2-Sided vs 3-Sided Arena Design

[CptTrips]

The 'so you agree' mindmeld hypnosis attempts can get rather tiresome. 

Only when people refuse to admit the obvious.   

I'll stop as soon as they honestly admit what we all know.

Or have the b@lls to say, "Sure, put the 2-sided war in the Melee and put the 3-sided war in the SE and 3-sided would still win out!"

Then I'd be impressed. 

Otherwise, their evasions are transparent.
 

[Arlo]

I'll stop as soon as they honestly admit what we all know.

Is this the 'queen bee' perspective on what the hive mind should be? 

[CptTrips]

Is this the 'queen bee' perspective on what the hive mind should be? 

Well, it is certainly reasonable to infer based on not one of them being willing to see the 3-side war put over on the Special Events arena.  Yet, they seem unwilling to explain why that would be a bad thing.  Somehow that prevents people from clicking on it, but they won't explain how.

Do you honestly believe that what ever is in the Melee arena wouldn't get the vast majority of the traffic?  Will you answer that honestly?

[Mister Fork]

@CptTrips - it's not like other MMO's haven't run in a two-sided setup before. And all the SEA events are two sided, so is the AvA.

Three sided war is where it's at.

[Arlo]

@CptTrips - it's not like other MMO's haven't run in a two-sided setup before. And all the SEA events are two sided, so is the AvA.

Three sided war is where it's at.

I've tried that. And tried that. Apparently I'm supposed to think/type something 'more honest.' 

[CptTrips]

@CptTrips - it's not like other MMO's haven't run in a two-sided setup before. And all the SEA events are two sided, so is the AvA.

And somehow the Zombie Apocalypse didn't break-out because of it.   

Three sided war is where it's at.

I admit that HTC will probably never give it a try in the Melee.  Although, if they are as smart as I think they are, I hope they would just put their past assumptions aside, and really analyze whether is still doesn't make sense to give it even the smallest limited test given how much has changed since that original design decision was made.

I admit I don't know the full extent of what would be required to put together a test.  I assume there is enough knowledge gained from scenarios and AvA that it is possible with some effort without requiring code changes for an initial trial. That may be completely not possible, but I don't get that impression.  But I certainly wouldn't want them to have to go do code changes just to try it.

I admit that if they did try it, it might failed miserably.  I think that can be mitigated by surveying the arena to see if enough want to see it tried.  If people want to give it a try, give it a go.  Then after a couple of Tues runs, survey again to see if it was enjoyed enough to be continued. 

If people don't like it, you just drop it and continue with your regularly scheduled programming.  I can't see how a couple of Tues is going to bring the world to an end.



 

[CptTrips]

I've tried that. And tried that. Apparently I'm supposed to think/type something 'more honest.' 

I noticed you didn't answer. 

[Arlo]

Although, if they are as smart as I think they are ....

Perhaps we can only be as smart as we think we are and not presume we're smarter than others. 

[Arlo]

I noticed you didn't answer. 

Ask a better question. 

[CptTrips]

Perhaps we can only be as smart as we think we are and not presume we're smarter than others. 

Your comments seem to completely centered on me.  So I assume you don't have anything intelligent to add to the topic at hand.

[CptTrips]

Ask a better question. 

Would answering that one honestly be too hard for you? 

[Arlo]

Your comments seem to completely centered on me.  So I assume you don't have anything  intelligent to add to the topic at hand.

My thoughts to your thoughts ..... agree with me ..... I am right ..... you are wrong ..... don't focus on me .... I've inferred dishonesty on your part. 

[CptTrips]

My thoughts to your thoughts ..... agree with me ..... I am right ..... you are wrong ..... don't focus on me.

LoL. 

Q.E.D.

[Shuffler]

Currently it is 3 to 2...... we win.



 

[bustr]

no see bustr that where you are wrong, there is a lot a WHOLE lot that players do.  I own a business and I don't let the customers load there cars, they are not allowed to rig there cars.  I have absolutely no customer involvement in my business.  here fso is done by players, scenarios are done by players skins are done by players maps are done by players mods are done by players. I haven't been involved in a lot of games in my life but this is the only one I have seen to date that players have to create maps, skins extra scenarios and so on. 

you have to adjust with the times and what people want.  in the 6 yrs my business has been opened my business model has changed 3 times, all due to customer input and watching what people ask for.  have they all been a great success? no have they all failed? no.  I take what works and get rid of what doesn't. 

 I am a huge believer in the 2 sided war, is it gonna work I don't know?  I also look at it through different glasses as I like to fight in fighters and could careless the map out come winner.  I can tell you my little over 2 years in here I have seen a lot of people leave and very few come in.  you can take 100 people and divide them by 50 if you want but that don't create action.  now you take a 100 people and divide them by 2 and give them a closer area of involvement then you create action.  maps can be made to where the "open sandbox" is still applicable.  have close tight bases up front and rearward base for the bombers guys and make strats available for defense and bombing.  make a sprawling landscape for the 30 gvers that want to up and pound the crap out of each other.  if a owner wants to sit on the laurels and refuse to change with time and customers then the world passes by.

You have said nothing other than Hitech needs to try out what you and someone who agrees with you to see if it will work.

Neither one of you has ever built an MA world and analyzed the results of how players utilize it, but, talk like you have and are a information broker in touch with hundreds of ex-players with a database of their personal stories. The only players who will benefit from a single front between two countries are the same kind of player who likes the DA and take part in KOTH. You have admitted yourself as that kind of player. There are two sided combat arenas but the majority of customers want to play in the three sided combat arena for reasons other than KOTH\DA kinds of combat. They like being multidisciplinary to play capture the flag air combat and drive on the ground shooting at each other. KOTH\DA type of players have been in the forefront of trying to push Hitech into turning the MA into a giant 10x10 one front DA which two sides will create overnight. The capture the flag players will have no space to pull back to from failed initiatives and choose a less demanding front to catch a breather. While being constantly harassed by DA types who will make sure they never have a break becasue that is what a single front facilitates and will be gamed knowing that.

Ultimately if Hitech try's it, you might achieve the unspoken goal of driving out all the old dinosaurs who don't want to play in the three sided MA your way with a two sided MA. Your blind spot is you have no solution for Hitech to recoup that kind of revenue stream loss other than it's his problem to solve in his industry. Like all those who have pushed this topic for 20 years before you and CptTrps today. The gist of your assertions are to force through doom and gloom predictions, logic countering rationalization traps, and even silencing by any means, those who disagree with your assertions in the hopes it will force or persuade Hitech to give you your utopian vision of the MA.