Author Topic: Pongo - Equalized Numbers Discussion (Read 1871 times)

Toad · « **Reply #120 on:** June 12, 2002, 05:15:06 AM »

OK, Ripley.

How many bases left or what percentage?

The new 512x512 map the AK's made has something like 70+ bases per side.

How's your plan work in that environment? I believe all future maps will be at least this size as well so we can expect this to become the "standard" I think.

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #121 on:** June 12, 2002, 07:24:33 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Why don't you just tell me TWO of the ways you are going to make being reset "fun" for the losing country.

I already did, just check some post above.

MrRiplEy[H] · « **Reply #122 on:** June 12, 2002, 08:24:45 AM »

Toad I believe those 5 last fields would be enough. I don't think they all could be bombed down and/or capped totally.

That would enable the losing side to remain fighting untill the bitter end.

lazs2 · « **Reply #123 on:** June 12, 2002, 08:36:59 AM »

well.... I belive that what is being missed here is that there are two distinct types of people who care about "numbers". No One likes to be gangbanged as a steady diet but..

One type of simmer cares not a whit about overall numbers or "winning the (lol) war" ... they care about local numbers. wheather there is a field to take off from or go to where the numbers are pretty even.

The other type cares only for "overall numbers" they are heavily into "winning the (lol) war". Any percieved unballance when they come on is considered poor gameplay and "unfair".

And never the two shall meet and agree.

ripley.... I think that one thing you and I do agree on tho is that the war shuld be over when there is more than one field left. Not the way it is now. I have allways advocated this.. It would make "being caugt behind nme lines at reset" less likely and less gamey and it would allow for good fights all the way up till the "surrender". It would "force" other countries to fight each other IF..... they wanted to (cough) win the war and not let the other country have it.
lazs

MrRiplEy[H] · « **Reply #124 on:** June 12, 2002, 08:43:05 AM »

The other type cares only for "overall numbers" they are heavily into "winning the (lol) war". Any percieved unballance when they come on is considered poor gameplay and "unfair".

I think you go a bit to extremes there.. At least what I've been after all this time is to prevent a crazy mismatch in numbers like constant 2:1 or worse (for players of a certain timezone.)

Wouldn't you say the situation 3 days ago when I last played was unfair with 47 bish 27 knights and 8 rooks? lol.

lazs2 · « **Reply #125 on:** June 12, 2002, 08:51:41 AM »

rip.... it would't be "unfair" to me if....

I were a rook and there were a rook and a knight field close to each other and the knights were sending over say... 10 guys at a time and I had 7 other rooks to "defend"... No.... not unfair.... simply a great time online.

And that is my point. I care only about local conditions. I would reiterate tho that the way the "war is won" sucks. if the hammered country "surrendered" when it was down to 2-3 fields then there would allways, or allmost allways, be good gameplay even at the endgame portion. It still wouldn't help out the gamers who think "winning the war" is important.
lazs

MrRiplEy[H] · « **Reply #126 on:** June 12, 2002, 09:03:27 AM »

What if the situation was (and it mostly is) that you're there with 7 of your friends and your fields are hit elsewhere by knights so 2-3 of your friends go there to defend at 10:1 odds.

You're left with 4 of your friends to fight the 30+ bishops who are attacking you with high-altitude typhoon strikes. One of your friends sits on a capped field blasting away in osty. IMO that's not a playable scenario by any means.

But I guess it can still be fun if a player fights as I think you do, just diving to the first furball with no intention to even try to fly out of there alive.

Toad · « **Reply #127 on:** June 12, 2002, 10:38:55 AM »

Mandoble, I'll assume you're talking about this post.. the one above where you posted two ideas?

Quote

Originally posted by MANDOBLE
1 - Surrender poll.

OK, how do you envision this working? If it is voluntary, I have no problem with the theory, I just like to hear the plan.

How will you counter people "surrendering" just to cause a map change? Even if many people are on having "fun" on that map? I'd think a minority of the players actually online could accomplish this, right?

A Country = 100 B Country = 100 C Country = 99. If 50 folks in country C decide to switch maps while the other 249 are having the most exciting times of their online career, how do you stop the "surrender"?

Additionally, what about guys like Laz? He's still having fun as long as the "fight is on"? Does his fun not count?

Quote

Originally posted by MANDOBLE
2 - With some criteria (only 3 bases left?), activating a 3D zone in the space near a map margin where the obliterated country may spawn its planes already airborne (simulating out-of-the-map reinforcements?).

How does this one work fairly then?

Assume Side A, Side B and Side C all start out at 7 PM EDT (US Primetime) with 150 players each. The battle rages all night long with numbers staying fairly close.

Nonetheless, about 10 PM Side A has gained the upper hand, mainly because Dweebs like Toad and all his ilk won't listen to the self-appointed "generals" in the losing country. Guys like Laz just keep furballing as fields are lost to the dreaded enemy.

OK, the losing side is down to 3 fields. They still have equal numbers, although all sides are down to 100 players now.

So, the losing side suddenly gets the "airborne start" enabled, even though they are NOT outnumbered?

And even though Side A, through brilliant gameplay, superior generalship and all that other real important stuff, has waged a near perfect "war" they must now overcome this new advantage given to the losing side which waged a terrible war with poor strategy, failure to cooperate and rebellion against the "generals"?

That's what you want? That increases everyone's enjoyment?

Please do explain.

crowMAW · « **Reply #128 on:** June 12, 2002, 11:02:33 AM »

Well, here are some thoughts. They may have been brought up already, I certianly didn't read all threads relating to this subject previously...but here they are anyway:

1) A major potential drawback for the new SuperMaps (AK Pizza and the like) will be getting down to 1 base for the reset. Resets may take a very long time to acheive. Personally, I like the variety of maps, and would rather not be stuck on one map for months at a time. To help this situation and the numbers problem, the reset could be based on one country owning a majority of the entire map's bases. Whether that is 51% or 66% or 75% could be determined by a pole similar to the one's that HTC performs at login on occasion. I know I'd vote for 51%. Making resets easier may cheapen the victory, but at least it doesn't completely demoralize the "loser" by obliterating them off the map.

2) Local numbers can be addressed by limiting the number of planes that a base can launch. This was done in AW3 where damaged bases could not launch as many planes as undamaged fields. I wouldn't suggest that model, but rather something where fields can only support the launch of a set number of planes and as a country's fields are reduced from the initial number given after reset, the plane allocation to other fields is increased. Further, the number of GVs launched from the hanger position should be unlimited since those are a purely defensive weapon when launched on the base.

Anyway...my 2 cents.

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #129 on:** June 12, 2002, 11:04:08 AM »

Toad the voting system should be as easy as follows:

Do you have only 4 fields left?, that is, are you clearly loosing (this is a MUST to enable the button)? If so, the surrender button is enabled. More than 50% of that country players with the button toggled to "surrender" and we have a reset. No problem with people that have fun keeping fighting from closed/vulched bases, they will have even more fun fighting in a clean map.

About the aerial spawn point, with 100 players per country but one country with only 3 bases, when that country takes a fourth field its aerial spawn point will be disabled, so this wont be a permanent advantage for the loosing country. Or disabling the spawn point when numbers are almost equal (+-10%?) even having only 3 bases left.

crowMAW · « **Reply #130 on:** June 12, 2002, 11:27:24 AM »

The only thing I would not like about the "surrender" voting button would be that it potentially gives the "losing" country the ability to decide who to give the perk points to if the other two countries have nearly the same number of bases.

MrRiplEy[H] · « **Reply #131 on:** June 12, 2002, 12:13:29 PM »

Additionally, what about guys like Laz? He's still having fun as long as the "fight is on"? Does his fun not count?

Guys like lazs have fun anywhere where they can find 2 fields close to eachothers.. Resets aren't affecting them.

I think the 5 field limit would be a good compromise, no fake airstarts but no sitting on field either, looking at tiffy's strafe the field.

When the 6th field gets taken, reset simply happens and nobody has to spend 30min - 2 hours vulched on a broken field.

Toad · « **Reply #132 on:** June 12, 2002, 12:24:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MANDOBLE

About the aerial spawn point, with 100 players per country but one country with only 3 bases, when that country takes a fourth field its aerial spawn point will be disabled, so this wont be a permanent advantage for the loosing country. Or disabling the spawn point when numbers are almost equal (+-10%?) even having only 3 bases left.

So if a country is down to 3 bases and they get the altitude advantage.. and decide from then on not to take another field back... then they keep the advantage? (Assuming the numbers stay close.)

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #133 on:** June 12, 2002, 12:42:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
So if a country is down to 3 bases and they get the altitude advantage.. and decide from then on not to take another field back... then they keep the advantage? (Assuming the numbers stay close.)

If they keep outnumbered but decide not to take any more fields, they are going to lose for sure. That aerial spawn point doesnt let u to spawn bombers, nor fighers with more than 75% internal fuel or DTs, you just have an opportunity to re-take the nearest base or to defend the nearest base. That aerial spawn box is also at low level, no more than 10k its maximum alt and no less than 3k its minimum alt. And one your spawn altitude is random. Basically this will ensure that you are not going to be vulched inmediatelly even having this spawn box capped by the enemy.

lazs2 · « **Reply #134 on:** June 12, 2002, 02:12:24 PM »

better that when a country is down to 3 bases it automatically "surrenders". Game over... reset.
lazs