Maps are way too big

[finnster]

IF you want people to avoid ack dragging. or at least use it only as a last resort, then make the ack dangerous to BOTH sides.
In real life, the ack either shut down when friendlies were in the fire zone, or kept shooting and risked hitting enemy and friend alike. Make either condition the case in AH and the problem disappears.
Back to the main theme of this thread, heck yes the maps are too big. I only have the stamina to play for an hour or so, and I can count on one finger the really good fights I've had in my last five hours. Make the maps a lot smaller, OR... disable parts of them as the player numbers fall.  X players = full map,  .9x = .9/10s of the map and so on down to a reasonable limit, which more knowledgeable chaps than I would determine.
finnster.

[Oldman731]

IF you want people to avoid ack dragging

You'll thereby encourage the vulchers.

- oldman

[hitech]

Another example of a rule that discourages players is your insistence to clinging to ENY. That thing has never, ever, ever encouraged players to stick with Aces High or to even change countries. I get what you are trying to do, but would point out that the implementation of ENY rules came at what was roughly the highpoint for AH online participation (note I don't say subscribers. I imagine it took a while for old die-hards like me to finally decide to throw in the towel.) It was all downhill from there. ENY doesn't work. I'd love to see you provide stats that prove me wrong - X number or percentage of players change countries when ENY kicks -stuff that you undoubtedly have access to  - but to the best of my knowledge you have never shown us that. I suspect that's because you value your vision for ENY more than you value the folks leaving the game because of it. Something with ENY isn't working. If you want to attract new players, admit it and move on.

You may wish to reread my question. Because I did not ask you what " rule that discourage players" I asked you what type of game play you think I am trying to force? No where did you answer my question. You make accusation and assumptions about me and simply remake the claim you think ENY and large maps are causing players to leave.

Now you have me very curious, exactly what type of game play do I try force on threw the rules?

HiTech

The closest I can find an answer to my question is this.

Yet, somehow, the game decided that furballs weren't what was wanted and maps increasingly became spread out.

But you say the game and not me. So I have to assume you mean that I decided. But I have done no such thing. To the best of my knowledge distance between bases has remained consistent since the early days of AH. In fact I have done the opposite of what you claim and have done many things to promote fur balls over the years.

But again I am making the assumption that you are answering my question as (my rules try to  promote game play other then furballs ). If that is not what you think then please state again what game play type the "rules" try to promote?

Also your very insulting in your assumptions.Just  to show a few.

(and I really don't think you care either way)

Time flown between fights is a huge determinant of fun in a game. Any developer knows that.

You apparently based your decisions on a small cadre of players who had hours to spend in arenas

HiTech, the fact you asked me to identify rules that discourage players makes me think you really don't care.

Even though I did not ask that question.

Nothing, whatsoever, has changed.

You may wish to go back and see all the changes that have been made since 2010.

Yet you act like "What? There's a problem?" Seriously?

I have never done any such thing.

Doing the math, I imagine you are getting close to retirement and are hoping to just hold onto the subscribers you have to keep things going until you decide to pull the plug or sell.

You imagine completely wrong. In fact you use straw man augments constantly, rather then making the obvious assumption I have a huge vested interest and desire in making AH succeed.

And finally you completely ignore the large changes that have been made. Simply look at the free arenas like the match play completely geared toward fur balling. Or look at War Online Pacific.

And finally do not in any way construe this post as stating my opinion on map size. This post is only a response to the still unanswered question. (what type of game play do I try force  threw the rules.)

HiTech

[Arlo]

I've always been sorta mystified, myself, regarding the 'map size' kills fights argument. The front is the front, whether it's in a closet or on the entire planet Earth. The clipboard reflects where the bad guys are and, amazingly enough, there is usually a friendly base close enough to get to the fight, post-haste. Heck, sometimes that friendly base is where the fight is. So that really makes the argument 'Should I up at the fight and risk getting vulched or should I up from a base nearby and fly to the fight?'

Then there's the argument of 'Every time I log on the fight is between the other two chess pieces and I'm left out without flying three sectors plus to it.' Meaning, I guess, that the option of switching to a side that's in that fight is too hard/unthinkable/unavailable.

Maps aren't too big. Minds are too little. 

[Wiley]

Then there's the argument of 'Every time I log on the fight is between the other two chess pieces and I'm left out without flying three sectors plus to it.' Meaning, I guess, that the option of switching to a side that's in that fight is too hard/unthinkable/unavailable.

Mostly because like it or not, most people/squads are side loyal.  Couple that with the 6 hour side switch limit and if you switch to find a fight and the situation changes or your squaddies log on, you're stuck there until you can switch back.  Also, you have no way of knowing which of the 2 sides you'd be switching to has the upper hand.  If you're trying to get on the low number side of that fight, there's no way of determining which that is until after you switch.

If the above information was available, it would be more useful.  However, the chesspiece underoos, general dislike of people who switch in the community, and side switch timer still pretty much stop 99% of people from switching.

Wiley.

[CptTrips]

You imagine completely wrong. In fact you use straw man augments constantly, rather then making the obvious assumption I have a huge vested interest and desire in making AH succeed.

I mean no disrespect.  You know I respect you and your work. 
But if I could use my Jedi mind-control powers, I would place a thought into your mind like Inception; your vested interest is in making HTC succeed.  A subtle change.  There is no reason AH has to be the hill HTC dies on. 


Also, I would suggest you define "success" for Aces High carefully, and realistically.

Aces High has succeeded.  It was one of the pioneers of online combat gaming.  It was the internet Shizzle in it's day.  It's lasted 20 years and all its competitors are either gone or zombie husks. 

Aces High continues to succeed in that I think you are capturing about 85% of the possible market that would be interested int this particular design implementation.  The ROI it would take to get the last 15% is probably not > 0.
I don't think there is much more juice left. I have little faith AH could acquire significant numbers of new players.  I can't imagine a realistic scenario where the numbers spike back up to 500 players.  I wouldn't spend any money trying, but anything you can do for free, why not.  Your best bet is to target past players and re-monetize them somehow. That is not failure, that is having carried AH through it's entire 20yr product life cycle curve and squeezed all of the life out of it anyone could get.  That has been quite an achievement for a company with such limited resources.

But you can not alter the market forces and trends. You don't have that power.  And AH is not magically immune to market forces. 

Other than that, I think you should be putting AH in sustaining mode and looking for new hunting grounds.  You still have your knowledge, experience and infrastructure.  That is the best thing you can do for AH as well, as a healthy and profitable HTC is the best way for AH to ensure it's long tail.

Which is of course why you started WO:P, but...well that's a whole other discussion. 





 

[hitech]

I mean no disrespect.  You know I respect you and your work. 
But if I could use my Jedi mind-control powers, I would place a thought into your mind like Inception; your vested interest is in making HTC succeed.  A subtle change.  There is no reason AH has to be the hill HTC dies on. 

I'm not disagreeing with this statement. But the interest in making it succeed remains even if the choice that it can not be done is made.

HiTech

[CptTrips]

I'm not disagreeing with this statement. But the interest in making it succeed remains even if the choice that it can not be done is made.

Totally understandable.  It was your dream project that you invested a huge chunk of your life into.  How could you not feel that way?

But as I said, I think you have succeeded with AH and I think you are succeeding as much as is possible at this point in its life cycle. 
I'm not saying don't make maps smaller or larger or move bases closer or make some bug fixes, or tweak around the edges.  I'm saying don't go crazy looking for a solution that doesn't exist. 

The strategy at this point I think would be to accept with grace that there will probably be a long, slow decline in population for this game that can't be altered as the generation of gamers who fell in love with this particular style game fade out.  All you can do now is be a good steward and manage the glide slope and keep it as shallow as you can to let the current base get the last few drops of enjoyment and community out of this for how every many years it has left.    But limit that to some reasonable percentage of your bandwidth.

In the mean time, keep scanning the horizon for your next adventure.

Look on the bright side.  You could have still been working for Bill all these years. 

   




 

[Arlo]

Decisions ... decisions:

[Wiley]

Decisions ... decisions:

(Image removed from quote.)

Thank you for proving my point.  What in that available information shows who has the superior numbers in the fight between 22 and 45?  Is that 1 bish upping against 6 rooks, or is it 6 bish upping for 1 rook?  Total country numbers don't mean much when looking at a conflict between 2 fields.

Wiley.

[Shuffler]

Thank you for proving my point.  What in that available information shows who has the superior numbers in the fight between 22 and 45?  Is that 1 bish upping against 6 rooks, or is it 6 bish upping for 1 rook?  Total country numbers don't mean much when looking at a conflict between 2 fields.

Wiley.

People on the other side will usually communicate if you ask. Works most of the time.... granted not all. You have two other choices.

[Arlo]

Thank you for proving my point.  What in that available information shows who has the superior numbers in the fight between 22 and 45?  Is that 1 bish upping against 6 rooks, or is it 6 bish upping for 1 rook?  Total country numbers don't mean much when looking at a conflict between 2 fields.

It's an educated guess if you don't want to contact anyone on either side of that ongoing fight. The strat bombers could be one or two Bish players. Cybro could be on. I could be logged on just to screenshot the map, etc. No, it isn't an 'exact science' but no it's not an impossible obstacle. There's an obvious fight at an obvious location and an obvious way to get into it quickly.

Large map 'problem?' Not really. 

[Wiley]

People on the other side will usually communicate if you ask. Works most of the time.... granted not all. You have two other choices.

Not terribly inclined to climb for an hour and press B at the appropriate time, nor do I desire to sit in a metal box on the ground awaiting a bomb or bullet from nowhere.  There is something going on between 22 and 45, but I've never seen a question and reply on 200 like you describe since I've been here.

Wiley.

[Arlo]

Not terribly inclined to climb for an hour and press B at the appropriate time, nor do I desire to sit in a metal box on the ground awaiting a bomb or bullet from nowhere.  There is something going on between 22 and 45, but I've never seen a question and reply on 200 like you describe since I've been here.

Then take a chance and pick one or the other. It's not like you're going to go through 6 hours of pure hell because you wanted to be on the 15 player side of a 15 vs 18 player fight and you ended up on the 18 player side (or however many it ends up being).

P.S. (I'd go Rooks if I wanna play spoiler/underdog - they have ten fewer bases and 4 fewer players no matter where they are allocating their overall forces. If I wanted to hedge my bets toward a map win, I'd go Bishops.)

[Wiley]

Then take a chance and pick one or the other. It's not like you're going to go through 6 hours of pure hell because you wanted to be on the 15 player side of a 15 vs 18 player fight and you ended up on the 18 player side (or however many it ends up being).

Yeah, but it's not 15 on 18.  If I'm wanting to make the 45 fight 2 or 3 against 6 and I wind up making it 7 on 1 or 2, now I'm stuck for 6 hours, or I'm only around for the next hour with nothing to do but horde.  And just as often as not, the "high" number side is actually often getting horded because people are either in GVs or tower.

Wiley.