Off hours-- or should that be low population WARNING>>RANT

[Vraciu]

There's nothing stopping people from going to two sided AvA.  HTC doesn't prevent people from using it in any way.

Wiley.

I didn't say AvA.   I said LWM.

[Vraciu]

Need some new maps. Smaller the better. Fewer bases.

Violator has the solution above. 

[Ack-Ack]

A two-sided Late War Main is where things SHOULD go.  Time will tell what watches don't.

Two sided main arena wouldn't work and would be the cause of much whining.  Kesmai learned that a 3 sided war was best for game play and that's why AW had 3 countries.  HiTech through his own evolution also discovered that 3 sides was much better for game play than either a 2 side or 4 sided war.

[Ramesis]

I have within a couple of months returned to AH.
I guessing the reduction in numbers in all the
arenas is a result of the alpha (ah iii) release!!
I could be wrong tho

[Vraciu]

Two sided main arena wouldn't work and would be the cause of much whining.  Kesmai learned that a 3 sided war was best for game play and that's why AW had 3 countries.  HiTech through his own evolution also discovered that 3 sides was much better for game play than either a 2 side or 4 sided war.

Two-sided was awesome in Warbirds and would be awesome in here.   The fronts are more dynamic and the fights are more intense.

Three sided may work when you have 550 players, but it doesn't when you have 100 (and 300 bases).

[diaster]

agreed, all other games are two sided, lets do it. Sometimes you have to force a change that is good for all but resist to change.

[Wiley]

agreed, all other games are two sided, lets do it. Sometimes you have to force a change that is good for all but resist to change.

Planetside 2 is probably the most similar game to this one. It has 3.  WBs is the only other game remotely similar to this that I know of.

Wiley.

[Ack-Ack]

Two-sided was awesome in Warbirds and would be awesome in here.   The fronts are more dynamic and the fights are more intense.

It also caused a lot of players to leave WB, don't forget to leave that part out.

[Kodiak]

Two sided main arena wouldn't work and would be the cause of much whining.  Kesmai learned that a 3 sided war was best for game play and that's why AW had 3 countries.  HiTech through his own evolution also discovered that 3 sides was much better for game play than either a 2 side or 4 sided war.

Back in its heyday, IL-2 1946 used to have 1000+ players in Hyperlobby.  Of course they were broken into smaller groups, but they were all playing either 2 sided co-op or MP, so there was a market for 2 sided game play, at least in the 2006-2010 era.

Almost everyone I know who still plays IL-2 1946 and IL-2 Cliffs of Dover won't play here because of 3 sided chess piece sides and Bf109 vs Bf109 match-ups.  Lots less folks now, though, but I wonder how many new players leave Aces High when they come here looking for WWII and don't find it.

In any case, it was just a suggestion.

[Vraciu]

It also caused a lot of players to leave WB, don't forget to leave that part out.

No it did not.  One could say three-sided is causing people to leave AH.

WBs had other issues.  The two-sided war was not one of them.   

[Xtrepid]

No it did not.  One could say three-sided is causing people to leave AH.

WBs had other issues.  The two-sided war was not one of them.   

Ever think... in the years after AH came out, a few more warfare computer/console games on-line have come out?

You think maybe this has a effect on the numbers? Not everyone stays dedicated/committed to only one game. 



X 

[The Fugitive]

No it did not.  One could say three-sided is causing people to leave AH.

WBs had other issues.  The two-sided war was not one of them.   

Ya that 3 sided war has really taken a toll on the population over the last 12 years.

[Vraciu]

Ya that 3 sided war has really taken a toll on the population over the last 12 years.

Silly argument.

Things have shifted more recently than 12 years ago.   Numbers do not support three sides any more, particularly with maps this large.   Period.

If excitement can be brought back to the off peak periods through base-disabling/fight-funneling perhaps the numbers will go back up.

[Vraciu]

Ever think... in the years after AH came out, a few more warfare computer/console games on-line have come out?

You think maybe this has a effect on the numbers?

That's the entire point the OP was making.

[The Fugitive]

Silly argument.

Things have shifted more recently than 12 years ago.   Numbers do not support three sides any more, particularly with maps this large.   Period.

If excitement can be brought back to the off peak periods through base-disabling/fight-funneling perhaps the numbers will go back up.

I have been here since tour 21 I believe. In that time the numbers have gone from what we have now, to in the 600 range on a WEEKNIGHT (hitting 1000 players a few times on the weekend)back down to where we are now. 3 countries worked well all that time.

Two countries would bring MAJOR ganging. Players would jump to the higher count side and run over the lower side for the quick easy win. The only way to stop this would be to assign players to one side and lock it there. The problem there is you can't count on the same number of players to show ALL the time on both teams with no option to equalize sides by switching. It would be possible for one team to have a numbers advantage for weeks at a time.... ya that sounds like fun.

Having three sides gives each team the choice of fighting against either one of two other teams, not to mention the ability to force more than one front against either or BOTH teams. The issue isn't that we have too many teams, it is the type of play the majority of players seem to like to play.

What is needed is a carrot that HTC can add in to entice players to want to fight for bases, ships, kills. Once it becomes worth while to more players to fight, you'll have more fights.