Author Topic: New Arena (Read 367 times)

J_A_B · « **Reply #15 on:** March 12, 2002, 04:15:17 PM »

I'm taking a wait-and-see attitude with respect to the larger terrain and the quality of combat. It's possible that people will gravitate to just a few bases; it's equally possible that they'll spread out. I see nothing wrong with at least trying these larger maps.

What a larger terrain will NOT solve is the communication issues. Eventually something is going to have to give; either CH1 will have to be completely removed and CH2 will have to become distance-dependent, or the arena numbers will have to be capped. I feel it would be a horrible mistake to "divide up" the communications within a single arena. Essentially this would divide the player base like separate arenas would, but without the positive effects of having multiple MA's.

I believe HTC is aware of this issue and they themselves haven't decided exactly what they're going to do.

J_A_B

whels · « **Reply #16 on:** March 12, 2002, 04:19:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by J_A_B
I'm taking a wait-and-see attitude with respect to the larger terrain and the quality of combat. It's possible that people will gravitate to just a few bases; it's equally possible that they'll spread out. I see nothing wrong with at least trying these larger maps.

What a larger terrain will NOT solve is the communication issues. Eventually something is going to have to give; either CH1 will have to be completely removed and CH2 will have to become distance-dependent, or the arena numbers will have to be capped. I feel it would be a horrible mistake to "divide up" the communications within a single arena. Essentially this would divide the player base like separate arenas would, but without the positive effects of having multiple MA's.

I believe HTC is aware of this issue and they themselves haven't decided exactly what they're going to do.

J_A_B

dont get me wrong, im all for newer bigger maps. im just pointing out in my opinion that bigger maps wont solve what we have now, were some think it will.

whels

kylecmurphy · « **Reply #17 on:** March 12, 2002, 05:41:29 PM »

I am glad that my post is creating a good dialog about the situation.

I do agree that new bigger maps will be nice and may help some. But what I think may happen that no one has stated yet is that we will end up stuck on one map for a very long time. The last MA map lasted almost 5 weeks just imagine how long it may take to reset some of the maps if they are 4X as large with 4X the number of bases.

Could you all imagine getting suck in the uterus for 20 weeks.

I hope that HTC is thinking about this problem and will address soon.

~~MurphRTC~~

hitech · « **Reply #18 on:** March 12, 2002, 06:47:58 PM »

What map ever lasted 5 weeks, 5 days maby.

Manedew · « **Reply #19 on:** March 12, 2002, 07:56:26 PM »

I'm sure this has been talked of before .. but one way to inspire the spreading of forces is to limit the spawn of fighters; based on country's numbers at a given time.

when coutry x has 100 players, say small feild: 10 fighters allowed in air, based from that feild at one time; lagre feild maybe 30 (50 player= 5 from small 15 from large)

Anyway i'm not recommending or pushing this just an idea beyond new arena's.

It would be a huge mistake IMO to create muti-MA's
But I think HT loves MMOLG's like the rest of us, so my bets on an MA with more than 470 max soon

;even tho at this point I usally don't enjoy MA with 400+ in it, i always like to see that higher max number ...

ergRTC · « **Reply #20 on:** March 13, 2002, 10:02:22 AM »

I think the point was, hitech, that if you enlarge uterus will it take longer to reset (yuck! hope it isnt your baby or something).

I agree with the larger map idea. But I think it will have to be HUGE. With fewer bases close together.

Those that think 14 people in the ct is a joke, should go fly for a while with those numbers. It is actually quite enjoyable.

heres an idea, how bout a PACIFIC THEATER?? With a 100 person limit. Just for me. Same map all the time (that great one that was in CT 3 weeks ago).
Plane set is limited to pacific planes. And make it axis vs. allies. Then just leave the thing alone. Dont touch it, just let it do its own thing.
why not try?

(was the V in the pacific? How bout a good old p-40!!!!!!!)

ergRTC

DmdNexus · « **Reply #21 on:** March 13, 2002, 11:59:54 AM »

ok I'm going to voice a different opinion than the majority of this thread.

I like the 400 people arenas. With more people, means more things are going no. I can choose to be part of a massive GV assault, or a fighter sweep, etc.

I've noticed in the past two week there is someone running a mission nearly every hour. This seems to only happen when a large number of people are online. I like jumping in on missions - it's a type of team work that isn't easily availabe in regular MA play.

And when my country is out numbered, doesn't bother me. Just means I fly higher and stay fast, and avoid taking fights to the deck - different tactics for different situations. go goon hunting just to frustrate those 40-50 gang bangs - muhahaha

Looking for a 1v1. Yes can still get those. But I find 1v1 boring, the fight is usually determined on the initial merge or shortly with in 2 to 3 turns. And every one knows the theory and the model advantages and disadvantages, so 1v1 is now mostly formulatic, and well.. boring.

I would like more maps. Maps of N. Africa, italy, pacific, china, russia, etc.

A limited plane set feature would be nice. For example limit the plane set to 1941 only models for an hour, Kind of like what WB did. Perhaps that could be bulit into the map rotation. Or perhaps 1 day out of the week this feature is enabled.

DmdNexus

hblair · « **Reply #22 on:** March 13, 2002, 05:05:10 PM »

The CT will be running the full planeset enabled Axis vs. Allies setup on the new Perdonia terrain this next week (starting this saturday). Try it out. More new terrains on the way.

hblair · « **Reply #23 on:** March 13, 2002, 05:19:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DmdNexus
I would like more maps. Maps of N. Africa, italy, pacific, china, russia, etc.

North Africa is on the way, as well as Kuriel Islands.

lazs2 · « **Reply #24 on:** July 08, 2002, 08:48:22 AM »

so what? maybe 4 people asking for gigger maps? I have seen threads that were larger and about half felt that larger maps were a bad thing. I also think that the milkrunners and late war plane aficianados simply want the fields farther apart so that they can cherry pick easier.

They could do something useful with such a big map tho.... wipe out a band of 4 or five sectors (no fields) and make it the seperation between the anything goes area and the early war area where onlyu early war planes could take off.
lazs

Ripsnort · « **Reply #25 on:** July 08, 2002, 09:08:50 AM »

Lazs, do a search on the BBS, keyword "bigger maps",you'll get 4 pages of threads regarding it.

The need for bigger maps was destiny as soon as Knits once reset the arena 4 times in a 24 hour period.

Nuff said.

gofaster · « **Reply #26 on:** July 08, 2002, 09:46:19 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
They could do something useful with such a big map tho.... wipe out a band of 4 or five sectors (no fields) and make it the seperation between the anything goes area and the early war area where onlyu early war planes could take off.
lazs

Or better yet, populate those sectors with small airfields and vehicle hangars and make it so that only early-war planes could launch from the small airfields and late-war fighters and bombers could only launch from the bigger airfields. 4 or 5 sectors with no fields would be too much of an impediment to the "quick dogfights" I like so much. You'd probably see a lot more posts from folks touting the viability of the FM-2 (a fun little plane) and the P-40B, along with the Spitfire Mk I and V and the Me-109E, A6M2, F4F, and C.202. A field in every sector, a plane or vehicle for every field.

It would also make it more difficult to wipe out a country, since as the bases are captured and the lines are pushed back, the bigger airbases would come into play more and the late-war planes could engage quicker.

Kind of like the real war...

lazs2 · « **Reply #27 on:** July 08, 2002, 02:39:48 PM »

resets?? who cares about resets at 3 in the morning??

gofaster.. u would need 4 sectors or so to seperate the early war planes from some of the more attention starved later war guys. we would still have plenty of fields even if we wiped out 30 or 40. as a bonus... the map would be less confusing.
lazs

Ripsnort · « **Reply #28 on:** July 08, 2002, 03:13:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
resets?? who cares about resets at 3 in the morning??

I was on that Saturday, resets occured at(All PST) 7:40am, 1:30 pm, 7:30 pm and apparently (yes..) one at 3am.

lazs2 · « **Reply #29 on:** July 09, 2002, 08:16:53 AM »

who cares about 7:40 or 1:30 either.

resets occur when no one is up and the gamey milrunner AI fighters are the only ones on. I have seen exactly one reset the whole time I have played AH. resets are a non issue for me.
lazs