Combat theatre..a failure??

[Saurdaukar]

Why are the same people consistantly the ones dishing out the most toejam?  Who exactly do you think you are?  Unless youre paying more than what the rest of us are - $15 US, please keep your comments in the "contructive" category - otherwise its a waste of both your time and ours.

[Kieran]

But Saur, who gets to determine what is constructive?

The proposal as stated was untenable, as has been proven by another sim. To state the MA is becoming stale flies in the face of the fact the numbers are growing. The CT numbers seem stable. Which arena appears to be serving the people what they want? Which arena needs to be changed to draw more people?

The answer is obvious, isn't it?

I don't happen to be in the "The CT is a failure" crowd. I think it is fun and serves its purpose. What I don't support for one second is forcing anyone to fly there, or any arena like it, that doesn't want to. If that is toejam, then yeah, I will keep saying it. I'm just a member like you, that's who I am.

"Constructive" doesn't mean I have to agree with you. In fact, I will always be an outspoken advocate of not forcing others to do as you would have them, unless the structure of the event is designed from the outset to do so (such as snapshots, scenarios, and TODs). The sim has enough desktop Napoleans, no reason to give them real power.

[lazs2]

frustrating eh kieran?

The CT is not more realistic than the MA it just has some features that a few dozen people can't live without.   Those features come at the expense of action and gameplay and variety and parity sooo.....

The rest stay away.   There can be pockets of realism, good gameply, parity and variety in the CT but they are rare and all those things are free and assured in the MA at allmost all times.

The CT does serve a purpose... it provides a place for those who want axis vs allied to go and screw up an arena without affecting the rest of us.   For that I am grateful as I am sure HTC is.   In that respect the CT is a resounding success.   Until.... some socialist comes in here and claims that we need to shut down the MA for our own good.
lazs

[Yeager]

Having a CT is better than not having one.  Some of you people need to get squeak slapped.  Shut up already.

Relax, its just a game.

[Rude]

I wish the MA had some of the CT terrains....oh.....sorry..... .carry on.

[Killjoy2]

Based on the success of the Sports Illustrated "Swim Suit Edition" I suggest that HTC sponsor a CT Bikini Squad.  

Perhaps pink FW's, special squad logo's (collect them all) and a first class lounge in the towers. With the new VOX feature we could chat up the birds.

[hblair]

Originally posted by Toad
.... rather than possibly making a few changes to the CT to ATTRACT them to it.

Or am I way off base here? Perhaps there are some more folks.. in good numbers.. that might find the CT much more attractive if it offered a few more MA features?

Nah, I must be crazy... sorry to interrupt.

But that's been done. There was a lot of effort put into pulling the Main arena crowd into the CT a month or so ago. I scoured the CT bulletin board looking for the most desired things that pilots wanted in the CT. There were 4 items that were very popular among these pilots.


1. Two sided Axis vs. Allies

2. Reduced radar.
(but not greatly reduced) enough to easily find a fight, but not so much that you can see the enemy taking off from a rear field. We found the compromise to be 40 miles bar radar range, 10 miles on dot radar.

3. Shorter icons.
 We have a choice of short (3.0) or long (6.0) range. We set icons to short range

4. New terrains.
I drew up what I needed for this setup, sent it to Nuttz, and he had Perdonia finished in one week. Which BTW is a first class terrain with all MA-like strategy elements, GV spawn points, etc. It is actually a MA terrain with two sides. Excellent tiles, immersive.

These 4 things are what people have been clamoring for for a long while. Sure, there are some of those that some people don't care for, but they are a compromise between the historical/realism crowd and the MA gameplay aspect.
The first week I ran this, we kept 50-70 in the CT during prime time US time. It was looking up for the CT. We were happy.

Here's that setup.

A few weeks later it ran and it was back to the 15-30 pilots. Towards the end of that week it just fell off.

The problem? The problem IMO is you have to have an arena primed with 40 or more pilots in order to attract even more pilots. Most pilots think the CT is empty with 20 pilots in it. They won't log in. If there are 40 pilots in the CT, more pilots tend to want to fly there. If there are 60 pilots in the arena, well, even more are likely to fly there. It's kind of like a snowball effect. I believe this is the biggest problem I ran into with the Perdonia setup.

Another thing is people just tend to like the main arena. Everything goes in the main arena, this is very appealing to a lot of pilots. Many pilots have no reason to click on "Combat Theater" if they were having a blast in the main arena with their squad the night before. Therefore some pilots are simply never going to fly in the CT. That is a factor we have to deal with too.

Their is a 128X128 terrain that will run in the CT this friday. It is small and has action everywhere (Nuttz built this beauty). The CT team hopes the easy to find action will bring more people in. I am off the CT staff for now but I hope they find the formula that will work.

Believe me it's not as simple as people make it out to be.

[hblair]

Originally posted by lazs2
The CT is not more realistic than the MA it just has some features that a few dozen people can't live without.   Those features come at the expense of action and gameplay and variety and parity sooo.....

The rest stay away.   There can be pockets of realism, good gameply, parity and variety in the CT but they are rare and all those things are free and assured in the MA at allmost all times.

The CT does serve a purpose... it provides a place for those who want axis vs allied to go and screw up an arena without affecting the rest of us.   For that I am grateful as I am sure HTC is.   In that respect the CT is a resounding success.   Until.... some socialist comes in here and claims that we need to shut down the MA for our own good.
lazs

Then you got old fellas like lazs who should be off fishing somewhere, but instead they're sitting at home on their PC. Doing what? contributing anything? helping?
No.
Just the usual trolling guys half his age, trying to piss em off, getting reactions. Don't you feel so much better than us lazs? Aren't you just a little old for this stuff?
Go take your geritol old fart.

[Toad]

Originally posted by hblair


But that's been done....  I scoured the CT bulletin board looking for the most desired things that pilots wanted in the CT.

Respectfully, I disagree.

What you did was essentially ask your CURRENT client base (the folks that already play in the CT) what they "most desired".

Obviously, that current client base is relatively small, about the size of the client base using the TA. My point is simply that perhaps you didn't look in the right place for your answers.

As I posted a while ago (I think in the CT forum), if you are truly looking to induce more players to switch from the MA to the CT, I think you will have to make the MA intially[/i] much more like the MA and introduce future changes slowly and progressively.

This is all my opinion, of course, but here's what I see in a nutshell:

1. The CT was created to serve as a place where AH players themselves could actually implement their "dream" arena setup within the confines of the game code.

2. Various ideas and formats have been tried, none of which ever drew much interest from more than about 5-10% of the player base on any given night. (Comparing MA attendance vs CT attendance)

3. This percentage of participation is apparently insufficient to the point that it draws appeals from the CT supporters, similar to the one that started this thread, to "force" other players into the CT environment.

4. Rarely, if ever, does one see a CT "proponent" say:

"Yah know what guys? Maybe what the few of us like is nowhere near what the vast majority of the player base desires. Maybe, if we TRULY want more participation, we should make a few changes back towards the MA environment and see what happens. Maybe we should try:

• Axis V Allied
• New terrains

and just leave the rest of the stuff totally the same as the MA.

Then let's see if people come over. If they do, THEN maybe we could just add ONE thing at a time, like "shorter radar" and see if the numbers hold up for a few weeks. Maybe then we could find something that a significant number of players would support."

...But that never happens. There seems to be some inviolate CT characteristics that are not open to change or even much discussion. Perhaps these are the things that keep the majority of the players in the MA?

Of course, I recall in one CT thread a guy that made the point that he didn't want MORE players in the CT. He thought about 30-40 players was ideal. So you're never going to please everyone are you?

My bottom line? The CT was given to those who wanted "something different" to use as they see fit to implement their ideas and suggestions. The idea that ANYONE should be FORCED into the CT from the MA is simply ridiculous and, to me, somewhat offensive.

The CT crowd has its own sandbox now. If the rest of the kids in the schoolyard don't see the brilliance of its sandcastle architecture there's two possibilities:

The rest of the kids are simplistic morons that really don't understand "fun" (the CT "innate superiority" elitism argument)

or

The CT really isn't as good a "game" as the MA (the "just look at the numbers" argument).

Pay your money and take your choice... please, can we just drop the "FORCE 'em" threads.   (I know YOU aren't in the "force" camp, HB)

[hblair]

Originally posted by Toad

4. Rarely, if ever, does one see a CT "proponent" say:

"Yah know what guys? Maybe what the few of us like is nowhere near what the vast majority of the player base desires. Maybe, if we TRULY want more participation, we should make a few changes back towards the MA environment and see what happens. Maybe we should try:

• Axis V Allied
• New terrains

and just leave the rest of the stuff totally the same as the MA.

Then let's see if people come over. If they do, THEN maybe we could just add ONE thing at a time, like "shorter radar" and see if the numbers hold up for a few weeks. Maybe then we could find something that a significant number of players would support."

...But that never happens. There seems to be some inviolate CT characteristics that are not open to change or even much discussion. Perhaps these are the things that keep the majority of the players in the MA?

[/B]

With the exception of the radar range being at 40 miles, which BTW extends past the closest enemy fields, you can't tell any difference looking at CT bar radar vs. MA bar radar upon entering the arena. It shows up the furballs well. It is very easy to find a fight with 20-30 (or more) pilots in the arena.

The only other thing that is noticably different is the short icons. I personally have heard no criticism of this while in the CT, even when there was 70 ppl in there.

Do you think if we ran this setup again with long icons and unlimited radar the CT would fill up?

[Arfann]

Ok, now stay with me on this. If all the folks that said "I would fly in the CT if the numbers were higher" would fly in the CT, the #'s would, by definition, be higher. And as the #'s got higher the lemmings would notice and before you know it the MA AtTiTuDe would prevail and spoil it for the rest of us elitist bastages.

Nevermind

GronK

[Eagler]

there are always more ppl in the "easy" rooms vs the "realistic" rooms in a game ... any game.

I say make MA even easier (no cockpit view, reduced FM) and CT even harder (smaller maps with very limited dar) - separate the men from the boys

[Toad]

The CT isn't "my baby", so I have no "ownership" feelings...

... and the MA/TOD/Scenario stuff fills up my dance card to the point that I don't have enough free time to participate in all the AH activities I'd actually like to do.

So, that being said....

If I were king, yeah, I'd put in an Axis V Allied plane set and use the MA maps and the new CT maps in a continuing rotation. In other words, a CT that was the same as the present MA except for Axis v Allied planesets and some additional "new" maps.

Then I'd announce the changes far and wide, loud and clear in the forums, on the banners and in the MA (well, muted a bit in there )

Then I'd put my feet up on the desk and not make any changes for about 3 weeks.

If no one came, I'd be forced to consider that perhaps Axis V Allied or the new maps themselves were the problem and I'd eliminate one of those and try again.

If LOTS of people came, then I'd add one thing... radar or whatever.. and again wait and see.

But that's just me and I'm real patient.

The problem you guys are trying to work through is that you've made a lot of changes and few people showed up. There's so many different things that you really don't know why people aren't coming in droves. Might be one thing, might be two things might be the combination of lots of things. So all is speculation and while folks speculate, the arena still languishes with respect to numbers.

As I said, though, it really isn't my concern... until somebody makes the routine "Let's MAKE 'em play OUR way!" post.  

[Kieran]

I think Toad makes a lot of sense. Whether or not you agree with the particular suggestion forwarded, the concept is sound. Sending folks from one extreme to another is jarring, whether we admit it or not. A gradual introduction might not be bad.

I like CT because it is two-sided, and you are faced with roughly historical opponents. I like the fact it is smaller. I like the atmosphere, and don't miss all the open channel nonsense. It doesn't have to rival the MA to be a success, contrary to popular opinion.

That said, what's wrong with generic Axis vs Allies? Rolling plane set? Rolling maps? Sure, not totally historic, but you are starting down the path, and at least eliminate the Spit vs. Mustang fights. These are compromises that might make the CT more palatable for folks, if indeed that is a pressing need.

Don't ignore the success of the MA; people keep talking about how they want an alternative to the MA, yet they log right back into it every night. The alternative is there, it's what people asked for. It is all too obvious this alone won't bring the people in until some concessions are made- just like the *gasp* MA the people so loathe.

[Seeker]

makes sense to me.