Ace's High MA "war"

[Arlo]

    There's been an exchange, off and on - over the years, about whether or not Ace's High (specifically Ace's High in the Main Arena) is a 'war game' (in other words, a game devoted to 'winning a war'). That begs the question 'what war?' or 'what is war?'.

    Outside of the AvA, WWI or AH events (and setting aside the training and dueling arenas) Aces High in the Main Arena is designed around a three-sided and fictional terrain of balanced proportions where three fictional 'countries' (Rooks, Knights and Bishops) combat each other using the same WWII hardware (all sides having equal access to and use of U.S., British, German, Italian, Soviet, Japanese ... and Finnish toys). Historically speaking, this represents no war known to man on Earth.

    Of course, this is for balance and fair game play and some may argue that the equal access to all hardware or the three-sided free-for-all format doesn't matter and that AH is still a war game. Some may counter that setting makes all the difference and that this comes closer to a 'sci-fi' game where humans were abducted, placed on an 'earth-like planet', given equal proportions of combat hardware and resources as well as unlimited lives and forced to fight each other to (repeated) death until one side captures significant enough territory to force the terrain to rotate and win bonus perks. (Some will likely mention that there are, indeed, 'sci-fi war games.) Is the capture of terrain to the point of 'winning the map' really a 'war game' or is it just a competitive combat game? I guess it depends on your perspective.

What's yours? 

Please bear in mind that several players just play to dogfight.

[AAIK]

The point of the game is to win by capturing the most fields in a given map.

There are two types of players:

1. Those who seek the chemical rush of intense air to air combat.
2. Those who want to be part of a larger group (Squads, wingmen).

[Ciaphas]

Semantics man, semantics.

All you are doing is debating semantics and failing at doing so.

The literal definition of war as a noun is:

A state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.

The verb definition is:

engage in a war.

"small states warred against each other"

synonyms:fight (against), battle (against), combat (against), wage war against, take up arms against; feud with, quarrel with, struggle with/against, contend with, wrangle with, cross swords with; attack, engage (against), take on, skirmish with
"rival empires warred against each other"

Everyday the three sides in this game engage in war (which is synonymous with Engage in combat).

So, what’s the issue?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Arlo]

There are no actual 'nations' or 'states' or 'empires' in AH MA. Good God.

[FLS]

There are no actual 'nations' or 'states' or 'empires' in AH MA. Good God.

There are countries. 

Next you'll be telling us there aren't any aircraft.   

[Arlo]

The point of the game is to win by capturing the most fields in a given map.

There are two types of players:

1. Those who seek the chemical rush of intense air to air combat.
2. Those who want to be part of a larger group (Squads, wingmen).

There are more than two types:

3. Those who want both.
4. Those who fly nowhere but the MA.
5. Those who fly in nothing but events.
6. Those who fly in both.
7. Those who fly in the AvA, as well.
8. Those who just fly in the AvA.
9. Those who fly in WWI, as well.
10. Those who don't fly but do GVs.
11. Those who do both.
12. Ship commanders.

etc.

[Arlo]

There are countries. 

Next you'll be telling us there aren't any aircraft.   

There are 'sides.'

What rules each chess piece 'country?' Presidents, Kings, Emperors, Parliaments? Each each player allowed to vote in an election? 

[Ciaphas]

I would hope that Arlo is trying his hand at trolling and nothing more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bustr]

It's generational how the Melee arena is perceived because of what competitive games mean to each generation. Winning the war is a mechanism Hitech tossed in to give a subset of players something to do besides furball. Bombing resupply or strats, or HQ, gives bomber players and missions something to do. Each individual field\port\vbase is a competition or mini war to keep ownership of that object or take away ownership. Simply a mechanism to help players generate competitive activity. The terrains are on a 7 day cycle to bring up a new terrain so as not to bore the players. Flipping the terrain or "winning the war" is just a game mechanism to give players more to do than furball. The "war" exists in the mind and imagination of the players fixated on this game being that because of how they conceptualize large scale competition. Hitech didn't help things with the message the war has been won and points awarded. But, its a great P.T. Barnum finish to a map change competition to keep players motivated for their next play session. Everyone likes winning.

There is no secret ingredient in the broth. The Melee arena is an open sandbox where you make it up as you go along each time you log in. That is why the current generation does not care much about win the war. Ganging and dominating our red guys appears to be in line with how they play other first person shooter games. Winning the war tends to be more important as a motivation to an earlier generation of players.

Arlo with a game like this it's not nice to open the hood where no one really wants to look. It's all about illusions that under the hood is not a VW bug air cooled but, a small block with a hemmi and a blower. That is the fantasy an open world allows the customer to play out for their $14.95.

If this were a war game, we would be firing generals, field commanders, and admirals every 15 minutes for incompetence and hiding from combat.

[Arlo]

I would hope that Arlo is trying his hand at trolling and nothing more.

Not trolling as much as applying sarcasm. This has indeed been a point of contention for some in this community. Those that share differing opinions on the matter usually find the other side amusing (or one would hope they only go that far).

I, personally, find your definition of 'war game' (in the MA) a bit broad for my liking (events are another thing) .... but then, I'm an historian and that likely narrows my parameters a bit.

[Arlo]

If this were a war game, we would be firing generals, field commanders, and admirals every 15 minutes for incompetence and hiding from combat.

Which is why I'm content to be a virtual/imaginary/pretend Ensign. 

[BaldEagl]

It's The Hunger Games starring HT as Caesar Flickerman.

[Arlo]

It's The Hunger Games starring HT as Caesar Flickerman.

I've never watched "The Hunger Games" yet I seem to know enough about it to appreciate this post in a very mirthful manner. 

[FLS]

There are 'sides.'

What rules each chess piece 'country?' Presidents, Kings, Emperors, Parliaments? Each each player allowed to vote in an election? 

Go to the O'Club to change countries in the war.

The MA is a war game. Events are a war game. They are similar but different.

[Arlo]

Go to the O'Club to change countries in the war.

The MA is a war game. Events are a war game. They are similar but different.

If they are different then .....