Author Topic: Name change for CT? (Read 3301 times)

Squire · « **Reply #45 on:** June 23, 2002, 04:38:02 PM »

How about "BT" for Better Theater?

lazs2 · « **Reply #46 on:** June 24, 2002, 09:10:18 AM »

blindman... my idea for an arena has nothing to do with allied vs axis so would not fit in here. If you must have allied vs axis then I suppose if you want enough people you will have to go scripted. The joy of being up against huge odds in ac or numbers superiority wears thin quickly in a 24/7 arena as does (IMO) the lack of variety such an arena forces. I mean.. fight one 109 with one spit and you've just fought all the combinations for about 3/4 of the setups available in an allied vs axis arena. you can circumvent some of the sameness by say, making everyone half blind but... when you finally do get into the fight it is the same one. At least a scripted scenario and it's "goals"makes for some action and... numbers.

For the MA I would like to see an area in that huge new map they have where early war planes could fly unmolested by later planes. I would prefer some canyons near the ocean. Maybe later another area for perk and late war planes only.

Still... for now, I see nothing wrong with "allied vs axis arena" for a name. It is descriptive and would attract people of that ilk.
lazs

Dennis · « **Reply #47 on:** June 24, 2002, 02:50:41 PM »

How about

The Squad Arena.

Splash1

Red Tail 444 · « **Reply #48 on:** June 24, 2002, 03:30:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
Still... for now, I see nothing wrong with "allied vs axis arena" for a name.

As long as allied vs axis isint limited to ETO. If that's the case, that large sucking sound you hear will be the USN / IJN folks (points to self) rtb'ing back to the Furball Arena

Gainsie

lazs2 · « **Reply #49 on:** June 25, 2002, 08:25:56 AM »

red tail... allied vs axis would mean just that but... face it... 90% of the guys who like allied vs axis want only to fly spits or are 109/190 guys that want to compete with (cough) less variety of enemies. maybe a few pee 51 guys...They are all very, very eto centric. allied vs axis has very lttle opportunity for parity so.. you have to either be the windshield or the bug... most just wait till they are the windshield or... switch sides in order to be the windshield. The more people you attract... they more this happens since they are not so "dedicated" to make things work.

To stop that... you need to script things in an allied vs axis setup so that the numbers and such work out to some semblence of parity. with parity you get fun and with fun you get players.
lazs

Squire · « **Reply #50 on:** June 25, 2002, 11:18:59 AM »

We have TODs for all this strict mission stuff. Thats what they are there for. Please dont turn the CT into that.

We just want a "WW2ish" arena that we can call home. Dont try and turn it into a 24/7 Scenario. It wont work.

Let the participants decide the level of involvement they want themselves, dont impose it.

Regards.

Oldman731 · « **Reply #51 on:** June 25, 2002, 11:32:13 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
red tail... allied vs axis would mean just that but... face it... 90% of the guys who like allied vs axis want only to fly spits or are 109/190 guys that want to compete with (cough) less variety of enemies. maybe a few pee 51 guys...They are all very, very eto centric. allied vs axis has very lttle opportunity for parity so..

I have heard this before, but because it is so contrary to my experience, I feel compelled to ask:
- what makes you think that A v. A must always be one-sided?
- what makes you think that 90% of A v. A allied fliers want to fly spits?
- where is the logic of the claim that the Luftweenies want to fly against inferior planes, especially if the Allies are all supposed to be spitdweebs?

- oldman

HFMudd · « **Reply #52 on:** June 25, 2002, 12:36:03 PM »

Actually Oldman, I think the popularity of the Tunisia terrain and planeset gives some small validity to Lazs contention.

What I fail to understand though, is why Lazs considers this to be such a bad thing.

Pongo · « **Reply #53 on:** June 25, 2002, 03:29:33 PM »

I like the idea of a mission theater..
I like the idea of introducing new planes in the CT for a week..

Virage · « **Reply #54 on:** June 27, 2002, 03:37:09 PM »

Add my vote to the Mission Room idea.

lazs2 · « **Reply #55 on:** June 29, 2002, 10:23:05 AM »

"I have heard this before, but because it is so contrary to my experience, I feel compelled to ask:
- what makes you think that A v. A must always be one-sided?
- what makes you think that 90% of A v. A allied fliers want to fly spits?
- where is the logic of the claim that the Luftweenies want to fly against inferior planes, especially if the Allies are all supposed to be spitdweebs?

- oldman"

wow... kinda read a lot into what i said there eh oldguy?
I don't think allied vs axis is allways one sided... just about 90% of the time but I mean... How many BOB setups can you run till you puke?

Where did I say that 90% of allied guys wanna flyu spits? I think 90% want eto and want to fly spits 51's or maybe a 38 or two. Perhaps it is you who is thinking that?

luftweenies like to fly against inferior planes?? LOL... of course they do! they love when the 190 comes out and they can fly against spit 5's... they want planes that were rare as hell like the D9 ... They want every field mod that was ever thought of and they LOVE any slice of history where they can have the advantage even if it never existed. They squeal like pigs if you suggest anything that adds parity like a 51A durring their baby seal clubbing '42 period... ok to have D9's but the 51a was not important enough?

hfmudd... I only consider it a bad thing so far as it applies to me. I have no interest in recreating the give and take and lopsidedness of WWII. I read the book and I know how it comes out. I am not a re enactor and I don't ever think I am a WWII pilot. I want action and parity and variety with WWII weapons. Allied vs axis is the opposite of that for me.

Most players are opportuninsts... if you can attract a lot of players to an allied vs axis arena..... It get's ugly fast... No more "good guys/elite club" no, everyone grabs whatever side has the current uber ride and steamrollers over the other. The numbers become lopsided and the tempers short. Say "it won't happen here" all you want but online sim history mocks you.. not me.
lazs

NUTTZ · « **Reply #56 on:** June 29, 2002, 12:55:17 PM »

I agree on some points and disagree on others
I disagree that 90% fly spitties,109's190's and ponies. Personally I don't fly any of those. Although I understand Laz's point about limits to axis OR allied. Since I enjoy flying plane types from both Axis and Allied, Limiting myself to one side or the other is a trade off I'm willing to accept in return for a more "historical" atmosphere.
The problem arises when you get STUCK constantly on ONE side threw the whole tour trying to balance the numbers. This leaves Many people with NO choice of axis or allied ( IMO, the numbers always favor the Allied by a huge numbers gap) leaving the Axis as an underdog most of the time. Now for some that love flying the Axis side this is not a problem. but for people that like to Mix it up, this causes monotany,stagnation,frustration, and eventually leave the CT and never come back ( me being one of these). A few weeks ago it was 40 something to 5, Now haw can you have fun in that?

As far as HiTech's suggestion about a mission theater, maybe it would work maybe not, it's his ball, he can do what he wants. We have senerios,TOD's,KOTH,WW, I'm not sure changing the CT to this type would fill the numbers, although i do agree something nees to be changed.

Laz meantions a "script" Hitech meantions "Missions" Both are scripts. So IF you combine these you have the "rolling planset".

Another note, Most people are so hypocritical when it comes to the dreaded word "SCORES". IMO we need the score page and scores whether you look at them or could give a rats bellybutton about them, they are needed. It's like watching a football game and not keeping score. Then why watch?

Don't agree, look at the frame 3 for TOD not being posted. Why fly a TOD if your not posting who won?

"IF" a script is needed you need a starting point AND an ending point. Parity? A rolling planeset would Help this, but not fill it in the capacity of the MA where every plane for 3 sides is available to all. But It would be a sart in the right direction (IMO)

I like the Axis Vs. Allied, but there is always the issues at what point do you cut off the planeset? One side will always have the "lovely end of the stick" IMO a scripted rolling planeset, everyone gets the good and the bad on an even keel.

There would be those that would log on and unfortunately always log on the time when they are the underdog in the planeset era, but then again since this is 24/7 i'm sure it would balance itself out. I'm also sure if HiTech wants to turn it into some sort of mission theater you would more likely miss the boat when signing on, than have a ride, And waiting for the boat would be unacceptable. I'm not dissing the Idea, just pointing out it will need alot of work. Maybe a combination of the two, a hybrid.

My thought for the CT may be Moot since I don't fly in there anymore, Nor do many that where so gungho at it's birth. We all have our personal reasons why we do or don't fly the CT.

Good maps don't insure the masses will fly the CT, Nor does the good set-ups. It's a right combination that sparks, and the numbers come. I don't think it's a parity issue, Check out any senerio the numbers don't lie and That has less parity than any arena. I think we are bouncing all around the answer but not hitting what the CT arena trully needs. Do I have the answers? NO. do i have suggestions? Sure.
90% of AH people will never read this, 9 % will look and see it's to long a read and pass threw it. .5% will post a flame reply just to disagree for no reason other than to start a confrontation. .25% will read it and not post anything. .25% will post a reasonable reply to add the the conversation hoping to get to a conclusion and add to helping the "CT"

AKNuttz
(Artist formerly known as NUTTZ)

As far as

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
red tail... allied vs axis would mean just that but... face it... 90% of the guys who like allied vs axis want only to fly spits or are 109/190 guys that want to compete with (cough) less variety of enemies. maybe a few pee 51 guys...They are all very, very eto centric. allied vs axis has very lttle opportunity for parity so.. you have to either be the windshield or the bug... most just wait till they are the windshield or... switch sides in order to be the windshield. The more people you attract... they more this happens since they are not so "dedicated" to make things work.

To stop that... you need to script things in an allied vs axis setup so that the numbers and such work out to some semblence of parity. with parity you get fun and with fun you get players.
lazs

eskimo2 · « **Reply #57 on:** June 29, 2002, 01:36:21 PM »

%@&
(Artist formerly known as NUTTZ)
Are you changing your name to a symbol too?

Great post NUTTZ!

I agree.

I do think the lack of score in the CT may be hurting it a tad, but remember, the text buffer is also a form of score, as is the greeness of the map!

Lots of ideas are worth trying in the CT. This is one of them.

eskimo

brady · « **Reply #58 on:** June 29, 2002, 05:32:39 PM »

I do not like the mishion idea for the CT.I prefer the existing format to that of the mishion type.

I do think a name change would be a great Idea, and that the name should have Areana in it somewhere.

Joc · « **Reply #59 on:** July 04, 2002, 03:51:09 AM »

I think either 'WW2 Arena' or 'WW2 Historical Arena' would bring more guys in.Ditch this Theater crap.