the fields really do need to be closer together

[AKDejaVu]

So, believe what you want- but when I don't even see you in the arena DJ, then you really shouldn't be commenting on things you don't experience or aren't around to watch.

I'm there wulfie.. and my stats are a tad higher than yours.  Anything else you'd like to measure?  I'm up to it.

Of course.. those are just stats and STILL don't mean toejam.  You are completely unable to differentiate yourself from the norm.  Maybe you just like to see others do it for you?  I dunno...

But very few people that enter a furball can boast those numbers.  Let them speak for that.

And Lazs,

When my parents wanted to get a new house because we'd outgrown our current one, they didn't move from a 3 bedroom 1200 square foot home to a 5 bedroom 1200 square foot home.. they moved to a 3 bedroom 2000 square foot home and the overcrowding problem was solved.

Increasing the size of the MA to enable more bases to be opposing each other is fine.  There is absolutely zero need to move those bases closer together.  Dispersing things is what you said was needed... right?

The rest of it just speaks for "lets see if I can possible find some way to make things more to my liking while pretending I'm doing it for the betterment of the arena."

AKDejaVu

[Am0n]

Swulf sorry i missed your point in my last post. Yea i agree that its possible to survive low, if you done that in a 190A8 <S> to you.. nice.

One of my squadies caught me on film from a GV fighting 5 low cons in a zero. I was "in the zone" as i call it where i cant seem to be touched, and didnt get killed. killed one and managed to get separation.

to bad i cant stay "in the zone"  

Altitude builds a false sense of security IMO. I Also fight HI alt a lot, simply becuase i like hi-alt conflicts, its a different fight. But i dont find it any easier to stay a live up there.

[AKDejaVu]

Putting fields closer toghether will increase field capture.. do you agree?

Absolutely not.  You make the arena more dense.  Help is now closer.  Field capture becomes considerably more difficult.  Of course, those totally undefended fields will be a tad bit closer... so some fields will be captured... but when the arena is getting close to a reset and you now have 3 bases 10% CLOSER... you think things are really gonna be easier?

People want "the fight".  That's the curse of the MA.  That one huge furball with tons of things to shoot at.  Every front has one... with a few strat guys fighting amongst themselves in other areas.  How will moving bases closer solve that problem?  It won't... it just means less time to fly to that furball... a wopping 30 seconds less than the 4 minutes it currently takes.

Of course, it also puts friendly ack 10% closer and vulching 10% closer and additional defenses 10% closer and spawn points 10% closer.

No.. it couldn't possibly have any adverse effects on the arena.  A newbie wouldn't be 10% more likely to fly straight to an enemy base to make his newbie straffing run down the runway before inept ack finally catches up to him... it can only do good lazs... because it makes things closer.

You've obviously thought this through so thuroughly that arguing the point is useless.  I'll leave you to that special world you like to call home lazs.

AKDejaVu

[AKSWulfe]

Dejavu, you have completely lost yourself in trying to be the self-righteous defender of whoever.

I am saying, as I have been this entire time, that it is entirely possible to fly to live in a furball. I used my stats to back it up. The k/d and k/s mean jack toejam, you are right. But coupled with k/t, which is notably higher than the average furballer, will point you in the direction that flying to live in a furball (higher k/t means furballing, get it now?) is possible. Just because I like to stay down in the mud does NOT mean I am not flying to live or not having fun.

Is it that impossible to understand? Each time you replied to me in this thread, you have given me some roadkill rhetoric that my stats prove nothing. Now before you go saying that AGAIN, you read what I posted here just make sure you have it clear: IT IS POSSIBLE TO FLY TO LIVE IN A FURBALL

And what the hell does this mean? "You are completely unable to differentiate yourself from the norm. Maybe you just like to see others do it for you? I dunno..."
-SW

[AKDejaVu]

Wulfie...

Your stats do not speak for "furballers".  You are using them to do that.  Lazs stats do not either.  Nor do mine.

Can you go into a 5:5 battle and kill 4 out of the 5 enemy despite the fact the other 4 friendlies have been endlessly spraying ammo?  I bet you can.

Do you know what a likely target and a dangerouse con aproaching look like?  I bet you do.  Most furballing right now don't.

Do you think that a con 700 yards in front of you slowly pulling away is a prime target... even though he's leading you out of the furball?  I bet you don't... can you say the same for most in a furball right now?

Your k/t, k/d and k/s are not representative of anything.  You kill what you shoot at.  That is more than most are doing in the MA right now.  That boosts your stats.

I do the same thing.  That's why my stats can be even higher in every category without having to rely on an overabundance of targets to do it.  Yes.. that is including kills per time. 20% higher.

And I know you are a better pilot than I... so why would my stats be so much better?  Because I'm flying to live a little more maybe?  Because I know how to find a fight a little faster without having to resort to furballs?  That has to be it.

As far as what is being "championed"... it is normalcy.  I'm getting sick and tired of extremes coming in and arguing for changes based on nothing but personal preferences.  So what if these changes are being proposed for an arena that averages 200 players.  Its better to risk losing customers than to have a handfull of people not enjoying the game as much as they possibly could.

And its much better to have HTC design entirely new maps to accomodate a 10% reduction in flight time to the nearest furball... because those damn flight times are what is killing the game right now.  

Yep... I'm just the self-righteous defender of whowever...

AKDejaVu

[Kieran]

It means, SW, that he is suggesting you are posting your numbers for the "Oooh, ahhh" effect from the crowd. In short, not because you are taking a stand, but you are bragging.

I don't happen to believe that, and I could post stats that verify your stats, but I think that clarifies the statement well enough. I know that I have had more fun furballing (with the occasional strat break) than I have had in a long time. Maybe just me.

[AKSWulfe]

Again you missed it, I am not using those stats to make a point of changing the arena.

I am using them to make a point that if you fly to live, you can and you can do that in a furball. In this case, it's me. Yes, my stats prove that I can fly into a furball, get 2.2857 kills, land, do that again, die, and repeat. I can get .0022 kills/(whatevertimefactor) and I get 4.7407kills before I die.

So, again, I will repeat, my stats prove that you (I) can fly to live if that's my goal and it can be done in a furball.

I stated nothing more and nothing less.
-SW

[Kieran]

Interestingly, I used to be the guy that would climb to 25K to kill that lone Lanc porking the base. I would notice streams of fighters heading out of our base, ignoring the buff. I would struggle up, 2/3's of the time kill it, land, re-up, and climb to the next buff. Not very fun, but I felt I was serving a need. One day I thought, "screw the buff, worst that can happen is the base will close." And I was free.

Now I just go and fight. Occasionally I will still climb, but I won't do it as a habit. The nail-biting action of slowly creeping up a buff's tailpipe while he rapes a field is more than my poor heart will take.

[lazs1]

deja.. as hooli says.. with more field density people won't up from a capped or vulched field they will leave it to the field capture and move on to another better fight or take off from a field further back to try to recapture..   It happened that way in WB..  It is obvious to all but you that it would happen in AH.  

arguing with you is sensless because you get a "leave everything alone" stance that is your own little special world.   A world where you will allways be forced to espouse the next status quo and the next and the next.   Each time pretending that the current status quo is the be all to end all.  

closer fields will not "solve" anything.   Except.. they will make life a little more enjoyable for those who like to have some action for their time on line.   I also believe that they will add to a sense of "participation" for more people but that is simply my opinion.  

you claim that 30 seconds each way is no big deal out of 4 minutes..  watch your second hand for a minute or two.   and watching that second hand is every bit as exciting (and less frustrating) than flying to the only fite or flying home from it.
lazs

[pbirmingham]

Originally posted by Kieran:
Interestingly, I used to be the guy that would climb to 25K to kill that lone Lanc porking the base. I would notice streams of fighters heading out of our base, ignoring the buff. I would struggle up, 2/3's of the time kill it, land, re-up, and climb to the next buff. Not very fun, but I felt I was serving a need. One day I thought, "screw the buff, worst that can happen is the base will close." And I was free.

Now I just go and fight. Occasionally I will still climb, but I won't do it as a habit. The nail-biting action of slowly creeping up a buff's tailpipe while he rapes a field is more than my poor heart will take.

Hear, hear!  I'll never forget the day when, in another forum, I read Badz' words

 

...I don't make the mistake of
trying to defend the base, because I don't care if we lose it or not, it's
just a convenient target magnet  

The scales fell from my eyes, and I was happy again.  Now I do try from time to time to make the climb, and I occasionally take a Ta-152 up to ruin some buffer's day, but now if the base dies, I just go somewhere else.  If enough die, I just log and read a book.

[AKDejaVu]

closer fields will not "solve" anything. Except.. they will make life a little more enjoyable for those who like to have some action for their time on line.

Hmmmm.... you were right on target then strayed considerably.

You are simply arguing circles.  Moving bases closer will make field capture easier... so people can just come up from a different field... but they'll still get to fights faster... but from farther away... but... wait...

There needs to be space.  Distance between bases is not for the sake of consuming time... it is for the sake of insulation.  When you remove that insulation you save time ... but you are simply forgetting why it was there in the first place.

I'm not against changing the game.  I am against changing it to cater to the whim of a specific group of people.

AKDejaVu

[Daff]

Actually, Lazs, I do play AH. Granted, I don't play very much, but I do play.
But again..isnt just one field, with airstart, all you want?..I mean, why bother with the landing and takeoff stuff anyway?..it all adds to the time it takes to get to the fight. Just have one field in the middle (A1?), which can't be captured and where all 3 countries can launch fighters from. Viola! Instant furballing.
That is all you want, right?

Daff

[rammjagr]

closer?? would you like to receive AA fire from enemy field while taking off???

 

[Gadfly]

Shut up and fly, Laz

[Toad]

I haven't noticed any shortage of "fun" in the MA in any particular discipline. Seems to be lots of "strat" going on with captures and resupplies and stuff. Seems to be plenty of "fly to live" guys around. Seems to be a furball real handy to just about anywhere.

I guess I fail to see the problem.