Hardcore Arena

[jimson]

How many times do I have to say that there was no improvement in the arena population when we turned the icons on?  How many times do I have to tell you that recently, there were two separate groups that wanted to play in AvA on Thursday nights with icons on. We accommodated them. It died after a few weeks.

ADDRESS THAT INSTEAD OF IGNORING IT LIKE YOU HAVE EVERY TIME IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP, BECAUSE IT'S A REALITY THAT DOESN'T FIT YOUR NARRATIVE.

Buddy, you are focusing on something that has been proven to have zero net negative effect on arena population. Every time we have tried a new approach, we got a very brief bump that quickly faded.

In the past several years, the icon change is about the only thing that created a sustained excitement and population increase. That's because it was a new experience. Something you could find no where else. We actually lost a core group when we turned them on and didn't replace them with another core group. Where was the foot traffic then? Where were all the people who turn every thread like this into an anti AvA, anti icon change bash fest?  because they sure as hell weren't in the arena.

What is it that you think? That after running the arena with icons turned back on for 6 months, we changed it back despite the fact that foot traffic increased dramatically? Do you realize how stupid that sounds? If that had happened, no one would have ever thought we should try to change it back to no enemy icons.

In case you haven't noticed, population is down across the board in this game.

I'll say it one last time. Pick a night and bring in players and I'll lobby hard to have it set up the way you like. If you have all the answers like you think you do, it should be damned easy for you to consistently fill the arena one night per week with all the players we have allegedly driven away.

It's well past time for you to put up or shut up. Lets see what you got.

Here is what staged missions will provide. A semi organized game with more realistic missions with lot's of ear and eye candy that they can play most anytime, that will have an actual objective.

A lot more targets so that a player may be less likely to have to experience being shot down by the same guy 5 times in a row.

New features like limited numbers of certain planes and modeled attrition.

Something to do in there rather than avoid it because there is no one there and nothing to do but fly around by themselves.

The uncertainty that the AI they think they are going to fight is really AI or another player that joined in.

In lower population times, it might even give the 80% and new players a less intimidating experience to cut their teeth on than the MA. They will at least have a little direction, a clue as to what to do.

This can all be done already in custom arenas but they aren't consistently open and require someone to set it all up. We are hoping that in the future, it will be more automated in AvA.

We already have some advantages over custom arenas in that we don't automatically close in five minutes after the arena goes empty, meaning that if I advertise a Euro time mission to be run at 3pm est and I cant be around to run it, at 2pm est I can set it to start in one hour and all players will have to do is come in and pick their ride and wait for it to start.

Believe me, I am still learning, but I am trying to make the coolest missions possible with briefings, sound effects etc, to provide the right atmosphere so that players will want to come back just to see what we come up with next.

We will be testing them again on Tuesday open to the public.

[Oldman731]

ADDRESS THAT INSTEAD OF IGNORING IT LIKE YOU HAVE EVERY TIME IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP

Jimson.  Dude.  Chill.

Bustr's point, which he brings up in virtually every forum, is that new players don't want to go where experienced players will gobble them up.  AvA has (or had) a lot of dedicated, experienced players.  QED, new people won't go there because they don't want to be gobbled up.

This is not news.  AvA has always attracted people who aren't particularly concerned with score.

- oldman

[jimson]

Ah heck with it. Wasting my breath anyway.
Bye now.

[Puma44]

At least now we are having an honest conversation with the cherished dreams set aside.

Does AH survive because the game is tailored to the wants of the 20% or to attract the 80% such that they feel like staying around and paying the rent to keep the doors open?

So with no-Icons there is no way to improve the dots for the 80% then?

Honestly I was hoping there was........

The old CT and the AvA before your group took over ran into the periodic difficulties that 20%ers would run out the 80% and get bored killing each other. The secret for the MA and the SEA events is the 80% feel they have options to counter the 20% other than their whole evening being abused for their $14.95. The AvA periodic side balancing problems and then the favoring of one country's rides over another from setup to setup showcases this human nature. Why do the 80%ers like furball lake but, the 20% duel?

And what really will the staged missions populated with AI give the 80%? The illusion of not getting their kester whomped all night long by 20%ers.

Over the years some of the best times in the CT, the skill levels were about even across everyone fighting on both sides. As the resident sharks grew in skill level, the 80% stopped showing up. At that point the CT was turning into the DA's annex with resident CT squads of sharks.

So there is something to Icons and the illusion of safety they give to the 80% who constitute more $14.95's than the 20%. And don't play this game for the same reasons the 20% do. And Hitech is offering them enough illusion of safety and chances of personal accomplishment in the MA that they stay.

The CT\AvA acts like a dinner bell for the 20%. I've always wondered why after they run off the 80% that they don't stay and beat each others brains out in their now uber 20%er utopia? As soon as the 80%er kibble is gone, they leave it a dead waste land. Many of them don't even hide this irony by at least choosing to fly only the worst rides of the matchups to show case their superior skillz before finishing off the kibble in a few bites.

Guess maybe the AvA should be renamed the Shark Diner and a for sale sign put up.

I bet Lusche could come up with a (Kill to Death\Hit%) ratio average to reasonably determine the 80% at any time. Then Hitech could adjust access to a "fun combat" arena based on that number for each player's LWMA K\D. That which drives a 20% to be one will keep most of them from trying to play with their own K\D just to get into that arena to crap on everyone's fun.

And this is human nature. For any given moment it's not about the future concept of the 80%er can get better, or see a Trainer, or keep upping over and over again to loose to a 20%er as the price to get better. It's about the quality of the 80%er's fun in this moment that he is paying for. 20%er's love free lunches of 80%er's any time they can find that free lunch line, and in general don't care how badly they are humiliating them. It's a free lunch is all that counts. Even 20%ers have 20%ers who humiliate them.

And Hitech is doing something in the MA that gives the 80%ers the idea they have a chance to survive the sharks that keeps them coming back every day.

Where do you get the 80%/20%?  Did you just pull the numbers out of an orifice to support your lame agenda?  You are certainly a 20%er, but not in the context you are using.  You are among the very small minority, who doesn't frequent the AvA, keeps your argument stuck in the past, can't come up with something productive to say,  and can't get out of your close minded viewpoint.  You are in the 20% percent that causes 80% of the unnecessary problems and just makes racket for the sake of self satisfaction.

Comes up with REAL statistics, have something productive to say, come participate in the AvA, and get to know the ones who do enjoy it and put in an enormous of work to constantly improve it or, as Jimson so eloquently put it "Put up or shut up".

[Old Sport]

3.1 nautical miles is 6278 yards, a tad longer than the AH icon range.  Remember, the AH icon range also accommodates bombers that are larger than jet fighters.

Point taken Karnak. The main reason I posted the info was to show that some of the claims made here, such as 10 mile unaided visual detection of fighter-sized aircraft, are not what sober studies of the subject prove, at least any that I've found. There are quite a few factors involved in R/L vision that the computer screen cannot duplicate, some that diminish detection of bogies, some that enhance. I hoped that the citations would help provide a balance to the debate.

Best.

[Puma44]

Point taken Karnak. The main reason I posted the info was to show that some of the claims made here, such as 10 mile unaided visual detection of fighter-sized aircraft, are not what sober studies of the subject prove, at least any that I've found. There are quite a few factors involved in R/L vision that the computer screen cannot duplicate, some that diminish detection of bogies, some that enhance. I hoped that the citations would help provide a balance to the debate.

Best.

Old Sport, thank you for the constructive contribution. 

[Karnak]

Point taken Karnak. The main reason I posted the info was to show that some of the claims made here, such as 10 mile unaided visual detection of fighter-sized aircraft, are not what sober studies of the subject prove, at least any that I've found. There are quite a few factors involved in R/L vision that the computer screen cannot duplicate, some that diminish detection of bogies, some that enhance. I hoped that the citations would help provide a balance to the debate.

Best.

I believe that longer range IDs can happen at times under the right circumstances, but I certainly wouldn't ask for longer ranged icons than we have.  I don't think there is a perfect solution as every solution introduces other problems while solving the problems it targets.  I think icons could be done better than they are now though, even in the MA.

Concerns I have:
1) Seeing enemy aircraft at long enough range to set up a fight.  I am more interested in a fight than I am in a free kill against a guy who didn't see me, even if that requires unrealistically high situational awareness courtesy of the icons.
2) Ability to tell if I am gaining or losing ground on a target at long range.  I have an experience that sticks out in my mind, one that happened in the MA long ago.  It was on the Mindanao map and our HQ was destroyed.  I was at about 20,000ft and I spotted a co-alt dot in the direction of enemy territory and gave chase.  After about 15-20 minutes I finally got into icon range only to find that it was a friendly and upon chatting him found that he had been running from my dot.  It was frustrating to spend that much time chasing a dot, not sure if I was even gaining and I want that sort of activity minimized.
3) Icons make snap IDs too easy at short ranges. I would like to see enemy icons reduced, below 800 perhaps, to change to a simple red Bishop, Knight or Rook symbol.  Perhaps a .5 to 1 second delay before they show up as well.

[Vinkman]

I'm curious.

It appears in the past 9 months Hitech has made some strides in haze as a 3D effect to your ability to see at distance. What are the specific arena settings to adjust that? Are they an H2O air density value 0-xxxxx, or a combination of layer colors for different times of day. Or a cloud generation setting that allows you to change the density of a world covering fog cloud?

Can the air density or haze along with the ambient light be set so that dots stand out with clarity so everyone can see them on maps? And if that is possible, wouldn't it be easier to attract players to no-Icons by starting everyone out at being able to see the dots. Then over time gradually lead them to the more hazy dots?

If there is a setting to make the dots visible, I'd like to experiment with it offline and see how it looks.

We often kill great ideas because we are addicted to the complexity of our cherished dreams we assume others will cherish just the same. So the unintended consequence is, rejection of your dream becomes a personal rejection of you, and a knee jerk fight against mean haters of you. This is one of several basic reasons small businesses fail. I suspect if Hitech required you guys to turn a profit with the AvA, you would be looking for answers to the low foot traffic rather than your status quo. Since some one else is paying all the bills and not requiring accountability and performance. I will venture the fires you light under yourselves don't burn very hot near your dreams.

I still think the CT\AvA has a role to play with the AH community. So far your implementation of the offering is less attractive to the goodly number of two sided historic matchup fans than the MA or special events. If you treated it like foot traffic equaled profit, your outcomes might change. But, then you might have to change your cherished dreams a bit to suit the paying customer. Even Hitech makes changes to his offering for the customer, which keeps your arena doors open even if the foot traffic is very light.

Do you think if Hitech duplicated your AvA as the MA that he could keep his company running?

Above is based on the mis-understanding that foot trafic is driven by arena settings. It isn't. 

[Vinkman]

Point taken Karnak. The main reason I posted the info was to show that some of the claims made here, such as 10 mile unaided visual detection of fighter-sized aircraft, are not what sober studies of the subject prove, at least any that I've found. There are quite a few factors involved in R/L vision that the computer screen cannot duplicate, some that diminish detection of bogies, some that enhance. I hoped that the citations would help provide a balance to the debate.

Best.

Karnak is still wrong. At 6K yards in real life The AVERAGE pilot sees a dot. That's not the same as AH where EVERY the pilots see EVERY plane due to a giant neon sign under it.

[Karnak]

Karnak is still wrong. At 6K yards in real life The AVERAGE pilot sees a dot. That's not the same as AH where EVERY the pilots see EVERY plane due to a giant neon sign under it.

No, that is the range when the aircraft were IDed, not a dot.

I'm 40 years old and an airplane isn't a dot to my eyes at that range.

In addition my bias is towards wanting fights.  Ambush kills are boring as <bleep>.  Perhaps you're not as interested in actual combat and just want freebie kills?

[Vinkman]

No, that is the range when the aircraft were IDed, not a dot.

It's the distance at which the aircraft is SPOTTED. Not Id. 

[Vinkman]

I'm 40 years old and an airplane isn't a dot to my eyes at that range.

It's not in game either. you can see the whole plane at 6K in game. It's a dot at 10K

In addition my bias is towards wanting fights.  Ambush kills are boring as <bleep>.  Perhaps you're not as interested in actual combat and just want freebie kills?

Ambush kills and how it affects game play is worth discussing, If we can ever get off this eyesight vs screen resolution nonsense.

Your analysis is not well thought out. Freebie kills and freebie deaths I suppose. It would work both ways. I think it would lead to more base taking, and more low level sneaking around. In the air I think it will lead to more ambushing (as you said) but also less gang-banging. Those might be trade offs that could improve play. Depends on your point of view.  

...and stop making nefarious accusations about people's motives. It's just insights off topic arguments.  

[Karnak]

It's not in game either. you can see the whole plane at 6K in game. It's a dot at 10K

Depends on your hardware, and that is part of the problem that you are ignoring.  On my system a single engined fighter is a single pixel at 6k yards.

Ambush kills and how it affects game play is worth discussing, If we can ever get off this eyesight vs screen resolution nonsense.

That makes no sense.

Your analysis is not well thought out. Freebie kills and freebie deaths I suppose. It would work both ways. I think it would lead to more base taking, and more low level sneaking around. In the air I think it will lead to more ambushing (as you said) but also less gang-banging. Those might be trade offs that could improve play. Depends on your point of view.  

...and stop making nefarious accusations about people's motives. It's just insights off topic arguments.  

Exactly, less fights.

[Vinkman]

Depends on your hardware, and that is part of the problem that you are ignoring.  On my system a single engined fighter is a single pixel at 6k yards.
That makes no sense.
Exactly, less fights.

You forgot to factor in the effect on ganging. Better fighting through not being ganged is a positive thing. 

[Wiley]

Depends on your hardware, and that is part of the problem that you are ignoring.  On my system a single engined fighter is a single pixel at 6k yards.

Ditto mine, at normal zoom.  If I zoom in, it grows wings though.  Not sure how far out zoomed in shows as a dot, I rarely see stuff outside icon range.

I've often thought the solution that would work for my eyes is the ability to set a 'minimum plane dot size', either having it be 1 pixel, 2x2, or 3x3 so when plane dots render that's how they show.  I think it would be a good balance between visibility and ability to hide.

IMO no icons is fun once in a while in scenario stype play, but a horrible idea for MA style play in this game.

You forgot to factor in the effect on ganging. Better fighting through not being ganged is a positive thing. 

I played a lot of no icons in the backwhen.  If your friendly is at all competent at describing where he is, ganging is still not that difficult.

Wiley.