Current player numbers.

[JimmyD3]

That's why 3 sides don't work with today's numbers..

Make the game two sided and many issues self correct..

Eagler

So who do we eliminate? Rooks, Knights or Bishops?

You will have  players leave because of their loyalty to a Chess piece, and don't think for 1 minute it would not  happen.

It will not change anything.

[save]

Guess my sarcasm didn't come through.

I was trying to juxtapose the current radar setting that many of the veteran players seem to dislike with the fact that it was designed for new players who are few and far between.

Small maps only with predicable routes like the small island in the center (that also had ground war below)  and old radar will solve both smaller numbers and finding the enemy. hiding behind mountains and surprise attack without help from radar encourage you to use WW2 tactics plus SA and not warfare  we even not have in the 21st century.

[Animl-AW]

So who do we eliminate? Rooks, Knights or Bishops?

You will have  players leave because of their loyalty to a Chess piece, and don't think for 1 minute it would not  happen.

It will not change anything.

Plus, the maps would have to be rearranged, some coding would need to change,.....based on a gamble?

Any time there are big changes you risk a big exodus. Look what just the radar caused.

Not to mention what if most players chose one side over the other? A MA in constant 75 to 25.

This has been a losing debate for 35+ yrs.

[hazmatt]

So who do we eliminate? Rooks, Knights or Bishops?

You will have  players leave because of their loyalty to a Chess piece, and don't think for 1 minute it would not  happen.

It will not change anything.

I think Queens would be a side with a big following.

[flippz]

I honestly believe that there are so many players that are either loyal to a chess piece or want to remain part of the horde that 2 sides would not fix the issue.  I believe you would have a handful of players quit because they couldn't fathom having to change countries while the remaining players continue to pile on one side.

What you loose in folks loyal to a pixel picture you may gain in 5 fold for action.
As far as in the ganging HTC could crank the eny by 3 fold and even to a point you have to goon troops in.
A lot of the issues are lack of interest by the creator as well.

[flippz]

So who do we eliminate? Rooks, Knights or Bishops?

You will have  players leave because of their loyalty to a Chess piece, and don't think for 1 minute it would not  happen.

It will not change anything.

Get rid of all of them. Have a color a shape anything. That’s what’s wrong with this game. A bunch of princesses that scream and kick like a three year old if things aren’t done the way they want. It’s the quiet ones that leave silent that needs the attention some times.
When fighters like lazer an tralfaz and many many others are ready to go that’s a sign. The game play is what ran me off. If you want a fight you have to fight the horde, then you have to listen to skankles for three hours. If you join the horde then you have to listen to skankles for three hours. And if you play like that for any amount of time you loose interest quickly.

[JimmyD3]

Good to see you again Flippz 

I disagree with your premise though. #1 No way you gain that many with the change. #2 Any increase in eny will kill the game immediately. #3, I have no answer for that.

I must admit, I don't understand the "horde" issue. That is what made the game fascinating for me. Back in the day there were squads/hordes everywhere. Some of the best battles I've had have been either trying to take base or defending a base as a squad/horde. Hordes exist in all 3 countries.

[Animl-AW]

Good to see you again Flippz 

I disagree with your premise though. #1 No way you gain that many with the change. #2 Any increase in eny will kill the game immediately. #3, I have no answer for that.

I must admit, I don't understand the "horde" issue. That is what made the game fascinating for me. Back in the day there were squads/hordes everywhere. Some of the best battles I've had have been either trying to take base or defending a base as a squad/horde. Hordes exist in all 3 countries.

Well back in the day you had enough players online that no matter where a horde was you could throw 10 planes at it and not really disturb anything, fronts still covered. Now, in gang bangs you're lucky to have 10 to throw at it. if you split your forces the country is screwed. It still comes down to critical mass,... IMO

[flippz]

Good to see you again Flippz 

I disagree with your premise though. #1 No way you gain that many with the change. #2 Any increase in eny will kill the game immediately. #3, I have no answer for that.

I must admit, I don't understand the "horde" issue. That is what made the game fascinating for me. Back in the day there were squads/hordes everywhere. Some of the best battles I've had have been either trying to take base or defending a base as a squad/horde. Hordes exist in all 3 countries.

Miss you bud,
Seems the current trajectory is doing much good. And nothing will work as long as you say it won’t. Like I said the current game play is atrocious. My last month playing I seen the horde continuously attacking one country and if fighting three to 1 wasn’t bad enough they were continuously taking down fighter hangers. 
I would bet if there was some changes made in the game and there were some better fights you would be surprised at some folks that would return. Most guys don’t want to spend their couple of hours a day/week fighting the horde every time they’ll on.  Nor do guys want to log on and fly in a horde for hours fighting there fellow country men to try and get a kill.

[Eagler]

AI, smaller maps, 3 to 2 sides..all things that could and should be tried to keep the game afloat...

But the owner nor the ones afraid of change here seem to want to change/ try anything new...just sit around and wish/whine for the good ole days ..

They won't even change and get themselves out of the late war birds they complain about here is ruining game play..

Eagler

[Bolt]

As a returning player...I noticed something. The lack of overall strategy or even countries rallying together against the winning country.

For example, Bish are about to win the map...they're taking Rook bases. Rooks are taking Knight bases (because it is easier) barely defending. And Knights are stuck defending on Rook front instead of taking Bish bases.

Maybe we should start voting for presidents 

[Animl-AW]

Which sounds fine if one ignored the reasons and risk given.

Seems those who complain about late war planes favor the late war 109s. Many AC were invented to go against the uber 109s in WWII. The 109 was the beast of WWII, through the whole war.

No matter map size, you will always 1-1.5 sectors for alt. Maps too small you lose bombers that need many sectors to alt.  Fly a buff and tell us all about it.

2 countries fans are people willing to gamble and risk the work required that could be disastrous to this game. Risking work they don’t have to do. And once its done and fails you can’t just go back.

There is a difference between decades of experience on why some things don’t work and afraid to change. Yep, they don’t like gambling on a whim if a few. Welcome icon dar.

Some are very good at wanting to gamble with someone else's money. The failure is not their loss.

Some won’t listen or even remember the solid vetted reasons given, while they can’t go into any real convincing detail why it would work.

It’s not the planes its the pilot, every plane can be used for HOing and gang bangs.

Late war 51s and 190D are uber and bad to fly? why do the complainers fly late war 109s? When I see these fly a Spit1 I would take it more serious. In BoB the same complainers chose the side with 109s, the best fighter of the event, we could not pay players to fly Spit1s.

The planes called uber were designed to beat the uber 109s. Fly an 190A5 or A8, nope they don’t like it. What they really want is targets easiest for them in their choice of uber.

2 country maps would be great? Why is AvA empty?

The same players also grasp conspiracies in other subjects with a white knuckle death grip, ignoring all reasoning and logic. Again, cannot go into detail to support it. Not one ever pans out.

Only a hand full of the same players even talk about 2 countries, no where near a majority who aren’t asking for it.

The biggest sell in WT and IL-2 is graphics, the game play isn’t what I call great.

Again, every reason given will be forgotten as if they were never mentioned (ignored) and rewind happens. This is not unvetted conspiracies its buisness.

The game works just fine when its over critical mass. Promote it and fix the real problem. These ideas are bandaids.

[Eagler]

If the 109 refers to me, you must have missed I am not flying the k4 this tour...

109g2 is the newest plane I am in this month..more in the 109e than it though..

What's the newest plane you're in this tour?

Nothing will change the game play most complain about here except the options I and others have listed..but the older players should set an example of what to fly to make the room more fun for most..earlier versions of what they fly now..

Seriously what huge difference is there between a spit5 or spit16? K4 or g2? A5 or d9? Except for speed which wouldn't be needed if the majority made the switch..

Nothing to lose ..

Eagler

[DmonSlyr]

Which sounds fine if one ignored the reasons and risk given.

Seems those who complain about late war planes favor the late war 109s. Many AC were invented to go against the uber 109s in WWII. The 109 was the beast of WWII, through the whole war.

No matter map size, you will always 1-1.5 sectors for alt. Maps too small you lose bombers that need many sectors to alt.  Fly a buff and tell us all about it.

2 countries fans are people willing to gamble and risk the work required that could be disastrous to this game. Risking work they don’t have to do. And once its done and fails you can’t just go back.

There is a difference between decades of experience on why some things don’t work and afraid to change. Yep, they don’t like gambling on a whim if a few. Welcome icon dar.

Some are very good at wanting to gamble with someone else's money. The failure is not their loss.

Some won’t listen or even remember the solid vetted reasons given, while they can’t go into any real convincing detail why it would work.

It’s not the planes its the pilot, every plane can be used for HOing and gang bangs.

Late war 51s and 190D are uber and bad to fly? why do the complainers fly late war 109s? When I see these fly a Spit1 I would take it more serious. In BoB the same complainers chose the side with 109s, the best fighter of the event, we could not pay players to fly Spit1s.

The planes called uber were designed to beat the uber 109s. Fly an 190A5 or A8, nope they don’t like it. What they really want is targets easiest for them in their choice of uber.

2 country maps would be great? Why is AvA empty?

The same players also grasp conspiracies in other subjects with a white knuckle death grip, ignoring all reasoning and logic. Again, cannot go into detail to support it. Not one ever pans out.

Only a hand full of the same players even talk about 2 countries, no where near a majority who aren’t asking for it.

The biggest sell in WT and IL-2 is graphics, the game play isn’t what I call great.

Again, every reason given will be forgotten as if they were never mentioned (ignored) and rewind happens. This is not unvetted conspiracies its buisness.

The game works just fine when its over critical mass. Promote it and fix the real problem. These ideas are bandaids.

The K4 is very tough to aim, and doesn't dive well at all. The K4 has 1 30 that you have to get very close to hit, and it doesn't lead shoot great at all. This means you have to have very good ACM understanding to fly it effectively and actually get kills. The yak3 is a much tougher plane to shoot down and is easier to aim with the 20mm. The 190D has 500 20mm cannons for spray and pray, Can climb just as well, and can dive over 600mph so it can run from almost anything. 190s dont turn fight, so all they do is pick and run. Atleast you can get some good fights out of a 109. The G14 is still a 25  eny plane. It can turn okay. But its pretty slow. All it takes is one 190D to catch you, and then one spit16 to turn with you. This combo makes fighting extremely tough and those are the 2 most used planes in the game. And then you have the over usage of the temp which isnt fun to fight against at all really. Remember that fast BnZ planes are the most advantaged planes in the game and cannons make them even more advantaged. Planes that can extend and arent turn planes make for some of the most boring engagements and then to get double/triple teamed by them makes the game extremely tough. Bomber just gonna find something else to do than having to deal with a temp and 262 every damn time.

I think what Bolt said is pretty true. Some squads just refuse to defend or fight on the other side of the map when needed and it can be very irritating. The lack of defense is really hurting the opportunity for large battles. But getting ganged by 4 high yak3s and 190Ds when you are the only defender doesn't make it worth it after flying 10 minites to get there. So people are just gonna log and go find other things to do with their time.

[Animl-AW]

If the 109 refers to me, you must have missed I am not flying the k4 this tour...

109g2 is the newest plane I am in this month..more in the 109e than it though..

What's the newest plane you're in this tour?

Nothing will change the game play most complain about here except the options I and others have listed..but the older players should set an example of what to fly to make the room more fun for most..earlier versions of what they fly now..

Seriously what huge difference is there between a spit5 or spit16? K4 or g2? A5 or d9? Except for speed which wouldn't be needed if the majority made the switch..

Nothing to lose ..

Eagler

My point is not just K4, my point is those who complain fly 109s, including the 14. Match any plane against any 109 of the same year, 109 tends to come out on top in TnB. Most designs were to keep up with the 109s.

I fly the D9 for specific reasons. It depends on the pilot. Its not helping me in top scoring. Some will use it to run home, I’m not one of them. I will extend to place distance between me and 2-3 ubers on my 6, once I reach 1500-2000 separation, or they abort, I WILL flip back on you. I can also roll out of path of rounds on my 6. I sm constantly in 3-5 to 1 odds, fighting hordes.

I went to D9 to combat HOing Temps and Mossies, and go after buffs and base guns and tower without blowing my canons like in the A5 i can rarely kill a 109 with D9.

I no longer fly the 51, I like nose guns, and the situation I put myself in the 51 doesn’t fair well. It takes an experienced pilot to TnB in a 51. I can spot MARK4 and a cpl others in the 51 because they are using it as designed, beast in a 51. I know its him on my 6 because he won’t fire until within 400. Wing gun convergence. Yet I watch ZE destroy uber planes in a Brewster.

Some think the Temp should be perked, its not the plane, its what its used for. HO and run.
The 51 is a game seller, its not perked to give new players who want to fly a classic a chance to survive and retain them.

At least plane discussion is on-going, many variables and moving parts. But in the end, it depends on who is flying it.

When you switch sides and I fight you, I don’t want to go up against you in my 109D9 against your K4, or Violator in any 109  I will lose 90% of the time. Its the pilot, same with MARK4 in a 51, same with ZE in his Brew. Any other pilot in same planes I’m going after it. Its the pilot. I have beaten Skyrr. If he didn’t kill you in the first 2 passes his advantage dissipated. MARK4 we fought many long rounds, his advantage doesn’t dissipate. He’s a challenge to the end.

Again, planes are a 80 yr old discussion. We can both be right. Its the damn pilot in it. IMO

Its pilot defendant.