Originally posted by Pyro
It sounds like you want a consequenceless game system, but we already have that and we're not trying to duplicate it with ToD. Some people will like both ToD and Classic, some will only like one or the other. But that's the point of having two completely different venues, we get to appeal to more people in one form or another. No game is going to appeal to everybody. The Sims may sell a gajillion copies, but I won't ever play it for fun because it doesn't appeal to me. ToD will not appeal to a lot of people because of the rigid structure, even though that is the very reason why it will appeal to others. If we were getting rid of Classic and replacing it with ToD, then I would agree with you on many of your points.
It shouldn't sound that way at all. I've stated time and again that the consequences go too far. The criteria for gaining rank (and the perks and privs associated) as well as a system that demotes players (stripping said gained privs and perks) need not go so far as sending players back through the training they supposedly passed to begin with. We've come to the conclusion that this particular punitive measure isn't really designed to discourage griefers. Then it must surely be just a penalty for players who lose too many engagements (deaths). We're not even talking about failure to attempt or compete missions.
I'm all for having a system that rewards success. I'm even all for a system that costs the players when they fail - to a point. My opinion is that retraining takes it too far.
As far as players having the choice of Classic or TOD .... even the Classic players have a vested interest in seeing TOD succeed. Unless, of course, HTC can afford for TOD to fail without it affecting the success and operation of AHII:Classic.
But hey, I've said my piece and gotten my response(s). You're the president of one of the most successful WWII multiplayer online combat simulation games on the internet. If the one thing I felt uncomfortable with in the proposal (and made mention of) doesn't phase you, then it's not my call. Message delivered, message recieved, reply returned and recieved. Thanks.
Originally posted by Pyro
As to your real world analysis, I disagree with much of what you say and I'd bet Abraham Maslow would as well. But that is entirely outside of this discussion on game mechanics.
I bet Tommy Blackburn wouldn't disagree:
"While working on the things that set Fighting-17 apart from other - run of the mill - squadrons, I was also quite concerned lest my fledglings miss a good grounding in the heritage of courage and devotion to duty that stood as the foundation for the U.S. Navy's fighting arms. It was my solemn duty and privilege to teach the uninitiated that, from the ancient days of sail, seafaring men have known that their lives and fortunes depend upon the bonds formed among shipmates. The teachings were embodied in oft-repeated aphorisms like "Never let your shipmate down," and "Never flee in the face of the enemy."
Our young pilots learned from the small cadre of proffesionals about all the brave men who had gone before them and why and when and where they had said, "Don't give up the ship, fight her til she sinks," and Give me a fast ship, for I intend to go in harm's way." I wanted them to be especially mindful of the heros and heroics of naval aviation, of Lcdr. John Waldron and his Torpedo-8, a squadron of slow and vulnerable, obsolete torpedo planes that, unsupported and in broad daylight, had bored through Japanese anti-aircraft fire and Zero fighters to attack the Japanese carriers at Midway. Waldron and all but one of his pilots died in that attack, but they established with their blood and their lives a nonpareil precedent of devotion and duty. I did not expect my youngsters to die as the Torpedo-8 pilots and aircrewmen had died, but I did expect them to go down facing the enemy, if indeed they must go down. More important than merely dying with their boots on and thus providing us with an example of courage and devotion to duty, Torpedo-8 had sucked down the Japanese fighter cover and had thus allowed our dive-bombers to score numerous hits that started the decline of the Imperial Navy's hitherto unbeatable carrier arm.
That was the real contribution, the real lesson of Torpedo-8, the one I did expect my squadron to emulate -- making our positive contribution to the final victory."
-
"The Jolly Rogers" As you may know, VF-17, with Blackburn at the helm, went on to down 154 Japanese planes in 76 days. They did so through both aggressive spirit and superior tactics - neither taking precidence over the other. And, considering the same sense of devotion to duty (not to mention self-sacrifice) that the enemy displayed in the Pacific ... it was a good thing.
btw ... I'm done. Won't mind actually being wrong on this one ... even though I have the suspician that I'm not. 
