Two sides

[AAIK]

Guys, just let go and let the game die. HT is the only one that can bring it back, none of us here have that level of control. All these death throes/ideas have already been heard before and are not productive and just reverberate the decline.

[CptTrips]

Nevermind trying to bring new ideas wont hear from me again ever on the forum. Good luck

Breath Yipi.  I already knew the answer when I started.   

[Wiley]

The Melee isn't the only game-play in AH.  Are you saying Scenarios, TFT, FSO aren't fun? 

Those are much more similar to BF than they are to the Melee.  They have a definable beginning, middle, and end within a fixed time-frame with specified victory conditions.   I'd say events are significantly more engaging than the wandering around aimlessly for days picking your nose activity of the Main.

They're fun, but I believe if FSO was just SO and ran all the time, it would dwindle.  It's a once a week special thing that is fun to do for certain.  So are scenarios (when the numbers are there).  But I know for myself, what I like about the MA is the unpredictability  It's a melee and you don't know what the other side is doing all the time. 

Scenarios, you know you'll be facing these planes trying to hit these things in numbers similar to yours.  In the MA you've got another side trying to take your fields.  How they're going to do it is up to them.  Sometimes it's a sneak, sometimes it's an NOE mission, sometimes it's a bunch of people upping together to hit it.  You have to respond to what you're seeing them do as opposed to "up at field 19 and defend it because they are trying to bomb the hangars."

WBs S3 was hands down the best iteration of that kind of thing IMO.  "These kinds of targets are worth these many points.  These are the people you are working with for 3 hours Sunday night.  Go."  No assigned targets except from the CiCs, some targets were obvious good choices but they weren't forced to go after any specific fields.  The downside was if your command guessed wrong you might wind up boring holes in the sky until you got redirected.

My dream version of AH would be a hybrid mode very similar to BF.  (Yeah, I know, hate on me.  ) 

Balanced, 2-Sided ,1 hour mini-scenarios with defined victory conditions and limit clock.  Divide up, choose flights, start the clock, take off, fight like Hell at maximum intensity for a 1 hour max sprint.  Boom. Session scoreboard and stats.  Winner or loser, beginning, middle, end within a time frame a play can get through in the time that evening they have to play.  Swap maps and missions.  10 minute intermission.  Again! 

You could get more actual combat time in a setup like that in a night as you do in a month in the Melee.  You could actually see the fruits of your effort within your evening, instead of always leaving things half finished. Players can run if they want, but they'll be losing within the hour.  If they want to win, they'll have to fight for the points.  Ticket-clock is ticking.

So... WT clone.   Like I said, those bite-sized action packed types of rounds are what is popular.  I'm not even saying it's wrong.  I fell into PUBG for months because of that kind of gameplay.  I just am saying "saving" the game by changing it to that is roughly equivalent to shutting it down.

I was hoping maybe that was where WO:P was maybe headed, but apparently not.

I have an opinion.  It is not constructive.  (when I say that, you can imagine... )

Wiley.

[CptTrips]

They're fun, but I believe if FSO was just SO and ran all the time, it would dwindle.  It's a once a week special thing that is fun to do for certain.

I'm not so sure.  I think the main problem is they are being done "by hand" so there can be some dead time waiting for command to get all the ducks in a row.  A lot of work, no offense.  Those guys ought to be paid!

I've found the Melee to be much more predictable.  I see no complex grand strategic thinking.  They just attack the next base adjacent to one they have.  Then the next one.  Then the next one, until they log for the night.  Did they win?  Did they lose?  Was there a point?  By the next day, some unnamed Euro's have retaken the bases you took overnight. So, get back on the treadmill.  Unless the Euro's had finished the map overnight, but you weren't there to see it. 

I'm not sure where all this grand strategic thinking is you speak of.

So... WT clone.   Like I said, those bite-sized action packed types of rounds are what is popular.

Well, I only played WT for about an hour.  Couldn't get my joystick to work right (or maybe it was the flight model ), and only Devil worshipers fly with a mouse!

I don't know if I'd describe 1 hour sprints as "bite-size" but yeah, I plead guilty. 

If there was a BF style game with AH flight model, defined victory conditions, on 128x128 mi maps that played out in 1 hour sprints, 24x7, that is where I'd be playing when not playing a deeper scenario experience.

But I would always want that in addition to the Melee, not instead of. 

But like I've said before, maybe it is better to just start with a different game where you have design freedom.

I'm not even saying it's wrong.  I fell into PUBG for months because of that kind of gameplay.  I just am saying "saving" the game by changing it to that is roughly equivalent to shutting it down.

It's like someone's grandpa.   If he only has a few years left, is it worth trying to get him to stop smoking, get exercise, and eat better?  Or just concentrate  on palliative care. Then remember him fondly.

I have an opinion.  It is not constructive.  (when I say that, you can imagine... )

[DmonSlyr]

Maps matter. 3 sides is not the issue. 

Some of these maps don't allow the 3rd team to easily participate in the off hours fighting. When that happens, it creates ENY embalance and one side with low #s.

Some  people just want an easier access to fights for all sides on smaller maps.

I recognize that some new maps have been made. But I also recongnize that some maps needs to be removed.

There should always be an emphasis to create new maps.

Hitech gotta pay people for that.

Maps are the most important part to AH.

[Wiley]

I'm not so sure.  I think the main problem is they are being done "by hand" so there can be some dead time waiting for command to get all the ducks in a row.  A lot of work, no offense.  Those guys ought to be paid!

No disagreement here.  I wouldn't do what they do unless I was WELL compensated.

I've found the Melee to be much more predictable.  I see no complex grand strategic thinking.  They just attack the next base adjacent to one they have.  Then the next one.  Then the next one, until they log for the night.  Did they win?  Did they lose?  Was there a point?  By the next day, some unnamed Euro's have retaken the bases you took overnight. So, get back on the treadmill.  Unless the Euro's had finished the map overnight, but you weren't there to see it. 

I'm not sure where all this grand strategic thinking is you speak of.

I'm not thinking that big.  I am thinking more in terms of relatively small base take type stuff, strat runs to a certain degree, and just general opportunity to do the unexpected.  I guess the distinction some people make is "strategic" which is what you seem to be talking about vs I'm talking more "tactical".  I'm talking about things like how some people will pork and take the VH when they're trying to take a base, some won't.  What I like to see is a bardar appearing a sector or so back on a contested front headed somewhere.  You can guess but you're not sure where they're going until someone scouts them out.

Now I realize it's not that way all the time, and it's not organized spectacularly well all the time, but it creates opportunity for unexpected stuff to happen.

Well, I only played WT for about an hour.  Couldn't get my joystick to work right (or maybe it was the flight model ), and only Devil worshipers fly with a mouse!

I don't know if I'd describe 1 hour sprints as "bite-size" but yeah, I plead guilty. 

If there was a BF style game with AH flight model, defined victory conditions, on 128x128 mi maps that played out in 1 hour sprints, 24x7, that is where I'd be playing when not playing a deeper scenario experience.

But I would always want that in addition to the Melee, not instead of. 

Not sure where the sweet spot would be on something like that, but the down-to-the-minute details aren't that critical, I get your gist.

But like I've said before, maybe it is better to just start with a different game where you have design freedom.

It's like someone's grandpa.   If he only has a few years left, is it worth trying to get him to stop smoking, get exercise, and eat better?  Or just concentrate  on palliative care. Then remember him fondly.

And does grandpa want to live in a world without bacon and scotch?  If he doesn't, I wouldn't inflict that on him.

(Image removed from quote.)

   Some of it rhymes with that.  But I like my account...

Wiley.

[Vraciu]

Again, where counterexample?  We can clearly see from player behavior in AH that they don't switch like they used to in WB.

Just like they do now.  Oh wait...

Just like they don't get penalized now with a side switch timer for six hours when they do.   Oh wait.

Right.  As opposed to the vast majority flying around bored taking functionally undefended bases until they cancel their subs.  Improvement!

Wiley.

Uh, that's what's happening now.   Look around you.

[Wiley]

Uh, that's what's happening now.   Look around you.

Yes.  And your proposed alternative has no proof that it will improve that.  Regardless, HT has spoken.

Wiley.

[Vraciu]

Nevermind trying to bring new ideas wont hear from me again ever on the forum. Good luck

Sad but true. 

Unfortunately intransigence is not always a good strategy.   So we're sunk.

[Vraciu]

Breath Yipi.  I already knew the answer when I started.   

(Image removed from quote.)

We all did. 

Adapt or die.   It's clear the former is not an option for whatever reason.    I have heard technical, but that can be overcome with creative thinking. 

So. 

Since we are stuck with three sides we need smaller maps to drive action and INCENTIVES to balance numbers.   If we don't get these things I fail to see a way out.

[Vraciu]

Yes.  And your proposed alternative has no proof that it will improve that.  Regardless, HT has spoken.

Wiley.

Common sense dictates that it WILL work.   We have proof now that three sides DON'T work so there's nothing to lose.

And don't give me this garbage that it won't work for this and that, because we have an example of where it did, and without balance mechanics to boot.

There's only one way to find out.    Go bold or go out of business.

[guncrasher]

So you are saying numbers will increase if we have two sides, because that's common sense.

Makes as much sense as saying we need smaller maps.  With smaller maps some people will quit.  It will just be a never ending furbal with no objectives.

semp

[Oldman731]

Smaller maps are the easiest remedy in my opinion.

This.

I was on this night.  There was good action in the sectors where the three countries intersected.  Yet I saw people on the side I'd joined suggesting that we should attack bases far off - where there was no opposition, in other words.  We'll always have a win-the-war crowd, and that's good, it brings in or keeps a whole body of players, but smaller maps would keep everyone more concentrated.

- oldman (like that's never been said before, I know, I know...)

[guncrasher]

That's exactly what happened yesterday Oldman.  But did you ask the other guys why they wanted to go somewhere else?  Because it got boring.

semp

[save]

What we need is new content - new small maps, (or grey out parts of old large one's), new planes, and vehicles.

Fixing abnormalities like Yak3, B26 damage model would help.

This way old players returns, and it's playable in other time zones than US.