply have a hair across your bellybutton and the CT and it's players are what you've chosen to use to try and work it out on.  

 After that last post with the quip about the playground you've been back pedaling trying to defend your choice of words (typical) as well as introducing some generic and undefined "POPULAR alternate arena."  Yet you've not shed one bit of light as to what the hell that is supposed to be. (And the CT forumn wouldn't be the place to do it either.) It becomes quite apparant that you think the CT is robbing AH and you of something but either your not sure what thatsomething is or you're simply not going to tell anyone.



 "The fact is, not many people care about MY opinion so publicly ranting about the  CT isn't going to accomplish anything."
 
 Please don't confuse expressing a valid opinion with delivering a spiteful, insulting tirad that may have a valid opinion buried in it somewhere. As for the CT team expressing themselves? Most won't I'd bet.  A certian level of restraint is expected on thier part in much the same way the AW TOS-cops and forumn volunteers had to be.


 And last, "Do you agree then, that the current CT setup has no mass appeal?"

 Current? It does not.   However all that is there has been in place for less than a month. Since there has been a team of volunteers selected to create the environment what is in the CT is a "place holder" as the new terrains and features are created. Which has been explained several times. No one has said, "IT is finished! Behold the CT. Use it well!"   I definately think the CT holds mass appeal. AW's "AvA" was a hit (not withstanding the gamers that helped wreck it some) the WB's WW2A is very popular, FA has a very popular Territorial Combat arena and WW2O shows people want historical match up. (Even though the execution failed miserably and thier mistake is trying to replicate WW2 itself) of WW2 ).

 If you don't like the CT concept and wish HTC would offer an alternative to the MA using a setup you think works then I would rather you went to the General forumn and started plugging away there for it and left the CT players, such as myself, alone.
 
 -- Westy


 (proud of my heritage too! I'm Irish-American and came from a decent family.
  OH! And I once played an online game three years ago that has since gone out
  of business)

[Nifty]

the last few posts have helped the CT out in what way?

[Sabre]

I almost started a new thread rather than respond here, but here goes...

Before the CT Team was chosen, there was much discussion on the boards regarding what the CT should be.  It was clear, or seemed to be at the time that there were several issues with the MA that CT advocates wanted to see addressed.  First there was the icon issue.  A small but vocal crowd wanted icons reduced or eliminated.  Than there was the radar debate.  Again, there seemed to be a fair-sized crowd that wanted dot-dar eliminated, and/or wanted to be able to fly NOE and avoid both the bar-dar and dot-dar.  Another group was the Strat-advocates.  These individuals wanted to see changes that would give more purpose to their efforts to effect "the war."  Longer rebuilds and increased impact of hitting strat targets like cities, factories, stations for example.  Finally, there was the HA folks.  They wanted two-sided historical matchups and (at least some of them) terrains that were historically representative, if not completely accurate.  Remember too that when the CT was first opened (before a team was called for and selected) many people said, “I’d fly there, but there’s no point without base capture enabled.

From all these suggestions and requests, the CT team (with Pyro as the guiding patriarch) built an initial view of what the new CT would look like.  Note that we had to work within the current framework allowed by the software, with the current plane/vehicle set, and with the baseline idea that it would be a 24/7 arena that wouldn't and couldn't require a full-time monitor.

So, how close are we to what the majority of CT advocates seemed to be looking for?  We have an arena with reduced icons (can't do no icons, and I don't think we should), radar that more accurately reflects the imperfect radar and GCI systems of the day, historical matchups that rotate at least every two weeks (at least that's our goal), and will soon have a suite of unique and historically representative terrains.  We've implemented strategic victory conditions that allow a side to work towards a more specific goal than just capture all the bases, but still include base capture.  Because of the lack of CT-specific terrains, strat is arguably the least perfectly implemented, but that should change soon.

This begs the question, where are all the people who said they would drop the MA like a hot potato if there was just an alternative that offered no dot-dar/historical matchups/reduced icons/better strat (take your pick)?  What we’re fighting IMO is the gravity well of the MA.  People log on to see 300-400 in the MA and 15-20 in the CT.  They want the more realistic combat environment the CT offers, but are put off by the numbers.  It’s a catch-22: I don’t want to fly there if there aren’t enough people, but there won’t be more people unless I fly there.  That’s why we (Pyro and the CT Team) continue to look for ways to draw people in.  The CT is like a new product trying to break into a well-established market.  We may feel that we have a better basic product, but people won’t try it unless we offer something extra, something unique.  That’s where I have high hopes for the new terrains coming down the line.

Remember about a month back when the MA was down for an evening?  The CT was full, and even after the MA came back on line at least half the people stayed in the CT for the evening (150 in CT vs. about 150 in the MA).  There was some praise for the CT from those who hadn’t tried it before; more importantly, there were few if any saying how bad the CT sucked in comparison to the MA.  That gives me hope that we might eventually find a formula that will bring the people into the CT of their own volition.  In the meantime, keep those suggestions coming.  We really are open to them, and some have already been implemented.  Remember too that each time we make a major change to the format (such as when we went from “capture all enemy bases to win” to “capture these specific bases to win” as a way to focus the action a bit more), we have to give it enough time to see if it helps or hurts CT attendance.  Too many changes all at once or changes made too rapidly work against us.

So to answer at least one criticism posted above, we are trying to create a niche…as big a niche as we can:D.  No one ever expected the CT to draw more than the MA.  We are not, however, following some private vision, with no regard for what the community says they want.  If the CT is to have a place in the greater scheme of things, it has to be different than the MA.  How different it has to be, and in what ways so as to please the greatest number, is the quest we’re on.  In the mean time, you who enjoy and support the CT must do your part.  Post your ideas, play in the CT as much as you can, and share your positive experiences from the CT in the General Forum.  And as always, thanks Pyro, to the terrain builders, and to you in the community who suffer through these growing pains.

Sabre
CT Team

[Vortex]

I'm curious if you folks have entertained the idea of holding a weekly mini-scenario type event in CT? I'm just thinking out loud here so this might be completely outside what you folks would like to do with the theatre.

What I'm driving at though is something that's small in scale, can be run with a minimal amount of people (10 to 20ish?) in a relatively short period of time (a couple hours total perhaps) that maintains the "theme" for the arena for that period. As an example you might pit two teams against each other. These could be squad based or simple sign-ups taken here. The goal would be for each team to play attacker and defender in a given scenario. Again, one would want to keep this quite small in scope. Things like destroying/defending a fleet, destroying/defending an air base or strat targets, destroying/defending supply lines, etc.

Letting each team play either side allows you to balance things out to a degree. However it also requires that you keep things pretty small in scope and probably give a set "time-to-comple" for the attacking side. You could tally the results based on overall completion of goals, amount of targets hit (or not), etc etc. Keeping that part relatively simple would be good too so as not to create an administrative headache.

I dunno, perhaps this is too much like TOD? I just noticed that as a weekly event but have yet to participate in it so I'm not sure what its all about. Thought I'd throw this out to chew on though as it might be a means by which you can get folks familiar with the arena at least once a week. From there, who knows, you may make believers out of those folks and see them more often throughout the week.

Just a thought anywhoo...

Vortex

[Nifty]

Vortex, you're describing what the AH special events team calls a Snapshot.  We used to have these every weekend until the TOD came to town.

I don't see why the CT team couldn't try to run something like that every so often.  give each side a very specific objective for a couple of hours, perhaps just by creating a detailed mission in the planner.  hblair, sabre, et al, what do you think?

[J_A_B]

Thank you Sabre for the response.  That does more to inform me about why the CT is where it is today than anything else I've seen so far.  A shame I hadn't seen a post like that a week ago    My frustrations would have been considerably eased before my response to Sling.


Oh, and Westy--thanks for the posts.  I'm still laughing.  

"How the **** do you know what the average AH player will enjoy? "

Poor Westy, can't ask a question without resorting to the use of swear words.  Are you still going to claim you're totally emotionally detached?   So, what color is the sweater and skirt, and do you carry a baton or pom-poms?

"Well...OK, J_A_B, so it clearly does not presently have mass appeal, and perhaps never will. What would you do to change it, while still maintaining a historical arena approach? " --Oldman

Right now I think the first thing they need is BOTH the CT and the MA re-named, combined with a new "advertising campaign" for the CT.  The CT team made a large error in using up most of their "attention time" when their arena was still not using its full potential, and they're now suffering the same fate as WW2OL is.

I still feel the "totally new map/planeset every other week" is a mistake that will drive away the casual player.  Far from feeling like WW2, it feels more like a time machine warping around between different battles.  As soon as version 1.09 becomes available they should (IMO) switch to a more permanent system and use a WarBirds-style RPS combined with a 2-sided Axis vs Allied planeset.  After more early-pacific planes become available they could possibly take this even a setp further and alternate every other month between Europe and the PAC, although that might not be a good idea since the PAC doesn't generate the same kind of interest that the ETO does.  

As an alteration of that (perhaps a better alternative), would be a modified version of the current setup, but offer more continuity.  For example, with the 2-week planesets, they could do a 1941 ETO for two weeks followed by a 1943 ETO for 2 more weeks using the same terrain but with the newer airplanes.  This would simulate the "march of technology" and reduce the "new arena every other week" feeling that the CT currently suffers from.  With version 1.09, they could do say 1940, 1941, 1943, 1945 all in a row.

You could also do a 1941/1943 Mediterranian theatre month with the current planeset--in fact it'd be great fun.

Obviously, with AH's current planeset, it would be more practical to use 2-week planesets.  You will exhaust your options too quickly alternating it every week.  Furthermore, weekly rotations to totally different theaters makes the "not connected to reality" problem even worse--it will create a sense of detachment.

I think I would stick with the 3K ICONS.  This setting seems popular.  If people were to start complaining about it though I would not hesitate to switch back to 6K ICONS.

I'm not sure how AH's DAR setup works, so I don't know exactly what IS possible and what ISN'T.  If possible, I would eliminate DOT DAR completely, but leave BAR DAR available over the entire arena.   I would also leave BAR DAR off under 500 feet.  Not having DAR BAR arena-wide is a monumental mistake and that right there drives away a fair number of players.

I would have no perk planes in the CT unless absolutely necessary.  Perk rides don't belong in a supposedly historical arena.  I would, however, limit the use of planes that are "too good" (like the Tempest or Me-262), probably by keeping them at limited bases.  A 1945 ETO setup, by my standards, would feature (in addition to Goonies and ground vehicles):

Allies:  Spit 9, P-38L, P-47D30, P-51D, B-26B, Typhoon, Mossie, Hurri 2D, all unlimited.  Tempest, B-17G and LANC would be at limited bases only.

Axis:  109G6, 109G10, 190A5, 190A8, 190F8, 190D9, Ta 152, Ju-88.  Jets would be at certain fields only.

Such a setup would involve the Germans being defensive and having to hold off the Allies, thus making up for their lack of a competative bomber.  Strato buffs would be discouraged by use of unlimited 152's.  Special bonus would be given to the Germans if they managed to puch the Allies far enough back.

I would also make dang sure that the maps I used were sized to fit the player base--no 512x 512 monstrosities that are made for 1000 players.  128 x 128 is plenty big.

You will notice that much of what I recommend for the CT is stuff that I am dead set against for the MA.  Just because I don't like something for an MA setting doesn't mean I don't like it at all.  I just get POed at attempts to, essentially, turn the MA into an HA.

J_A_B

[K West]

"Poor Westy, can't ask a question without resorting to the use of swear words.  Are you still going to claim you're totally emotionally detached?   So, what color is the sweater and skirt, and do you carry a baton or pom-poms?"

 Lame reply.    I don't consider "hell" a swear word. Especially in the context you try to make it. It's not like f&ck, sh&t, or prettythanghole now is it?  I use "hell" in RL during RL discussions also.  As in "how the hell did he miss that ball?"  Or "like hell I want my taxes raised"  Would saying "aytch- ee -double hockey sticks" instead help?

 Face it JAB,  you are and always have been a heckler to  AH not only here but even worse elsewhere(re: the old "BW" ng.  Because I call you out on it repeatedly here doesn't mean you can hide from that by calling me a chear leader or claiming it's me that has the emotional baggage when it's your AW ubilical cord that's the problem.  Well, "mother" is dead. Get over it and move on with your "online" life. You've behaved repeateadly like the bratty, pain in the bellybutton child who gives the new stepparent touble for no good reason other than they are here and "mom" is gone. You caused any grief in this topic. No one else.  The answer was ALWAYS there but you missed it or simply chose not to read it.


 As for the rest of your post. Well finally you wrote something to actually discuss.  I agree with most of what you wrote. A creative naming convention, rotate maps/planes less, etc etc.  From my reading what others have suggested it's not much different form what folks want the CT to be.   My only exception would be for icons to ever going back to MA range. I'd always vote "no" on that issue until HTC develops a different realistic, but usable, radar and/or icon system.

  Westy

[J_A_B]

"Face it JAB, you are and always have been a heckler to AH not only here but even worse elsewhere"

Face it Westy, you just can't handle any negative feedback regarding AH.   Your paranoid responses are, however, good for my personal amusement so please continue.

Funny how you only see what you want to.  You claim that all I've ever been is a "heckler" while ignoring tha fact that I have often been complementary of AH at the same time.  You truly have a gift....for warping reality.

J_A_B

[K West]

"Face it Westy, you just can't handle any negative feedback regarding AH."

 Sure I can.  I generate quite a few comments and posts on what I feel is missing, is wrong or needs changing IMO in AH. You're blind to that or, as is typical, just spouting crap to be confrontational in a most juevinile way.  Same as the last few times. You always devolve the discussion into a junior high level pissing match.

 Anything good you may have said said about AH has been quite minimal in comparison to the very large amount of ranting by you saying how bad things are here.  All the "problems" you have with AH,  from HTC, to the arenas right on down to the community has been bountiful and it certainly seems to me to be a direct result of AW going bye-bye.  And from reading another recent posting by another player in this very topic I'm not (surprise!) the only one who thinks that's part your problem.


  So I'll cry and lament with you for a moment. It'll help. Trust me.



 Moments up.  Oh well.

    -  Westy