Author Topic: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?  (Read 62961 times)

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #480 on: December 29, 2019, 10:05:20 AM »

I disagree.  I do not think the Melee has objectectives like an FSO or a Scenario, and that is exactly the point.  I undertand there are bases that can be taken and objects that can be destroyed in the Melee.  But no one really cares.  Not like they do in a Scenario. 

If there is a attack on a base in the Melee and it is a little too hard, they just off some where easier.  If a field defense gets a little too harry, the defends to drift off to pick their nose on another part of the map.

It is mob rule, with no individual resposibility.  No one has been assigned a task and feels resposibility to the team to get it done.  It's just...whatever dude. 

Since there is no real mission, then it comes down to peoples petty little dogfights.  They expect you not to bomb their fighter hangar.  They expect you to fly past their 1v1 and not interfere.  Tankers throw a fit if you bomb their Veh hangar.  They can't concieve you are actually trying to accomplish something, because its the Melee.  Just go bomb some other base.  Don't interrupt their little circle jerk with your mission hangup!

In a FSO where there are real missions and points to be captured within the frame which is ending in 1 hour,  that kind of dilitante mentality would be impossible to even form.  It would be nonsensicle. 

You can't just say "Let's all pretend the Melee is an FSO."  It doesn't work that way.  There is no agreed upon structure or responsibility.  It was a circle jerk when you logged in, and it will be a circle jerk when you log off.  There is no sense of immediacy or the need to push through an attack or defense at any cost within the time constriants of a frame. 

It's just a bunch of lolly-gagging and nose picking and don't dare ruin my little pointless dogfight.

One thing that I noticed WT doing is that even the death match modes have some sort of objective that will pop up on the screen, IE to attack a troop position in Sector X, defend a base in Sector A, etc. However WT fails to make those objectives actually MATTER, since victory is still largely tied to who has the most aircraft in the air when the game times out. All those objectives really do is determine the bonus at game's end.

This is something that Aces High's Main Arena, with the fact that getting shot down means you can just hop back in a new plane and rejoin the fight, could and arguably SHOULD take advantage of.

Imagine if the game would set specific objectives required to "Win The War," rather than simply tie it to % of the map your chess piece controls. Those objectives would be dynamic, with new ones popping up as they're completed. Maybe your country is "ordered" to capture a particular field, then upon completion, the next objective is to bomb a fuel factory into rubble.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Vraciu

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13991
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #481 on: December 29, 2019, 11:22:51 AM »
One thing that I noticed WT doing is that even the death match modes have some sort of objective that will pop up on the screen, IE to attack a troop position in Sector X, defend a base in Sector A, etc. However WT fails to make those objectives actually MATTER, since victory is still largely tied to who has the most aircraft in the air when the game times out. All those objectives really do is determine the bonus at game's end.

This is something that Aces High's Main Arena, with the fact that getting shot down means you can just hop back in a new plane and rejoin the fight, could and arguably SHOULD take advantage of.

Imagine if the game would set specific objectives required to "Win The War," rather than simply tie it to % of the map your chess piece controls. Those objectives would be dynamic, with new ones popping up as they're completed. Maybe your country is "ordered" to capture a particular field, then upon completion, the next objective is to bomb a fuel factory into rubble.

That would be awesome.   

I think total victory of at least one side should be required (minus the uncapturables perhaps).   Can you imagine the resistance that would spring up as you narrowed in on a country's last few bases?   Talk about Stalingrad-style resistance.   Would be outstanding.

That's why I loved the two-sided war in WBs.  You could see the fronts moving and marching toward the choke point.   The battle to hold the perimeter was like 1950 in Korea.   Awesome stuff.
”KILLER V”
Charter Member of the P-51 Mustang Skin Mafia
King of the Hill Champ, Tour 219
The Damned
King of the Hill Win Percentage - 100 (1 Win, 0 Losses)

Offline ccvi

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2074
      • http://www.carl-eike-hofmeister.de/
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #482 on: December 29, 2019, 01:30:18 PM »
I think total victory of at least one side should be required (minus the uncapturables perhaps).   Can you imagine the resistance that would spring up as you narrowed in on a country's last few bases?   Talk about Stalingrad-style resistance.   Would be outstanding.

That's how it was in the early days. Map change when one side had lost all fields. Later was down to 3 fields. Caused many people on the losing side to log.

A country-wide random goal would cause a massive horde. Fine-grained small goals to provide ideas what to do would make more sense. Could be player created (fitting the strategic situation), and grant a per modifier bonus on designated targets for pkayers on that mission.

Totally unrelated, supplies should drop rebuild time by a percentage (e.g. 10%). That avoids 3 quick drops bring fields under attack back to full instantaneously, and would help with excessive rebuild-time when factories are down. Resupply countering factory-issues, not a tactical element of defense.

Even more unrelated, enter should open the chat bar.

Ceterum censeo...

Offline Vraciu

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13991
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #483 on: December 29, 2019, 02:23:10 PM »
That's how it was in the early days. Map change when one side had lost all fields. Later was down to 3 fields. Caused many people on the losing side to log.

A country-wide random goal would cause a massive horde. Fine-grained small goals to provide ideas what to do would make more sense. Could be player created (fitting the strategic situation), and grant a per modifier bonus on designated targets for pkayers on that mission.

Totally unrelated, supplies should drop rebuild time by a percentage (e.g. 10%). That avoids 3 quick drops bring fields under attack back to full instantaneously, and would help with excessive rebuild-time when factories are down. Resupply countering factory-issues, not a tactical element of defense.

Even more unrelated, enter should open the chat bar.

Ceterum censeo...


People quit any way.   Some form of balancing would be helpful in that regard.

The idea of winning a war because you capture some random percentage of fields never made much sense to me.   I find the win-the-war-goals to be quite esoteric.    I don't want to read a spreadsheet with numbers.   I want a visual representation of what's happening and an idea of what is needed to win.    Then again, I really don't care about winning precisely because the criteria for doing so is not intuitive.

So I'll help out with a base take just because there is action there, but as for flipping maps, meh.  Not interested.

Your idea actually has some merit.
”KILLER V”
Charter Member of the P-51 Mustang Skin Mafia
King of the Hill Champ, Tour 219
The Damned
King of the Hill Win Percentage - 100 (1 Win, 0 Losses)

Offline CptTrips

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7842
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #484 on: December 29, 2019, 02:56:10 PM »
One thing that I noticed WT doing is that even the death match modes have some sort of objective that will pop up on the screen, IE to attack a troop position in Sector X, defend a base in Sector A, etc. However WT fails to make those objectives actually MATTER, since victory is still largely tied to who has the most aircraft in the air when the game times out. All those objectives really do is determine the bonus at game's end.

This is something that Aces High's Main Arena, with the fact that getting shot down means you can just hop back in a new plane and rejoin the fight, could and arguably SHOULD take advantage of.

Imagine if the game would set specific objectives required to "Win The War," rather than simply tie it to % of the map your chess piece controls. Those objectives would be dynamic, with new ones popping up as they're completed. Maybe your country is "ordered" to capture a particular field, then upon completion, the next objective is to bomb a fuel factory into rubble.


Interesting. 

Maybe another way you could do it is allow the ranking player on each country to define Strategically Vital Targets by marking fields/cities/strats/ports etc. on the map.  Maybe there are 3 SVT allowed per country and they can be overridden based on rank like CV routes.  Once marked these could show up on all country mates CBM and notified as set in a text msg.  Maybe there is a zone around a SVT that awards 2x perk points for all enemy planes/vehicles/objects destroyed in the SVT zone.  A little sweetener to get players attention.  :D  If it's placed on enemy assets it implies attack.  If it is places on country owned assets, it implies defense.

That at least keeps the game-play in players hands.  Kind of like the command staff in a Scenario.

$0.02.

 


« Last Edit: December 29, 2019, 05:23:03 PM by CptTrips »
Toxic, psychotic, self-aggrandizing drama queens simply aren't worth me spending my time on.

Offline Ciaphas

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1955
      • DethKlokDave
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #485 on: December 29, 2019, 03:15:56 PM »

Interesting. 

Maybe another way you could do it is allow the ranking player on each country to define Strategically Vital Targets by marking fields/cities/strats/ports etc. on the map.  Maybe there are 3 SVT allowed per country and they can be overridden based on rank live CV routes.  Once marked these could show up on all country mates CBM and notified as set in a text msg.  Maybe there is a zone around a SVT that awards 2x perk points for all enemy planes/vehicles/objects destroyed in the SVT zone.  A little sweetener to get players attention.  :D  If it's placed on enemy assets it implies attack.  If it is places on country owned assets, it implies defense.

That at least keeps the game-play in players hands.  Kind of like the command staff in a Scenario.

$0.02.

 


Remember when our own squads would get with other squads and plan out a few missions? Yeah, those were the good days.
10.(Jabo)/JG 26 Nuisance Raids Scenario


Offline CptTrips

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7842
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #486 on: December 29, 2019, 03:29:07 PM »

Remember when our own squads would get with other squads and plan out a few missions? Yeah, those were the good days.

Toxic, psychotic, self-aggrandizing drama queens simply aren't worth me spending my time on.

Offline The Fugitive

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17642
      • Fugi's Aces Help
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #487 on: December 29, 2019, 05:08:58 PM »
I wish HTC could incorporate some of what they had built for "Combat Tour" (I think that is what it was called). I know there was talk of players building their "players" in the game working toward ranks. I think there were other things like achievements that single players and maybe even groups could work toward.

How much was developed for Combat tour?

How could be used in todays game?

How much work/time would it take to implement it?

Could these things have been used as mini auto missions to pop up at certain times/conditions for a team to join/run for a reward?

Offline DmonSlyr

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6323
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #488 on: December 29, 2019, 08:29:45 PM »
Maps are really the only thing that will keep the #s higher. There should be a new map coming out every quarter. It doesn't matter how fast they get rolled. It matters if they provide action. I think what many people fail to realize is that new players DO NOT want to spend their time flying around aimlessly for 30 minutes before they get into contact with an enemy. If they can get into combat more quickly, dieing quickly isn't that big of a deal.  That's why these new faster games have brought in more people. New players need to know what dar bars are and how they work. With smaller maps and 13-15 mile fields, it makes the fights bigger in certain spots, makes it less spread out, and provides more of a "path to victory" approach. That's where the big fights happen. That's where the #s go.
The Damned(est. 1988)
-=Army of Muppets=-
2014 & 2018 KoTH ToC Champion

Offline CAV

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 682
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #489 on: December 31, 2019, 10:41:05 AM »

Quote
If they can get into combat more quickly, dieing quickly isn't that big of a deal.

That just gets you what we have now a furballin-arcade game. They can get that from a XBOX/PS game or War Thunder, World of Warships, or World of Tanks... and no $15 subscription.


Being the best Combat Simulation online gets HTC the $15 a month.........and new players, maybe.
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG301

Offline hitech

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12319
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #490 on: December 31, 2019, 11:37:13 AM »
I wish HTC could incorporate some of what they had built for "Combat Tour" (I think that is what it was called). I know there was talk of players building their "players" in the game working toward ranks. I think there were other things like achievements that single players and maybe even groups could work toward.

How much was developed for Combat tour?

How could be used in todays game?

How much work/time would it take to implement it?

Could these things have been used as mini auto missions to pop up at certain times/conditions for a team to join/run for a reward?

We already have implemented much of Combat Tour into AH.

Achievements were implanted.

AI Missions were implemented.

The Reconnect system was from CT.

The only major system that has not been integrated into AH is the Tank/RPG aspects.

HiTech


Offline GrandpaChaps

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 226
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #491 on: December 31, 2019, 02:29:58 PM »
I love this game, too.   It has caused me both intense frustration and endless fun.    It’s one of those challenges that I relish.

Amen.  I think that's universal!

 :aok
Uncle Fred

Offline Vraciu

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13991
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #492 on: December 31, 2019, 02:53:37 PM »
”KILLER V”
Charter Member of the P-51 Mustang Skin Mafia
King of the Hill Champ, Tour 219
The Damned
King of the Hill Win Percentage - 100 (1 Win, 0 Losses)

Offline gatt

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2441
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #493 on: January 01, 2020, 04:27:44 AM »
Maps are really the only thing that will keep the #s higher. There should be a new map coming out every quarter. It doesn't matter how fast they get rolled. It matters if they provide action. I think what many people fail to realize is that new players DO NOT want to spend their time flying around aimlessly for 30 minutes before they get into contact with an enemy. If they can get into combat more quickly, dieing quickly isn't that big of a deal.  That's why these new faster games have brought in more people. New players need to know what dar bars are and how they work. With smaller maps and 13-15 mile fields, it makes the fights bigger in certain spots, makes it less spread out, and provides more of a "path to victory" approach. That's where the big fights happen. That's where the #s go.

Well, #'s are high when and players can find planes, graphics and action. I left AH2 a long time ago. Actually, I'm playing WT (realistic battles) in these days. Yes, the joystick calibration is a nightmare and the mouse thing simply ridiculous. But I enjoy all the italian fighters AH never had and probably will never have. Not to mention the countless planes of all nationality and their variants. I enjoy the gorgeous graphics (I'm lucky to have a powerful PC). Bomber intercepts (I play only those) are fascinating to play. Contrails, rain, clouds, tracers, sounds, graphic effects ... simply beautiful. And when you fly historical you are up against the right enemies, not Bf109 against FW's. Last but not least, yes, I know I'll find my target in 5/10 minutes after take off (or respawn). Anyway, I miss the old AH2 times a lot. However, AH is so behind the new games ...
"And one of the finest aircraft I ever flew was the Macchi C.205. Oh, beautiful. And here you had the perfect combination of italian styling and german engineering .... it really was a delight to fly ... and we did tests on it and were most impressed." - Captain Eric Brown

Offline SirNuke

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1297
Re: How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?
« Reply #494 on: January 01, 2020, 05:34:31 AM »
are the huge maps still on with these kind of numbers?