Two sides

[CptTrips]

As far as not enough players for three sides.
when I learn to play air warrior there were three sides and a Max of 32 players in the arena.

Honest question, I can't remember back that far.   How big were maps?  How many bases?

And how many other online multi-player combat games was AW competing against in 1988?  Wasn't it pretty much the first with no competitors?

In conclusion blow it out your aromatic rear spincter.

There are a few aromatic sphincters in this thread, on both sides of the discussion.   

there might be a few mistakes in this typing because I did it all via voice with my phone.

I thought the spelling was unusually good. 

[Vraciu]

. . .

how would you have any clue about the financials of aces high or more in particular my personal finances.

. . .

No one in this thread is even posted the real reasons there are three sides.

the reason is not to spread out gameplay the reason is it gives a much bigger variants of gameplay .
with two sides each map continually is falt exactly the same way. you jump into the arena there's one side to fight there's no ebenflow and variance to the battles as there are with three sides.

As far as not enough players for three sides.
when I learn to play air warrior there were three sides and a Max of 32 players in the arena.

And don't go thinking I just stick my head in the sand saying that everything's alright with AH.

Well, don't forget we are on YOUR side, Hitech. 

You're making a grave mistake thinking 32 players over three sides is going to build this game. 

Also, I'm well aware of why you say three sides work.  We've heard it before from both you and Skuzzy.   

As for your finances, I find it hard to believe you NEED this game for that.   I'm sure you've done quite well, and deservedly so.

I'm not going to be allowed to debate you so I'll leave it there.  Just remember, the end user isn't always right, but he's also not always wrong.   I used to spend nearly every minute of the day on this game.  I understand the dynamics quite well.

[Vraciu]

Two sides works with the right people. So does three sides. As long as you have the right people playing it makes no difference. 

Two sides means joining the gang or getting banged when there's inequality.

Three sides gives you another option.

Wrong and wrong and wrong. 

Hitech has all the mechanics needed to balance. 

It is said three sides offer more play style options.   That's a consequence in search of a justification.  When we had full arenas everyone pretty much had the same choices and combat was ALWAYS one of them.   Now we have either gang or be ganged OR get ignored.    This really should not be by design.

[CptTrips]

And the idea you haven't made a fortune on this game is easily derived by anyone with a modicum of common sense and basic math skills.   My entire point was that you are not keeping AH alive because you NEED to.

You're going too far again.

You have no idea how much it takes to run a software company.  How much of the revenue has to be paid out to venture investors.  How much cost has to go into developing things for months or years without being able to monetize yet.  How much has to be kept as retained earning to get a team through lean patches.

Whatever Hitech has been able to make off AH has been well earned and I assure you  a programmer/architect of his skill level could have made several times more in the commercial world.  I can almost guarantee you he has sacrificed potential lifetime earning in order to peruse a dream we have all gotten to share.


I still think he is wrong about 2-sides when player counts are below 200-300 though.   

But I guess he has earned the right to be wrong on occasion.


Here is what we agree on.  Get the player count back up to 500 and many problems resolve themselves.  Quantity has a quality all it's own.

[Vraciu]

You're going too far again.

You have no idea how much it takes to run a software company.  How much of the revenue has to be paid out to venture investors.  How much cost has to go into developing things for months or years without being able to monetize yet.  How much has to be kept as retained earning to get a team through lean patches.

Whatever Hitech has been able to make off AH has been well earned and I assure you  a programmer/architect of his skill level could have made several times more in the commercial world.  I can almost guarantee you he has sacrificed potential lifetime earning in order to peruse a dream we have all gotten to share.


I still think he is still wrong about 2-sides when player counts are below 200-300 though.   

But I guess he has earned the right to be wrong on occasion.


Here is what we agree on.  Get the player count back up to 500 and many problems resolve themselves.

I know a lot more than you think.   

I'm not attacking Hitech.*   I am simply responding to the idea that he's not updating the game any more.   I am glad he keeps is going, but I imagine he'll do fine without it.   I fail to see how that's anything other than a COMPLIMENT.

Yes, he's the owner.  He has the right to do whatever he wants.   He is the one who lives or dies with the decisions. 

__
* I was in the middle of editing that post when you quoted it.  The first line was unclear.  "Derived" was not the proper word without "have or haven't" just prior.   My brain outran my fingers.

[CptTrips]

Hitech showing off his hoarded Aces High riches on Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous:

"Consequences, schmonsequences, as long as I'm rich."  Dale Addink

[Vraciu]

Hitech showing off his hoarded Aces High riches on Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous:

"Consequences, schmonsequences, as long as I'm rich."  Dale Addink

(Image removed from quote.)

You are so getting a Rule 4 for that.   

[atlau]

Here's one simple unintended consequence. if things were changed to to two sides what is the next thing you think people would ask for.

No one in this thread is even posted the real reasons there are three sides.

I postulate that there would be a push to only have 1 side.

[CptTrips]

I postulate that there would be a push to only have 1 side.

I postulate you are postulating out your aromatic sphincter.   

I say we go 8 sides for super-charged variety of action!

Ebbing and flowing out the ying-yang!

[CptTrips]

I'm not attacking Hitech.   I am simply responding to the idea that he's not updating the game any more.   I am glad he keeps is going, but I imagine he'll do fine without it. 

I think he is updating the game to the maximum of the resources he has.  He has to choose carefully how best to apply those resources to both short-term and long-term goals.

He simply does not think that configuring the code to support a two country Melee when numbers are low is the best use of his limited resources.  OK.  It's his call.  I'm not privy to the full range of things he is dividing his time across.

If you are implying he is rolling in dough and could just retire to his yacht in the Bahamas and forget Aces High, I highly doubt that is the case.  I bet you he is highly motivated to keep Aces High alive.

He would not enjoy a cubicle with a red stapler.   

[Ciaphas]

the reason is not to spread out gameplay the reason is it gives a much bigger variants of gameplay .
with two sides each map continually is falt exactly the same way. you jump into the arena there's one side to fight there's no ebenflow and variance to the battles as there are with three sides.

With players organizing missions and the addition of squads in this game came the ebb and flow or variance that you are speaking of, at least from a players standpoint. When we would see 400-500 people online, it was easy to forget that the players created the variance of battle and not the map. You can have point A opposing point B and have it fought multiple different ways depending on the players behavior. The targets stay the same but the mentality of the player changes for any given situation.

example,

Logging in to the current set up, the Knits are running a mission to a northern base on their front and the Bish are doing the same on their front. The Rooks have to defend against both or risk losing both and are then forced to retake ground on two sides of their territory. The battles that are fought are dependent on the play style of the attackers and the map just gave them targets.

now,

Logging in to a two sided arena, Side A is attacking 2 bases on their front on two opposite ends of the map. Side B is forced to defend against both missions or risk losing their bases and are then forced to retake lost ground. The battles are still fought dependent on the play style of the attackers where the map just provided the targets.

in these examples you are still having to defend against two separate attacks from an opposing team. These attacks might even pull a greater sense of urgency as the victory conditions for the map would most likely be a bit different than with a three sided war.

Dale, many of us are trying to pull as many new members as we can by use of social media, streaming, talking the game up etc...

We are all just brainstorming ideas, sometimes debates take place and sometimes we don't like some of the comments but you should understand that if we didn't care about this game we wouldn't even bother to have these conversations. This game has been apart of my entire adult life and also the reason why I am so passionate about helping this game.



 

[TequilaChaser]

I know a lot more than you think.   

I'm not attacking Hitech.  I am simply responding to the idea that he's not updating the game any more.   I am glad he keeps is going, but I imagine he'll do fine without it.   I fail to see how that's anything other than a COMPLIMENT.

How do you come to that observation, especially when there was a patch update just 10 days ago.....

[Vraciu]

How do you come to that observation, especially when there was a patch update just 10 days ago.....

I didn't.

Ahem.

Just venturing a guess here but chances are, resetting the infrastructure of present maps, from 3 to 2 sides would require a sizable modification of coding. My next guess is that Dale is/has/will be moving on to new pastures given the updates we've seen in the past year or so.

[CptTrips]

I didn't.

Ahem.

Not all effort in software is immediately visible to end users.  Sometimes a lot of work is being done behind the scenes laying the ground work for future features. 

What end users see is usually just the tip of the iceberg of effort.

[Max]

Point Counterpoint to ACHOO :

The world is round