Maxtor's stupid idea #7

[maxtor]

I am of the belief that gangbanging on a colossal scale is not good game play.  I am sure some will disagree with that premise, they will hate this idea totally.  

I was thinking this would encourage more or less equal teams, and the side with the best teamwork (not just the most warm bodies suciding into buildings) would win the war.   The wars would end normally, but not in the 1 or 2 hours time as can happen now when the numbers are ludicrously out of balance.  If the numbers were pretty close to even, there would be little or no impact.  

What I like about this concept is it is a carrot and no stick as it has nothing to do with perks or scoring, encourages good honest conflict based on skill and teamwork, but doesn�t spoil anyone�s fun in the process.  Nobody�s furball gets ruined, people can vulch all they want, heck bombers get even more stuff to blow up.

I am sure hitech thought of this one before, like I said I don�t even know if it is possible anyway.

[Midnight]

Originally posted by maxtor
What I like about this concept is it is a carrot and no stick as it has nothing to do with perks or scoring, encourages good honest conflict based on skill and teamwork, but doesn�t spoil anyone�s fun in the process.  Nobody�s furball gets ruined, people can vulch all they want, heck bombers get even more stuff to blow up.
 

Yes, and if you add this idea, you might as well just delete all the bomber aircraft in the game. It's bad enough an entire factory or other strat can be rebuilt faster with just a few supply drops, if stuff is harder to kill, and rebuilds faster (based on numbers), then why even bother bombing anything at all?

No, the loosing side needs to have their supplies and infrastructure crippled, not artifically and magically rebuilt just because they are loosing.

A supply and resource model built into the game would stop the gangbanging hordes. A single airfield should not be able to support endless waves of fighters and bombers taking off.

The MA is Quake, and it always will be. I just HOPE that AHII will utilize some real strat elements to make things more of a simulation of war.

[Meatwad]

I am a Rook and happy to be one. The best part is that we are always outnumbered. It keeps you on your toes to be constantly aware of all the enemy around you. Only people that dont like it are the kids that whine over being killed. In my opinion, some of the senior Rooks are indeed really good players and know how to work their aircraft in an outnumbered environment and still able to get kills.

[SlapShot]

Originally posted by Meatwad
I am a Rook and happy to be one. The best part is that we are always outnumbered. It keeps you on your toes to be constantly aware of all the enemy around you. Only people that dont like it are the kids that whine over being killed. In my opinion, some of the senior Rooks are indeed really good players and know how to work their aircraft in an outnumbered environment and still able to get kills.

yeah ... yeah ... yeah ... such is not the case anymore or lately. I have seen many nights where the rooks do have the numbers and lots of them, so please end the "rooks are always outnumbered" line of thought.

If you were around 6 months ago, it was the Knights that were in the barrel and I have to agree that being outnumbered does speed up the learning curve and does make for a better pilot in the long run, so with that said, and using your logic, the Knights do have ...

"really good players and know how to work their aircraft in an outnumbered environment and still able to get kills."

and so do the Bish !!!

Maxtor .. NOBODY likes the gangbanging.  

I have come to the conclusion that the true key to country balance is mainly due to the "accepted" leaders within each country. "Accepted" leaders are those individuals who ask and get responses. When one of these leaders gets the ball rollin', people flock to their missions and the wave is almost impossible to stop. If this happens on a continual basis, I believe that the majority of that countrys population are happy and have no need to move to another country. When that doesn't happen, that when you get gangbanged and the fun stops and migration occurs for those who can't take it anymore. Their choice.

Right now, the Knights only have a few of these "accepted" leaders ... No 1 leader being GrimCO/USgrim, but more are on the rise. I would expect and have heard that the Bish have many of these leaders and the Rooks have gained some good ones as of late with some of the squad moves ... here I am thinking of the 367th ... loved these guys when they flew Knights ... these guys know what they are doing.

So the more "accpeted" leaders that each country has, and the more that they are spread out across the playing time line, will result in happy players. Conversely for a country who only has a few.

Constantly trying to tweak the game parameters, I don't believe, will ever completely solve the problem.

[SPIKER]

To long to quote but
hit the nail.

[StracCop]

The problem is tied to the three country paradigm.

Each of the three countries look at the roster to determine which country is weakest.  The factor that this determination usually rests upon is the number of players.  As of late, the Knights have had far fewer players that the other countries.  This sets up the conditions necessary for a gangbang.

So the Bish have 130 players
And the Rooks have 135 players
and the Knights have 86 players.

Who should the Bish attack?
Who should the Rooks attack?
Where should the Knights defend?

The calculus that each of these 'countries' employs invariably leads to each reaching the conclusion that they should attack the Knights as they are the weakest path to a potential reset.  So they BOTH attack the weakest: the Knights in this example.

Short of auto assigning players to a country as they log on and ruining squad unity, the only solution is to ditch the 3 country model and go with an axis v. allies scheme.  

Only a 1 vs 1 contest can correct this pattern:  a pattern that makes roughly one-third of the subscriber base miserable while playing the game.  This game has become a 2 vs. 1 contest that is an exercise in futility for the country in the dumper. The fact that a clear and predictable pattern of 'no contest' contests has surfaced should be ringing alarm bells at HTC HQ.

From a business point of view, anything that alienates a large number of my subscriber base is something I would want to aggressively address.  Ignoring it just weakens subscriber satisfaction with the product and risks a reduction in renewals and lost subscribers.  After all, if you subscribe to a game for fun and it only causes you frustration, how long would you bother to pay for it?

And before you respond with the predictable banter that I'm only posting this because I'm a Knight remember this.  The same phenomenon occurred with the Rooks.  The result...pity at their 'hopeless' position.  A pity that resulted in defections to the Rook ranks.  If a country can elicit 'pity' over a period of months because they are widely perceived to 'have no chance' then something's obviously going on that should be examined in more depth.

Food for hungry minds...

David

[Dead Man Flying]

Originally posted by StracCop
[Only a 1 vs 1 contest can correct this pattern:  a pattern that makes roughly one-third of the subscriber base miserable while playing the game.

As opposed to just about half of the subscriber base being miserable under your plan, right?

1v1 doesn't correct this problem, it merely consolidates it.  Rather than two countries outnumbering one, you have one country outnumbering one.  One need only look at the "success" of the old Air Warrior Axis v. Allies arena to see that things rarely even out in a 1v1 situation.  If anything, the solution would be to create even more countries, not fewer.

-- Todd/Leviathn

[popeye]

The CT is axis vs allies, and it is mostly empty.  When it isn't completely empty, it is often 2:1, or worse.

[StracCop]

Todd,

I played Fighter Ace for two years under an axis vs. allies paradigm and found it to be an engaging contest.  Sometimes you lost and sometimes you won.  But the outcome was unpredictable and depended on coordination of effort between countries to effect a victory.

The current situation is not unpredicatble and is therefore an exercise in futility.  The game, as currently engineered, encourages gangbanging which I regard as an inherent flaw with the 3 country system.

Maybe a two sided contest would not work here.
I'm all for a six country battle:  England - USA - Germany - Italy - Japan - Russia all with restricted plane sets.  Yea, I would like more countries.  

Or...how about this idea.
How about delayed respawns for countries with say a 15% numerical advantage over the weakest adversary.  How does that sound?  If your country has a 15% numerical advantage over the weakest country and you 'expire' you must wait 5 minutes in the tower before you can respawn.

Thoughts?

[StracCop]

Originally posted by popeye
The CT is axis vs allies, and it is mostly empty.  When it isn't completely empty, it is often 2:1, or worse.

Is it still a fun contest?

[maxtor]

I have lived the axis v. allies thing too - it sounds great.  Trouble is it sounds a whole heck of a lot better than it is.

[culero]

Originally posted by maxtor
I am of the belief that gangbanging on a colossal scale is not good game play.  

Well, here's another perspective.

Last nite, about 1AM, I went to A19 and joined a few Rooks there trying to "hold the beach head" as a player put it over Channel 2. At first, we were seeing a few Bish at a time coming in small waves, and had some nice, fairly even fights.

Then the waves started growing. Within 30 or 45 minutes, we were being fairly well overwhelmed. At about 2AM, it was down to just 3 Rooks there, with the field so porked and CAPped/vulched that we weren't able to launch planes, only Ostys. However, we scratched and scrambled, shooting troops from the goons as they dropped, shooting the planes strafing our vehicles. We felt overwhelmed, but since we were giving back as good as we got, we were also having great fun!

By 2:30AM, we'd eked out a little sky and had a fighter hangar come back up. Only 25% fuel and no ordnance, and a few vulchers trying to suppress, but we clawed our way back up. A few more Rooks joined us, and for about an hour or so 6-8 Rooks held back a furious attack by the Bish, who always seemed to keep about an equal number of planes over our field no matter how many we killed!

Finally, close to 4AM, they made a successful mass attack that left both the fighter hangars and vehicle hangars dead, and 10-12 vulchers low over the field. This proved to be Check Mate, and they soon gooned the field successfully.

That was about the most fun 3 hours I have had since beginning to fly AH online. Gangbanged practically the entire time, overwhelmed in the end, I was so sweaty when they captured 19 I decided to log, take a shower, and go to sleep happy. Action that intense, shared with comrades who are working desperately with you against long odds, is IMO a great experience.

Just saying, one man's poison is another's pleasure, sometimes

culero

[SKurj]

I like the reverse...

The more fields and assets a country has the longer they take to rebuild (just simply based on distance from HQ)

Think my suggestion thread is still in my sig


SKurj

[rod367th]

First Exact words from Hitech, "This game will never be 2 sided or rolling plane set".


 Only time I've seen gangbang is when 2 teams racing for win. Now Bishops smart they will pull of if not in lead or don't think they can win. Meanwhile Rook and Knights  will pound each other  no matter who's in lead. That's why bishops win most resets. last pizza map I have flim of knights taking last base for bishops win, 15 bishops gvs letting knight c47 drop troops. Also seen last map  bishops down to 4 fields and knights had 15 field lead,, 40 rooks asking 10 rooks to stop taking bishops  bases. We begged and begged them to stop, They didn't so 4 of us went bishops to help them with rooks.


   played axies allied crap at WARBIRDS you want to talk about gangbang lol would be 150 to 30 alot. depended on time of war . Early war most flew Axies. Then allied when 51's came out.


 Now I do argee 2 sided could maybe work, But not rolling plane set or axies allied. Then Perk system would work real well. Guys changing to get extra perks or cheap rides.   But you would have to have 2 new names.

[Kweassa]

I like the reverse...

The more fields and assets a country has the longer they take to rebuild (just simply based on distance from HQ)

Think my suggestion thread is still in my sig


SKurj

 I'm all for that idea.

 I had a simular suggestion while back, which was based on attrition according to usage, rather than attrition based on destruction.

 More pilots a country has(drastic odds like 150:80:80), or, humongous numbers of ppl upping from 1~2 field or so(those prolonged furballs...), it begins to take toll and resources start counting down. More assets, more pilots, more power,and  more fields...should also mean more need for player-run supplies, more need for maintenance, and more difficulty in logistics.