Furball Arena

[CptTrips]

Far as I know, bases are capturable.  It used to be in the backwhen, never saw anything to indicate that changed.  I don't know why the AvA doesn't get traffic, although I'm not sure what the current icon settings are either.  I know I hate no enemy icons and for a while long ago that was how it was, so I never bothered going in there.  At the end of the day there aren't enough people to support 2 ongoing war arenas IMO.

Except that should appeal to the Scenario/FSO only guys who don't bother with the Melee.  Those are players already not going into the Melee.

Of course, I myself haven't gone in there either  (there is no one in there!  ), so I may be out of date.  I did go though a long chain of forum posts following the history of the arena back when I was researching a WWII AI arena for ideas.   What a saga.  I got caught up in it like reading a Soap Opera script. 

I think any kind of no icon baloney is just a dead-end.  Especially with the advent of VR, which has great depth perception, but very low resolution.  They should use Scenario/FSO vis range and icon settings.  If nothing else to appeal to the Scenario guys as much as possible.

I don't know how they do their maps, but often full scale historical maps would have too long transit times.  I think you'd have to allow historical "inspired" but optimized maps or liberal use of air spawns to keep it reasonable.  5 minute spawn to fun is about my personal limit for a nightly arena fun, unless I'm playing is a true Historical full-scale Scenario.  Then I tolerate long boring flights.

I'd love to see a nightly 3 hour mini-Scenario run in the AvA.  No big planning thing.  Just a command structure with some ad hoc coordination, walk on's that can be plugged in as they arrive.  I hate registering and committing to something months in advance.   I hate having to arrive at an exact time.  Something a little lighter, 4-5 days a week, walk on and get plugged in, coordinate on a specified goal.  Scenario vis settings.  That would be fun to me.

With your test arena, if you want to get people in to try it out what I would suggest is schedule something in there.  Like you said, people miss each other 10 minutes at a time on sporadic nights but if you've got something like Wednesday Whimsy where you and some other people are going to be in there at 9 Eastern, and you flog the hell out of it on channels and the board, you might get enough people in to have some fun and get some feedback.  I'm sure the feedback will be cohesive and it will be easy to come to a consensus. 

MNM gets around 15-20 people in it every Monday and that's enough to make it nuts.  10 or so is enough to keep it fun.

You might be right, but that is not what I can commit to.  If someone wanted to run with it, I'd help them get setup.

 

[Wiley]

Except that should appeal to the Scenario/FSO only guys who don't bother with the Melee.  Those are players already not going into the Melee.

It seems to me there are people that pretty much only fly FSO/Scenarios.  I know when I was in WBs there was a pretty good chunk of people who literally ONLY had a WBs account for the S3.  3 hours Sunday nights, never saw them in the main arenas.

I suspect there are a fair number who are pretty much like that here.  I know I often treat the MA as practice for FSO.  I quite often fly the ride of the week if I haven't flown it in a while.  I'm just not that invested in what's going on in the MA beyond flying for fun.

Of course, I myself haven't gone in there either  (there is no one in there!  ), so I may be out of date.  I did go though a long chain of forum posts following the history of the arena back when I was researching a WWII AI arena for ideas.   What a saga.  I got caught up in it like reading a Soap Opera script. 

I think any kind of no icon baloney is just a dead-end.  Especially with the advent of VR, which has great depth perception, but very low resolution.  They should use Scenario/FSO vis range and icon settings.  If nothing else to appeal to the Scenario guys as much as possible.

I remember some of the drama I was here for.  Icon settings are a hot button for many people and it can cause people who would be there often with the right settings for them to not go because of them.

I don't know how they do their maps, but often full scale historical maps would have too long transit times.  I think you'd have to allow historical "inspired" but optimized maps or liberal use of air spawns to keep it reasonable.  5 minute spawn to fun is about my personal limit for a nightly arena fun, unless I'm playing is a true Historical full-scale Scenario.  Then I tolerate long boring flights.

I'd love to see a nightly 3 hour mini-Scenario run in the AvA.  No big planning thing.  Just a command structure with some ad hoc coordination, walk on's that can be plugged in as they arrive.  I hate registering and committing to something months in advance.   I hate having to arrive at an exact time.  Something a little lighter, 4-5 days a week, walk on and get plugged in, coordinate on a specified goal.  Scenario vis settings.  That would be fun to me.

In an ideal world, it'd be cool.  Problem is that command structure would need to be there all evening.

Wiley.

[Spikes]

Except that should appeal to the Scenario/FSO only guys who don't bother with the Melee.  Those are players already not going into the Melee.

Of course, I myself haven't gone in there either  (there is no one in there!  ), so I may be out of date.  I did go though a long chain of forum posts following the history of the arena back when I was researching a WWII AI arena for ideas.   What a saga.  I got caught up in it like reading a Soap Opera script. 

I think any kind of no icon baloney is just a dead-end.  Especially with the advent of VR, which has great depth perception, but very low resolution.  They should use Scenario/FSO vis range and icon settings.  If nothing else to appeal to the Scenario guys as much as possible.

I don't know how they do their maps, but often full scale historical maps would have too long transit times.  I think you'd have to allow historical "inspired" but optimized maps or liberal use of air spawns to keep it reasonable.  5 minute spawn to fun is about my personal limit for a nightly arena fun, unless I'm playing is a true Historical full-scale Scenario.  Then I tolerate long boring flights.

I'd love to see a nightly 3 hour mini-Scenario run in the AvA.  No big planning thing.  Just a command structure with some ad hoc coordination, walk on's that can be plugged in as they arrive.  I hate registering and committing to something months in advance.   I hate having to arrive at an exact time.  Something a little lighter, 4-5 days a week, walk on and get plugged in, coordinate on a specified goal.  Scenario vis settings.  That would be fun to me.


You might be right, but that is not what I can commit to.  If someone wanted to run with it, I'd help them get setup.

 

You are correct in that all SEA terrains are 1:1 or pretty close to it.

I think gone are the days where people enjoy the DGS or BoG style missions where you end up completely immersed in your squad, plane, the frame. An hour of tracking bombers as they rumble toward Berlin, and eventually you finally get combat. Even in Scenario airspawns are used to speed action up (which I don't necessarily like or dislike) but sometimes I feel it lacks the immersion that some events used to have. In Der Grosse Schlag, I flew with the 474th FG where we filled up 3 entire fighter squadrons of P-38s (32 people, with folks fighting over slots). Now, I might even switch aircraft mid-Scenario frame to help out another group. Yep...gone are those days.

Your 3 hour mini-scenario sounds like what Snapshot used to be on Wednesday/Thursday. An hour or two with some basic objective for both sides. Usually a CO would step up on each side and try to organize everyone, but it was pretty loose in terms of structure. I would say it falls between Friday Squad Ops and Combat Challenge in terms of gameplay. We've toyed with bringing it back perhaps on a weekend or something, but interest is always the issue.

[Arlo]

I'd love to see a nightly 3 hour mini-Scenario run in the AvA.

^This!^ 

[Wiley]

You are correct in that all SEA terrains are 1:1 or pretty close to it.

I think gone are the days where people enjoy the DGS or BoG style missions where you end up completely immersed in your squad, plane, the frame.

I've taken a break from scenarios the last little while, but I have REALLY loved the 12 hour scenarios I've been in.  Best online gaming experiences of my life.

Wiley.

[CptTrips]

You are correct in that all SEA terrains are 1:1 or pretty close to it.

Understand, I make a distinction between a true full-scale historical Scenario, and what I'm willing to do for just an evenings fun.
In a Scenario, I'm all in.  I want to relive to whole thing.  I'll take long flights and boring patrols.  It's not my favorite part, but I don't feel necessarily cheated.  I'm mentally prepared for that and I only do those every so often.

I have totally different expectations for a normal evenings fun.  It's not 1995 anymore, where I'm in awe merely at the fact I can fly though this 3d world with people from all over the world online.  Yawn.  OK.  That newness has worn off.  The mere fact that online gaming is possible is not enough to hold my interest any more.  I get that part, I need some action. 

And my life is different now days.  I am very busy, not retired, and only have limited amount I can periodically dedicate to gaming.  I need a gaming experience that makes respectful use of my time. 

The great Sid Meier once said "simulate the fun part, and throw away the rest."  Or something like that.  Most of the time, a 20 minute climb out on auto-pilot adds nothing to my fun.  There is nothing intriguing about that anymore.  An occasional, true historical reenactment, would be a rare exception.  But I wouldn't have time for that very often.

Your 3 hour mini-scenario sounds like what Snapshot used to be on Wednesday/Thursday. An hour or two with some basic objective for both sides. Usually a CO would step up on each side and try to organize everyone, but it was pretty loose in terms of structure. I would say it falls between Friday Squad Ops and Combat Challenge in terms of gameplay. We've toyed with bringing it back perhaps on a weekend or something, but interest is always the issue.

Yes.  Herding cats is always the problem.   To me that sounds awesome.  I enjoyed the Scenarios, but I can't often plan and commit to something months in advance, and am most often busy on weekends.

I was tempted by FSO, Friday works better for me (Tues-Thurs is ideal for my personal schedule though).  but I still have commitment issues.  I can't always guarantee to be there every Fri for a month.  I can't always guarantee to be there at a exact starting time.  Having something running that I know I could drop in as a walk on when and if it is convenient and get placed where they need me would be ideal, if not practical.   When I do play though, I like some structure, I like working with a team on a specific goal with defined victory conditions achievable within a specific time frame.  So, the random meandering, maybe drags on a week and finishes in Euro time when I never see it, Melee, is less satisfying to me. 

I think you get hoards in the Melee partly because people desire a structure whether they realize it or not,  since there usually is none, they will clump up into something that sorta feels like it has a purpose because it is better that wandering around pointlessly.  But it becomes one hoard because there in no one coordinating instead of someone directing, ok you 5 guys go there and 6 of you go take the port.  You four go patrol this sector they might be trying to flank us.

I know everyone gets tire of me talking about Battlefield, and I'm sure it activates certain peoples knee-jerk fanboi defense mechanisms, but I've spent 95% of my gaming time since 2000ish playing either AH or BF.  So I can't help but continually compare and contrast there various design decisions and how they effect gameplay experience.

First, I like the low commitment, respectful use of my time.  I can start it up and drop in when ever I please and be in action quickly, and the action is intense (unless I want to take it easy then I snipe so options), and consistent and lasts as long as I want to stay logged on. 

But the other less obvious thing I love about it is how it handles it's team/squad dynamics.  It's a great mix of sandbox and structure. 
By default, when you enter a game you get dropped into a ad hoc "squad".  You have to take an extra step to unjoin and be a lone wolf.  By default it drops you into a squad. 
You can switch to a different squad if you don't like that one, or form your own, or unjoin all and just lone wolf.  (I sometimes do that when sniping because it is annoying to have a squadie spawn on you and start stupidly raking off machine gun fire from your sniper hide.  Uhhhh dude.  Can you go somewhere else and do that? I'm trying to be like stealthy and stuff.   )

But most often the squad thing works great.  Most people will instantly start coop'ing and playing the objective.  The squad leader has tools for easily marking targets and objectives and there are point incentives for everyone to comply, but even so it is just more enjoyable everyone working toward a series of mini-goals that lead to a team win in a known time frame.  Those games last about 30-45 minutes.  That's too short for AH, but 2-3 hours sounds about right.

There is something about that combination of action, structure, goal orientation, team/cooperation, clear victory conditions that are achievable in a completable time frame...  its like crack-cocaine.  Then the map changes and you are like "Oh shoot, I love this map, do I have time for one more?" 

If its going to drag on for a week, there is no sense of being near the end, and little "Oh we're almost there!".  That happens, but how often.  How often does the map get won by some randoms and you weren't there for it.  Knowing you'll probably never see the victory makes it feel less important.  It's just a pointless treadmill then.   

I was really hoping the WO:P was going to adopt a more BF structure, but it looks like it is going a different design direction.

[Spikes]

I was tempted by FSO, Friday works better for me (Tues-Thurs is ideal for my personal schedule though).  but I still have commitment issues.  I can't always guarantee to be there every Fri for a month.  I can't always guarantee to be there at a exact starting time.  Having something running that I know I could drop in as a walk on when and if it is convenient and get placed where they need me would be ideal, if not practical.   When I do play though, I like some structure, I like working with a team on a specific goal with defined victory conditions withing a specific time frame.  So, the random meandering, maybe drags on a week and finishes in Euro time when I never see it, Melee, is less satisfying to me. 

I know everyone gets tire of me talking about Battlefield, and I'm sure it activates certain peoples knee-jerk fanboi defense mechanisms, but I've spent 95% of my gaming time since 2000ish playing either AH or BF.  So I can't help but continually compare and contrast there various design decisions and how they effect gameplay experience.

I would try FSO, most squads would take you in and while the squad has a commitment number to abide by, it's semi-flexible and real life always comes before pixel games.

FSO too is much simpler than it used to be. What used to be 3-4 objectives per side is down to 1 per side (and sometimes 1 objective total in an attack only/defend only setup). But, it still has the structure and immersion that people enjoy.


I like Battlefield, my personal favorite is BC2. BF has a great balance of coordination, action, speed, etc. Heroes & Generals is one of those games that does the same - it has the tactical aspect as well as the basic FPS aspect.

[Wiley]

By default, when you enter a game you get dropped into a ad hoc "squad".  You have to take an extra step to unjoin and be a lone wolf.  By default it drops you into a squad. 
You can swtich to a different squad if you don't like that one, or form your own, or unjoin all and just lone wolf.  (I sometimes do that when sniping because it is annoying to have a squadie spawn on you and start stupidly raking off machine gun fire from your sniper hide.  Uhhhh dude.  Can you go somewhere else and do that? I'm trying to be like stealthy and stuff.   )

Interesting that the squads are optional.  I've never enjoyed the team games that put you in a subgroup with a bunch of randoms in some kind of loose command structure.  They're either even worse at the game than me, or they're so far along the learning curve I'm lost.  If I had a group of people I played stuff like that with on a regular basis I'd likely have a way different opinion of that kind of gameplay but it's not interesting enough to me to invest the time.

Wiley.

[CptTrips]

I would try FSO, most squads would take you in and while the squad has a commitment number to abide by, it's semi-flexible and real life always comes before pixel games.

FSO too is much simpler than it used to be. What used to be 3-4 objectives per side is down to 1 per side (and sometimes 1 objective total in an attack only/defend only setup). But, it still has the structure and immersion that people enjoy.

I was very tempted.  But, often I'm already heading out to my land on Fri night and am gone the weekend.  Maybe this Winter.

I like Battlefield, my personal favorite is BC2. BF has a great balance of coordination, action, speed, etc. Heroes & Generals is one of those games that does the same - it has the tactical aspect as well as the basic FPS aspect.

My online gaming started mainly with AH. 
Then BF 1942 hit.  I got sucked into that a while.
Then I did AH some more.
Then I got sucked into BF3 then BF4.  BF4 had a ruff start but has evolved into perfection IMHO.
Never got into Hardline. 
Came back and started piddling with AH and AI stuff.
I play BF4 on occasion.  Some BF1 (it's ok.)
I didn't like COD:MW.  BF5 was ....unsatisfying.

I'd love to find some AH guys who'd like to play BF4 one night a week as a squad. Just sayin. 

[CptTrips]

Interesting that the squads are optional.  I've never enjoyed the team games that put you in a subgroup with a bunch of randoms in some kind of loose command structure.  They're either even worse at the game than me, or they're so far along the learning curve I'm lost.  If I had a group of people I played stuff like that with on a regular basis I'd likely have a way different opinion of that kind of gameplay but it's not interesting enough to me to invest the time.

Wiley.

Random squads are often hit or miss.  If I'm running and gunning I still prefer a average squad rather than lone wolf.  If I'm in a sniping mood, I almost always go lone wolf, unless I get a random hair and want to play crazy close-in aggressive recon ( a whole different skillset).  As a sniper, I'm not much good at too close or too far.  I like medium. 

I used to love playing medic.  I generally looks at what the others in the squad are running and fill a gap.  Combine arms with each class covered tends to be most successful.  Rock, paper, scissors.  Make sure you have one of each.

If the random squad totally pisses me off, I'll swap around and check each squads rankings.  If I can't handle a squad of little Jimmies, I'll find a slot on a squad of 150 lvl Generals and grovel at the feet and run behind them dropping health packs.   I don't even have to get kills.  Just supporting the attack and reviving and dropping health so better shooters can take flags is satisfying.

If I can't find descent squad, I drop out and go lone wolf and snipe.   Sometimes I get in a weird mood and get  six-pack and I never even shoot.  I just perch and watch the hilarity ensure through my scope.  Sometimes just conitnually spotting guys is as deadly as shooting them yourself.  Especially if you see someone trying to be sneaky. 

 

[Oldman731]

I still cannot fathom why in a community of "historical enthusiasts" the AvA can't at least put 10 players in a historical setup on most night.  But the pull of the Melee dark side is strong.    I'd be interested to know why the AvA stays empty except for a couple of non-historical events.  You can't capture bases there right?  Is it just that?  Why isn't that the place that guys who prefer historical Scenarios hang out in-between events?

The question has been debated for years, with no consensus answer.  Easiest thing is to say:  Why don’t you fly there?  The typical answer is that no one else is there when I log in.  It doesn’t take many; as Wiley says, 10 makes for a good fight when there are two sides and the bases are close.

If the AvA was empty, I used to just announce in the MA that I was headed to the AvA, and that would bring people looking for an easy kill.  It hasn’t worked in quite some time, though, and is more difficult with the current text buffer.

As you say, though, the AvA should be the preferred arena for this bunch.

- oldman

[CptTrips]

Why don’t you fly there? 

Well, if there are no icons, I'm out.
If it is a 15 minute flight to get to action, I'm out.
If it is empty, I'm out.

 

[Oldman731]

Well, if there are no icons, I'm out.
If it is a 15 minute flight to get to action, I'm out.
If it is empty, I'm out.

Hence the problem.  Bases in AvA generally are much closer than on the MA maps, as many have remarked; so it takes three or four minutes to get to the action, not 15.  I don’t know what the current icon setting is (no enemy was my favorite), but I believe it is reduced range icons, similar to what you can experience in Monday Night Madness.  (Try it, it’s quite a twist.)  It’s the natural tendency of people to go where the crowd is that is the current problem.

But, of course, real WWII afficionados should not be deterred by that.

- oldman

[Shuffler]

While I was in the arena alone.... I almost shot myself down.

[CptTrips]

But, of course, real WWII afficionados should not be deterred by that.

Oh well.  You can lead horses to water, but you just can't make them drink.

It doesn't surprise me that it doesn't appeal to many Melee players.
I wonder if it isn't appealing to the Scenario type because while it is more historical, it still has no built in structure. No focus, no mission, no command structure, no built in coordination as part of the design.

Otherwise, it's just a Melee with less planes.