Maps are way too big

[Arlo]

People who don't want to be opposed will find a way, just about regardless of map size unless it gets made extremely smaller.

I've yet to see a single map, large or otherwise, that kept players from opposing one another. Shrinking maps to postage stamp size to facilitate fights that can and will happen on maps of any size seems like an extreme form of 'player control.' It's even weirder when someone complains that a large map with more options of play is forcing players to not conform to just one type of play and is therefore restrictive.

[Wiley]

I've yet to see a single map, large or otherwise, that kept players from opposing one another. Shrinking maps to postage stamp size to facilitate fights that can and will happen on maps of any size seems like an extreme form of 'player control.' It's even weirder when someone complains that a large map with more options of play is forcing players to not conform to just one type of play and is therefore restrictive.

Like I said, it doesn't matter much how big the map is unless you go REALLY small and I really don't think that would be good for the game.  If I could wave a wand, I'd do the 3 bardar colors although at this point like I said, I doubt it would impact much of anything.

The thing I find funny is I often see on the smaller maps it seems easier for a strat bomber to get to alt and enter the safety of the Cone of Boredom because you don't have a singleton bardar off in its own sector as he climbs.  It's actually easier for some of them to get to alt undetected and head for the strats.  And on the smaller map you have less time to get to 30k to get to him before he drops.

Wiley.

[Spikes]

If I could wave a wand, I'd do the 3 bardar colors although at this point like I said, I doubt it would impact much of anything.

I agree in this regard, I think it would be a nice little gameplay additive, but it won't really change much in the grand scheme.

[Arlo]

Can't find a fight. Can't find the strat runners. Can't find our glasses. We can find the time to complain. Have a beer, brother. 

[DmonSlyr]

Many of the smaller maps that have been made in the last 2 years have been great. I think they have been solid for action.

There are a few maps where I think a base should be planted in between others which would generate bigger fights. Id have to post pics when I have time at home to show. When you have a front that is over a sector to fly to, that's when things start to get slow.

Maps the like BowlMA IMO are just too big right now.

Its not necessarily the size per say of the map, it's, is there an organized path to action that players can join in to have fun fighting in. Thats why festers map had good fights even though it was big. While there will always be those who have all day to climb to 25K in their B24 or hide in a tank shooting buildings. The majority just want to be apart of team based fights that provide action in a timely manner. Im telling you right now that my generation simply doesn't have the patience for long winded strategy based situations. I dont think AH needs air spawns or AI, what it needs is a path to action for the most important base so that new players and people with short time spans can know where to attack. If they log in and see nothing much going on, and dont know where to go, or don't have a clue where to attack, flying to a base and bombing it by yourself and dying to ack after a 10 minute flight to get there, gets old after the 3rd run.

[DmonSlyr]

So think sector counters should be split into 3 bars?

HiTech

This was a wishlist item of mine 5-6 months ago. There needs to be a way to know who is winning on the other side. If I am going to switch sides, which side do I switch to to help the losing team? Sometimes you can tell by which base is flashing, other times it can be difficult. Sometimes the team with the lowest #s is actually winning the current battle. Late at night the low #s side has no fights, so it would be good to know which side to switch to if you are looking for a fighter fight to balance it out.

[finnster]

You'll thereby encourage the vulchers.

- oldman

This doesn't seem sensible to me. As long as you have at least one other base in flying range from which to launch, there's no need to take off from a capped field and get vulched. I started with this type of game back in 1990 with Air Warrior on GEnie, and there have been vulchers in every variation of MMP aircombat game I've played since then. Larger distances might deter them, but that's a smaller price to play than hours of boredom for moments of fun- which is what I'm finding right now.
I flew for over an hour yesterday and found exactly ONE fight. I kept turning towards where the map said the action would be and finding that by the time I got there, the fight was over.

[finnster]

You'll thereby encourage the vulchers.

- oldman

D'oh! It belatedly occurs to me that you're referencing my idea of making ack dangerous to both sides. Is that the case?
I think an argument can be made either way- but I don't see a lot of vulchers diving into the ack now, (at least not the smart ones) and I'm doubtful that they'd be eager to jump in just because the guy they're chasing might get hit by ack.  That doesn't do much to increase his chances of survival does it? Especially if the ack kills denies the vulcher any credit for the kill. Of course, that might lead to some players diving into their own ack hoping to get killed just to deny the enemy player a kill credit.  More dweebiness. Sigh. As I say, it can be argued either way.
Once the ack is down, the point is moot anyway.

[The Fugitive]

D'oh! It belatedly occurs to me that you're referencing my idea of making ack dangerous to both sides. Is that the case?
I think an argument can be made either way- but I don't see a lot of vulchers diving into the ack now, (at least not the smart ones) and I'm doubtful that they'd be eager to jump in just because the guy they're chasing might get hit by ack.  That doesn't do much to increase his chances of survival does it? Especially if the ack kills denies the vulcher any credit for the kill. Of course, that might lead to some players diving into their own ack hoping to get killed just to deny the enemy player a kill credit.  More dweebiness. Sigh. As I say, it can be argued either way.
Once the ack is down, the point is moot anyway.

It is dangerous to both sides. You can be hit by friendly ack tho it doesnt seem to be as likely as enemy ack.

[guncrasher]

would be nice trying to land and get hit by your own ack.

semp

[flippz]

That would certainly help figure out which side needs the help and allow people to switch to the right side. Maybe the single redbar would become a yellow / red bar to show to different countries (or similar color arangement)

Still only a band aid on a bullet wound. The ebb and flow changes so much and so quickly in the game.  Other things need implemented ie shorter switch times and (personal opinion) tower sitters kicked.
I have swapped to smaller number teams many times only to get a few flights in before the ebb of time/fight changes and now you are stuck on a side attacking ground guns and begging some one to up bombers or m3s

[Arlo]

tower sitters kicked.

How would you implement that? What are your parameters? Does that include hangar, o club, etc? 

[CptTrips]

How would you implement that? What are your parameters? Does that include hangar, o club, etc? 

Battlefield will kick you for inactivity.  It's not 30 sec.  more like 5 min.

Since they enforce side balancing, it's important they are only counting live players.

[Arlo]

Battlefield will kick you for inactivity.  It's not 30 sec.  more like 5 min.

Since they enforce side balancing, it's important they are only counting live players.

I'm of the mind that even 5 minutes is too short. Squads have people gather in the tower and even discuss squad mission parameters. If activity includes going to the hangar and looking through toy options and their load outs then that's one thing. If activity must be in a toy with wheels up, vehicle engine on or some such, that's another. What about gun emplacements? Start punishing players for 'too much' tower time and they'll man rear area guns and take naps. 

[Shuffler]

Still only a band aid on a bullet wound. The ebb and flow changes so much and so quickly in the game.  Other things need implemented ie shorter switch times and (personal opinion) tower sitters kicked.
I have swapped to smaller number teams many times only to get a few flights in before the ebb of time/fight changes and now you are stuck on a side attacking ground guns and begging some one to up bombers or m3s

You are worried about people in the tower. Mostly your high numbers are because you have a lot of folks on the side you are on. Try switching to a low number side and even up the numbers.