HTC, you plan on doing anything about this?

[Glasses]

Hussein you're a smart fellow but they're still gonna bomb you to oblivion. I'll enjoy watching the spectacle from CNN  

[Widewing]

Last evening on channel 1, I followed a discussion about the lopsided numbers. At the time, there were 138 Bish, 157 Knits and just 52 Rooks. One Knit going by the handle of “http”, made the outrageous comment that the Rooks were milk-running!

How absurd can such thinking get? We had only enough people to have no more than 3 at every field we owned. Five minutes later, I tackle a huge gaggle of Knits attacking our basically undefended field (there were two defenders counting me), A32, and I blasted 5 Knits out of the sky (landing the kills too), the last of which was Mr. http…. Any more comments on milk-running there http?

It certainly appears that many who are afraid of encountering a REAL fight, gravitate to countries with the big numbers. Rather than be at the pointy end of the spear, they show up in the second or third wave looking to vulch for kills, instead of actually earning them in even-up fights. This gangbang mentality is growing, and it grows proportionally to the increasing population of Noobs.

I had a somewhat similar experience at A24 last night. Along with 4 other Rooks, we went over to pork the strats to relieve pressure on our nearest field. I took an La-5 with two light bombs. I used those to kill fuel and ammo bunkers. There wasn’t much opposition, only a Spitfire and La-7 attempted to get up for defense. I killed the Spit shortly after he took off. Coming in from the nearest Bish field was a horde of fighters, probably 10-15 of them. Most of them refused to come down as long as we remained unengaged. Some hearty soul in an IL-2 wandered in and was dispatched with a single pass. Menawhile, several Bish began taking off from the field, with just two of us remaining, it got real busy. The other Rook with me got hit, but smacked 2 or 3 Bish before they got to him. At this time, the ladies in the high-flying Mustangs and 190s felt safe enough to come down, after all, I was the only Rook left flying. Well, I shot down another three of the Bish gentlemen, but was down to just 8 rounds of cannon ammo and not enough gas to get safely away, much less RTB. So, when a La-7 attempted to make a run at me, I decided to stay. 30 seconds later the Lavochkin was running for cover trailing smoke, but I now had empty mags. So, I weaved and turned and dodged the attacks (meanwhile another Rook showed up, taking some pressure off of me), but finally ran out of gas. I was unable to avoid a pair of Mustangs while maneuvering  in a glide and took damage forcing me to bail. On the ground I counted 17 enemy icons, 17!!! Moreover, there was not a Rook in sight.

Of those I shot down, and was eventually shot down by, I recognized only one name in the message buffer. Noobs with a  gangbang mentality. Fight in hordes, never engage if there is the least bit of risk. I don’t fault them for being timid, the learning curve is steep. It’s no fun learning this game while being hammered continuously. So, for them it is easier to fight against the Rooks, rather than with them.

This is why Rook numbers are low. These Noobs won’t fly with a country that has low numbers, because there is nohigh alt horde to hide in. Worse, if they fly Rook, most of the time they will be defending against larger numbers of fighters with those advantages of altitude and E. Again, I really can’t blame them for doing this.

I have seen this relating to my squadron, where Noobs fly with us for a day, see the lopsided numbers and promptly announce that they are switching to Knit or Bish. Therefore, Rook numbers are unlikely to grow, and the disparity in numbers will continue to get worse unless HTC intervenes, or some squadrons rotate to the Rook side. Noobs don’t want to fly here simply because they spend all of their time running for their lives. That’s no fun for them. Gangbanging fields is relatively safe and they can gain a little experience too. Until something significant is done, this will only spiral further out of control.

My regards,

Widewing

[NoBaddy]

Originally posted by 4ACES
There are ways to balance the arena and it should be considered.

1st. Take the rotating squads and balance the arena.
(They shouldn't mind since this will only be for a limited time).
2nd. Limit movement between the countrys to once a month or
once a week and all movements have to be approved by AH
staff. (Submit a transfer request).
(In other word make someone work once a week at AH
and only allow transfers that would maintain the balance.)
3rd. Put new players in all 3 countrys equally.

simple solution....

4th. Have HTC reward people that stay in country. Rotaters (and I use the term loosely) could move around just like they do now. Folks that chose to stay in country long term would be rewarded...perks. Think positive reenforcement .

Been doin this crap a long time. Traditionally, arena odds will stablize if given a chance. The constant 'rotation' of squads insures that this 'chance' will be a long time coming. Number 1 is what the Nomads did in AW. They would move daily, depending upon arena odds. Almost always to the country at the bottom of the odds barrel. Just a thought .

[phaetn]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not saying that's what exists, but a lot of people certainly seem for it -- governments get elected on the basis of less interference and letting markets do their thing. Isn't that what privatization and deregulation of industries is all about?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and it doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what the consequences of it are. Properity in charts, diagrams and stock markets, but misery in real life... People have come to accept a lot of things that would be totally untolerable as "conditions of human life" were it 50 years ago after going in the global scale rendered resistances in each countries virtually helpless. But anyhow, that's not the real point..

I believe we're on the same side on this issue, Kweassa.  What I am suggesting is that the "invisible hand" theory of economics is hardly a dead one, as a lot of people seem to be proponents of it (or at least of less interference).  I in no way endorsed it.  Hey, I'm a European living in Canada, so I'm all for taxation and the redistribution of wealth.  

In that vein, there's an interesting article in last week's (10.20.02) New York Times Magazine about the death of the American middle class interregnum.  "For Richer," by Princeton prof Paul Krugman, argues that the US is effectively back in the "Gilded Age" of the robber barons where a very small minority with wealth are the ones getting richer (and towards whom political agendas and economic policies are targeted), while the middle class is generally stagnant, and the poor are poorer than they were in the 50s, 60s and 70s.  He suggests the period of general equality (and prosperity!) that came out of the New Deal and had an effect for decades is now long gone.  While America is, indeed, the richest nation on earth with the highest GDP per capita, he argues, the median individual's standard of living isn't as high as those of other countries with more socialized policies because the per capita numbers are skewed by a small minority with great wealth.  It largely depends on what one uses for metrics in the "quality of life" argument, I'm sure.  I think there was to have been a rebuttal to the article by a conservative in this past weekend's edition.

As for the MA and HTC, they did provide a level playing field: anyone can pick one of three countries, and all the same equipment is available to all.  To use your baseball analogy, I'd say that they provided the field, the rules, and even the bats, uniforms and balls.  Everyone is playing fair ball.  What's out of whack are player salaries, and one team has a depth of resources that a smaller franchise doesn't.

But in AH, everyone is a free agent.  If there really is a perceived void, and players want to address it, they certainly have the means at their disposal to do so.  They created the problem, and just as easily can fix it.

Online communities aren't stagnant, they ebb and flow, and the more a company tries to "direct" the player experience, the less satisfied the player base will be.  Let them create their own experience, for that's the secret to any game's longevity.  The more restrictions that are in place, the more likely people are to log off and the less likely they'll be willing to contribute to the community in a meaningful way.  That eventually leads to dead arenas and players going to other venues.

Trust me, having lots of players is an absolute blessing.  Many developers would love to have this problem! Look at something like WB right now -- it's so empty that the community is positively feeding on itself and any interloper that happens in their midst is positively crucified.  Hardly the sign of a healthy community.

AH, on the other hand, has a vibrant community with all the healthy rivalry, bickering and tanting that that imples.

With all due respect, Kweassa, (and I really do mean to afford it to you!) I think the idea of "enlistment" and not being able to change sides at will, or the idea of a squad's C.O. "forcing" participation within a country without the player having the option to change that without leaving the squad is disastrous.  Players should have more choices, not less of them.  Artificial balancing is a very slippery slope, and sooner or later there will be so many levers, pulleys and gears all in the name of "balancing" that even trying to control them all will be impossible and "tweaking" this while at the same time "breaking" that will have a seriously detrimental effect on the game as a whole.

All that said, I can completely understand your frustration.  I've been in games/countries/squads that are on the downside, and it's no fun.  But it will change.  It doesn't make the game rotten by any means.

What the Rooks need (insert country here, its subject to change) is some squads to move over en masse.  Maybe the others are having too much fun gang-banging at the moment.  That will wear off eventually.  In this enviroment, a country rivalry is an excellent thing, even if it's a squeak being the underdog.  But there are lots of people who actually enjoy that kind of challenge: Find them, and get organized.  When the country rivalries are lost, that's when the game will really suffer.

AH is exactly the same for a Rook as it is for a Bishop or a Knight, only the icon is different.  It's the players' game, let them do with it what they will.

Again, let me stress that I'm non-partisan in this.  I'm neither bashing nor defending the Rooks.  For whatever reason, I've never paid that much attention to nationality in AH, perhaps because I'm not in a squad any more.  I'll tell you what, though, from now on I'll only fly Rook until the numbers are more equitable.  And if any of my buddies are online, I'll ask them to join me.  (Careful, we may be more of a liability than a help!)

I've been in AH since the Alpha, and write about flight sims and computer games for a living.  That's not to say my opinion is any more valid than yours, only that it's based on a lot of experience, is well informed, and I've seen exactly this sort of situation many times before.  Next year, the flavour will be different.  It's not a game buster.   What I want is for Aces High to be the best product that it can be, and artificially limiting the player experience in the MA is not the way to do it.  Frankly, I'd rather see HTC spend the time on in-game development like increased strat or more aircraft rather than tilting at windmills in the name of arena management.

My $.03.

Cheers,
phaetn

[phaetn]

Admittedly this is during an off-peak time, but Rooks seem to be doing fine here both in terms of numbers and certainly in number of fields.  

Cheers,
phaetn

[GScholz]

I was "borne" a Rook and I'll stick with 'em till the bitter end. I actually take great pride in being a Rook when I see the incredible results we sometimes generate. Sometimes winning the war in the MA (until bish and knit realize what is going on and consentrate their efforts on us) with less that half the pilots ONE of our opposing nations have. I don't know ... like another Rook said in another thread: I'm glad I'm not a nit or a bish, they don't stand a chance against these odds!

Feels nice to be part of an Elite ...

[LLv34_Snefens]

"Feels nice to be part of an Elite"

And an Elite we are. Try looking on how the countries do in various planes vs the other 2 countries. AH Statspage

As a totally "random" example we can take the Macchi 202:

The Knights have 300 kills and have been killed 480 times in the C.202 against all countries. (K/D=0.625)
The Bishops have 265 kills and have been killed 506 times in the C.202 against all countries. (K/D=0.524)

and finally......damdadaaaa

The Rooks have 474 kills and have been killed 349 times in the C.202 against all countries. (K/D=1.358)

No, it's not fake, the stats really are like that. Off course there is a logically explanation to it, which people who have been following the kill buffer will know.
To save you the time, its not me. I have less than 20 kills in it.

__________________
Ltn. Snefens
Lentolaivue 34
My AH homepage

[Silat]

Originally posted by NoBaddy



 Number 1 is what the Nomads did in AW. They would move daily, depending upon arena odds. Almost always to the country at the bottom of the odds barrel. Just a thought .

So you are admittings that the Mads did something right?:}:}:}

And by the way . Only the bottom of the barrel would have us .:}
                   
                                 Nomad +Silat :}

[Steve]

Well as a rook, I have periodically become discouraged over the imbalance of numbers.  However, when I first started the game, I was put on the knights automatically. Since many of my old mates from AW were on knights I stayed there.  The problem I ran into is that on off prime hours, I had trouble finding bad guys at which to shoot.  Bish-knight fights were far less common than knight-rook fights.  Seemed the bish and rook teams just didn't fight each other much.  Granted, this could have been a matter of coincidence but... BUT  when my squad switched to rooks I happily found myself in a target rich environment. Kills are earned more now and therefore that much more rewarding...landing a mission is a little sweeter as a rook.  As a rook once you've finished a kill or fight, you have to be even more quick to size up your circumstances because you are more likely to get bounced than a numbers superior bish/knight pilot would. You are also less likely to have help arrive simply because there are less rooks in the air. I'm not saying rooks are better pilots man for man... not what I mean so please don't go there.  I'm saying most of the elements of the game have a bigger thrill for me as a rook.
  I also feel however that rooks need to fly more missions....even quick hit jabo raids.. anything.  Missions that are quick to organize and get off the ground so we don't have any of our precious few pilots wasting time on the ground.  My squad flew a mission yesterday and had many non-squaddies join..it was a blast and we took a moderately defended base.
There are those on knights and bishs that love the gangbang mentality..that thrive in it.  Heck I've seen high knight tempests and 262's  cherrying fights where they had vastly superior numbers...I just don't see the sport or fun in that. If you're a knight or bish that wants to put a little more thrill/edge in your game, and you're not tied down due to squad restrictions, come on over to rooks... better yet, bring your whole squad!  I can't say you will turn the tide in rooks favor, but I can promise you'll fly a little more on the edge of your seat,  and you'll be much appreciated.