Author Topic: On perks (Read 524 times)

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #30 on:** March 27, 2002, 10:47:20 AM »

Dux, that really isn't a good idea either.

"Overall" rank is just that, it requires you to do every category to get a good overall rank. I just fly fighters, occasionally attack runs, almost never bombers and never GVs/PTs.

My rank/score is fairly low, and on top of that I don't fly enough time a month to get my rank very high.

So basically I'd be treated as a "newbie" with regards to perks and get a bunch of freebies, which I really don't need.

Gremlin, yes, you are right if you land you get 1.25x the amount of perk points you earned that flight. If you die, you don't lose any perk points you just don't get the multiplier for landing.

However, I gaurantee you that if you get 2 kills of SpitIXs in the 109F-4 you will get atleast 6 perk points if you don't land. I actually think it's higher than that. However, if you do the same in the P51D you will only get like 2 perk points because the P51D has a closer value to the SpitIX.

So while you may get some perk points for landing kills in a P51D, you will typically get 3 or 4 times that if you land those kills in a 109F-4 or 109G-2 (load gondolas onto either of those and they are deadly snapshooters).

My point isn't that you don't get points for flying planes with lower ENY values, it's that you don't get as many points as you could with higher ENY value planes.

qts, I believe P51D, La7, SpitIX, N1K2, 190D9 and 109G10 would be good low perk point planes. Between 3 and 6 points.
-SW

J_A_B · « **Reply #31 on:** March 27, 2002, 12:25:03 PM »

"I believe P51D, La7, SpitIX, N1K2, 190D9 and 109G10 would be good low perk point planes. Between 3 and 6 points. "

This is SW's quote but this reply isn't directed solely at him:

Since this idea would destroy any reason for my to pay for AH, how about also paying my subscription for me if you "perk nazis" get your way?

J_A_B

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #32 on:** March 27, 2002, 12:32:15 PM »

Well, I was suggesting this for qts' low perk value thingie.

Question JAB, would you give up on AH if it went to a RPS type deal too?

Just curious.
-SW

J_A_B · « **Reply #33 on:** March 27, 2002, 12:55:45 PM »

Yes I would SW. I never even considered getting a subscription to WarBirds (despite the fact that I really liked the game) solely because of the RPS.

I'm here for my own reasons. However, I'm not selfish. One of the reasons you see my advocating for AH to employ multiple arenas rather than just one MA, is you'd be able to use somewhat different settings in each of them. MY fun doesn't have to get in the way of YOUR fun. Everyone can be happy.

J_A_B

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #34 on:** March 27, 2002, 01:04:36 PM »

I agree, but we all know that seperate arenas divide things up and most will go to one place while some will go to another and still some insist on getting into the overcrowded arena.... because their buds are in there or whatever.. I dunno.

But as we get more early war planes, somethings gonna have to be done about these late '44-'45 planes. Maybe make them only flyable from rear fields (ala Lazs' idea) or to seperate them into individual arenas (early, mid, late) or to perk the late war rides while leaving the early and mid rides free.

Not my game, I dunno what the answer is. While you may like late war planes, there's another guy who likes the early war planes.

When you've got an arena full of late war monsters capable of dealing death by snapshot and gettin' the hell outta dodge, and you're in a early war Ki-43... well somein's gotta give.

What it is, I dunno. But it's hardly fair for someone in a Ki-43 (two 7.92MGs... sweet jebus, gonna tickle someone to death?) to be forced to fly in an arena full of untamed late war rides.

We all know how people think, there's only a handful of simmers in AH... they are the ones who go for the plane they like or planes they like despite what everyone else is flying.... while the rest of the players are simply gamers. The planes don't matter, they'd fly any plane that gives them any advantage.

I dunno, but somein's gonna give sometime soon.
-SW

J_A_B · « **Reply #35 on:** March 27, 2002, 01:18:11 PM »

Yeah, it's not an easy situation to deal with. There isn't any single flawless solution. As you point out, the "multiple MA" concept isn't perfect, although with proper number restrictions I feel such a system could work, at least better than what we have right now.

One problem is right now AH doesn't have the player base to support more than a single second MA. If it was to open a second MA (and presumably provide a smaller limit on the current MA), which planeset would you recommend for it? It'd be a waste to have it set up exactly the same as the current MA.

Or perhaps someone can think of something better. Lets try to get some useful discussion out of this thread

J_A_B

Swoop · « **Reply #36 on:** March 27, 2002, 01:18:59 PM »

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49311

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #37 on:** March 27, 2002, 01:26:12 PM »

I saw that thread Swoop. Honestly, I think a system like that could work.

But just perk the late '44-'45 planes. People can still reasonably fight an A6M2 versus a 190A5. Would you want to? Prolly not.

However, this is not something everyone would agree with.

What plane set would I use in the 2nd arena? Well shoot, this is pretty easy (for me anyway)... I'd leave the current MA with the early war planes unperked ('40-mid '43) and then take the other planes (mid '43- '45) and place them in the second arena. All fantasy planes, or rare planes would be perked in the '43-'45 arena. Jets, Shinden, F4U-4, P51H, P47M- all perks. Spit14, Tempest would be within their realm in a late war arena.. so I don't think perking them would make sense.

For the '40-mid '43 arena, perk the planes with more dominating performance. What are they? I dunno, I've never played in an arena with just '40-'43 planes.

This is just my opinion of course, but this would essentially divide the players.

However, if there was a way to create a portal, then maybe a system with more than one arena would work. What I mean is, all arenas are on the same map but there's two seperate wars going on. I think someone else had this idea before. Maybe it was Lazs, or even you JAB, can't remember.

Maybe this isn't feasible with today's tech.. maybe in a couple of years. Dunno really, but there's gotta be a good way of doing it fairly.
-SW

J_A_B · « **Reply #38 on:** March 27, 2002, 01:46:29 PM »

"However, if there was a way to create a portal, then maybe a system with more than one arena would work. What I mean is, all arenas are on the same map but there's two seperate wars going on. "

Hmm....we have 512 x 512 arenas on thw way. 4 times the size of what we have now....

I have an idea sort of like Lazs' idea haven't thought it over, not thinking of feasability, just total brainstorming going on:

Divide this new map into 4 areas. Each area could have its own planeset--one arena with ALL propeller planes free, one set up with current free MA planes free, one with up to '43 free, and the last section with only '41 planes free. Essentially you'd have 4 MA's without dividing the player base. The perk system would exist solely to limit a very few aircraft which would dominate in their own planeset area (like the 262). Although I'd use YEAR as a rough indicator of where to put a given plane, I'd divide them up by abilities and not be too strict with the year number (like a 1945 C-hog would be allowed in the 1944 section but maybe perked like it currently is or maybe free, but a 1944 Spit14 would probably stay restricted to the late-war area (free there of course).

So people who like a certain planeset would never find "their" area totally over-run, each country would need an un-capturable (and well-protected by flak) home base for each country. People like me could always fly their preferred airplane, but in order to win the map reset, you'd have to fight in all 4 areas so all 4 areas would see use. So if say the 1944 section was "won", there'd still be a fight there but the main action would shift elsewhere (sort of like how the A1 furballers on NDISLES have their fun without really impacting the rest of the map). Reset goals would have to change somewhat, perhaps to have a country reduced to only having its 4 "home" airfields. Resets would obviously be very tough to accomplish and would need a LOT of coordination--so increase the bonus for winning

Further modification could be made; this is just a brainstorm.

Oh, and provide 40K mountains or UFO's or something between the 4 areas to prevent someone from taking a TEMP into the 1941 side

How's that sound?

J_A_B

Orko · « **Reply #39 on:** March 27, 2002, 05:27:58 PM »

That sounds GREAT , JAB.
I think I have read before something like that.
This would be the best balance with RPS and perks.
But I really doubt that HT will implement such a revolutionary solution.
But got my vote though.

HFMudd · « **Reply #40 on:** March 27, 2002, 05:56:56 PM »

Let me toss out a modification to JAB idea that does away with the 40K mountains:

Make the MA an arena that is, say 256 East-West by 1024 North-South. Divide this in the North-South direction into four 256x256 area. In the Southermost section only 1941 and earlier planes are available, 1943 and earlier in the next, 1944 and ealier in the next and 1945 and earlier fall into the northern section. Each of the sections is divided from each other by a mountain range in the 15K range. No other restrictions and no UFO's on patrol.

If someone really wants to climb into a LA-7 and fly all the way to the 1941 arena just to hunt Spit I's then they can go for it. They will "earn" this by the time spent flying.

On the other hand, if someone wants to up a Spit I and try to mine perks hunting 262s, they can do just like they always have been able to by starting out in the 1945 area.

The only problem I can really think of with this is that it might be hard to balance out the Bishop/Rook/Knight starting position in each of the areas.

I'm not really familiar with the map editing capablities and restrictions but might we not be able to use existing maps for this simply by duplicating them four times and putting a mountain range between?

J_A_B · « **Reply #41 on:** March 27, 2002, 07:59:07 PM »

I thought some more about this little brainstorm idea I had (again thanks to Lazs for the inspiration)..

512 x 512 maps might not currently be necessary; diving a 256 square map into 4 sections should work--the population density would still be reduced by more efficiently using the available space (less of the map would be sitting empty).

To further balance out the population and keep massive 50-plane gangfests from developing (and to help reduce the horrible lag caused by such congestion) each base would have its own PLAYER LIMIT--if too many people were in the area of said base, no new planes could take off from there. AirWarrior used this sort of system to great effect.

Each of the separate "areas" could be "won" separately, but the entire map would not reset until all 4 sections had been "won". A "won" area would stay "won" until the other 3 were also "won". Base capture would not be disabled in an area where the "winner" was already determined (so a country in that area could make a comeback from 1 base), but this would not do anything to help them "win" the rest of the war. A small perk bonus could be awarded for winning an individual area. Each country would have an un-capturable MAIN airfield in each "area" well-protected by flak (presumable this airfield would be near several factories and depots which would also have flak); this would allow each "area" to constantly remain active. The ZONE limit for a main airfield should also be higher than for other airfields.

The winner of the RESET would be determined by who wins the most areas. Should there be a tie (which would probably happen a lot), then the winner would be the country with the most bases in its posession. If this was also a TIE there would not be a reset until one of the TIE countries managed to achieve an extra base. The perk award for winning the RESET would be larger than the award for merely winning an individual area.

Country start locations--each country would start in a random location in each of the 4 mini-areas; in addition each of the mini-areas themselves would randomly change positions. So one week the "early war Bish" might be in the "north section, left position" then a week later it might be in "west section, lower position". This means you could use the same map for a long time without fighting in the same location.

The RADIO would need to be re-worked. CH1 and CH2 would only broadcast to people in your opwn "area". Two new channels would be created (lets call them 100 and 200). "100" would broadcast to EVERYONE in the game who was tuned to it (sort of like CH1 currently is); however you would not have this channel tuned by default. Channel "200" would do the same, but it would be country-specific.

To divide up the areas several options are possible. You could have the "big mountains". Or those damn beer-stealing UFO's could start to attack people (my favorite). Or, for the realism-oriented, you could just slop a bunch of long-range, super-powerful super-accurate undestroyable flak guns in this "no man's land". Either way, I'd have the boundry of "no man's land" drawn on the clipboard map so people didn't accidentally fly into it. Perhaps, one day, this "no man's land" could be flushed out into a "no plane area" with lots of GV and INF action.

Obviously this system is not currently possible in AH because the game doesn't support the necessary settings. But AH is always growing and HTC is known to incorporate good ideas. Anyone else have their own ideas?

J_A_B