HTC.. New defaults for the SEA arena?

[-=Silo=-]

Hello everyone.  
Nice discussion going on here .

Pyro, what if you opened a Allied vs. Axis Arena on the weekends? Because of the flat rate and better features, it could be a thing of beauty. Also, the weekends could give more European guys time to fly with those of us in the States.

I understand you need to concentrate your player base. However, perhaps using an Allied vs Axis setup on Friday/Sat/Sun could be an excellent weekend draw.

Man.. Mission planner, developing ground game, excellent planes... it could somthing special  

------------------
-=Silo=-
AVG "Flying Tigers"
**WoOF!**

[Pyro]

Sharky, you're comparing two different things.  While I agree that the HA would have been more popular with different icon settings, the point is that with the same settings, the arena flourished on a limited basis and floundered on a full-time  basis.

The one thing I do find interesting in the Axis/Allies setup is why some people think it will be less boring.  It may not be boring when it's new and different, but if you think having to fight the exact same few matchups day after day isn't going to get boring, I think that's naive.

Also, some people consider that setup a success in WB because it moved people from one arena to another.  That's not success though, real success will manifest itself in the important numbers if it proves to be more than just a temporary change of pace.  That's why I say punt this back up in two or three months.  

Another game with this setup is FA but they're in a much better position to do it.  In their case, they have enough people that they can add that arena and have it be added value, not just pleasing some at the expense of others.

banana, I do enjoy what-if matchups.  I don't look to the main arena as much semblance to historical combat regardless of what the matchups are as that's just one factor among many others that can't be succesfully duplicated IMO.  I find books like Brown's "Duels in the Sky" interesting.  I like being able to compete with someone on equal ground as well.  I'm also a history and aviation nut.  On the flip side, I also like historical matchups too and know they have a big place in the game.  

I've never seen a game where design decisions were not criticized.  That's an inevitability because everyone has different tastes and you can't make something that pleases everyone.  Design decisions aren't just made on what you like and dislike though.  You can like everything and want to do it but that doesn't make it feasible.  It's all a matter of weighing pros and cons and taking the best course of action that you can.

With that in mind, try this.  Put yourself in the mindset that you have to sink all your money and effort into making this succeed and then take a look back at our development and tell me what you would've done if it were up to you.  What decisions would you have made on what features and planes you would implement? Keep the work level comparable to what we've done and follow our development timeline.  



------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

[dosequis]

I don't have a WB account anymore, so I won't comment on that.

I really prefer to fly historical matchups, but without the old WB no-icon HA setup. The icon ranges in MA are good. And as Pyro said, I really don't want to fly the Spit IX vs. the 190A5 ALL WEEK.

I didn't get enough advance warning on last weekend's Operation Overlord matchup, but a couple Pigs showed up and said turnout was a big disappointment.

So, I guess what I would like to see is the equivalent of WB's Fletchman show up. Somebody to run weekly organized events. Wed night, Friday and Sat nights. And have a European one for those hours, and an Asian one as well.

Now, having suggested it, I'm going to say I'm sure not to go volunteer. It's a LOT of thankless work, and you get a lot of squeaking as payment. I've talked to Flet and Snak and a lot of CMs, who will go on and on about how much thankless work it is. You may get an award at the Con, but for me and alot of others, I don't have the time. I just want to play different what-ifs every week that are historic, and want somebody to set it up for me.

If I could retire and had several million, I would do it, and offer to pay 1 month free to the top 3 buffers for those scenarios. That would encourage buffing. But, unfortunately I am up to my neck in work, and am not a millionare.

We need an Angel CM, like HTC's recent Angel Investors. :-)

XX

[Vermillion]

Dosequis, as of a couple of weeks ago, there is a full compliment of Aces High CM's.

And before that there was a volunteer group that performed that function.

The Scenario Corp runs two Snapshots a week (as an ex-WB's pilot you may think of them as SLs) one during US/Euro timeslots and the other in Japan/Oz timeslots.

As of this week, we are running an event (unamed at this point) for 4 hours on a weekend night that is a historical Axis vs Allied setup, similar in concept to AW's Warnight or WB's Weekend Warrior. This weeks was the first, and we didn't have time to advertise heavily, but after the cries of "WE WANT A AXIS vs ALLIES ARENA" we decided to go ahead with the concept ahead of schedule.

And this doesn't even count our Armor Events and some other things we have done periodically.

If demand goes up, we will expand our current program to include more dates/times. But right now we average about 25-30 players per event.

The Events are there, its up to the players to use them.

------------------
Vermillion
Senior CM, Aces High Scenario Corps

[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 08-07-2000).]

[Pyro]

To further what Verm said, I wouldn't read too much into the light participation.  There are still things that we need to get into place like event advertising and a section of our website for events.  That will be happening soon, but the important thing is that the ball is rolling.



------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

[Wanker]

 

With that in mind, try this. Put yourself in the mindset that you have to sink all your money and effort into making this succeed and then take a look back at our development and tell me what you would've done if it were up to you. What decisions would you have made on what features and planes you would implement? Keep the work level comparable to what we've done and follow our development timeline.

Well, that's a daunting task for me, because my expertise is not in game development, it's LAN's and WAN's and some trumpet playing, too.  

But, since you asked, here's my best shot:

If I were Pyro and HT, coming off that wonderful experience of being bought by IMOL<insert shudder here>, I would've conceived AH thusly:

I would've conceived AH as an online SWOTL to begin with, complete with a planeset starting at late 1945(or even early 1946). Some of the initial planes would have been:

P-51K
ME-262
Spitfire XIV
DO-337
P-80D
P-47N
F8F
Ki-84
FW-190D-9
BF-109K-4
Yak-3
Tempest


That would be the initial planeset. No bombers, no strat. Just pure, unadulterated late/post WW2 dogfighting, with only two countries...Allied and Axis.

My next version(s) would be dedicated to creating multiple layers of strategic(oil fields, cities, ports) and tactical(railyards, bridges, truck/train/ship convoys) targets, along with a new type of "main objective"(including, but not exclusive to, airfield capture). The following bombers or attack aircraft would have to be released within these same versions:

B-29
HE-229
A-26
JU-88A4

This, obviously, would take a long time to implement, and would probably bring us well into the second year(to be done fairly completely, anyway).

After this setup was established and had some time to shake the bugs out of the strategy model, I'd work on "completing" the late/post war planeset, being careful to balance aircraft for both Allied & Axis sides.

Then, I'd continue on and start going backwards in time and start filling out the mid-war, then early-war planeset.

In order to do this, I would decide not to include ground warfare until at least after the strategy system is in place(which would, of course, take into account that there indeed would be ground units in the game, eventually).

Well, that's my overall design for AH if I were Pyro & HT. I'm sure the things I've mentioned would require more time than AH has currently been in development, but I was taking that into consideration.

I can't prove that this design would've worked as conceived, or that it would generate substantial revenue, but it might. nobody has tried it.



[This message has been edited by banana (edited 08-07-2000).]

[hitech]

You missed some of the point banana would you personaly stake a million on your listing?
Or is it just an idea you would like to see if it would work?


HiTech

[Wanker]

Ok, I get the point. Sorry, wasn't trying to be flippant about this.

It's your game and your risk. I'm just one customer expressing my opinion of what I'd personally like to see AH become. In the end, I'll either remain a customer or end up spending my money elsewhere.

That's the logical, business part of me speaking. The passionate, aviation lover in me is the one you saw posting above about things that would be nice to see eventually in AH.

It's not my intent to second guess or criticize you guys. I just like to debate about things I have a passion for. And, for  as long as you're willing to tolerate my ramblings, I'd like to continue to congratulate you when you do great things, and point out some places for improvement.

Hope I'm not being too big of a pain in the keester, guys. I respect you and your work.


[This message has been edited by banana (edited 08-07-2000).]

[hitech]

Not a pain at all banana and I wasn't trying to be flipent.

Just wan't to empisize the differance between wanting to try somthing and staking somthing on it. I.E. it's very easy to say well lets give this or that a try when you have nothing at stake. You look at things very differntly when you have your livly hood riding on it.

And that's pretty much what pyro was asking for look at it from not just what I wan't to play but also from the point what will keep the company growing.


HiTech

[Lugnut]

Hi guys, I've been an occasional lurker here (still playing WB after all these years), and thought I'd drop in on this thread. I have to say, that although I'm the biggest reality/strat potato going, I can't argue with anything you've said.  Given the responsibility of starting the business up from scratch and woo prospective customers, I can't say I would have done things too much different (interesting plane choices wink,wink, nudge, nudge).

I would like to ask however, that assuming you reach a certain level of customers do you have a vision for how the gameplay can possibly evolve for those players looking for a little more than an MA experience?(outside of SEA type events).

I would also say that although I LIKE the WW2 arena in WB, I would not want to see the MA die completely, variety being the spice of life and all that. BTW, Thanks for engaging us in this thread.

Lugnut

[Pyro]

banana, the part about succeeding or failing wasn't my only point but that's certainly the final factor as you have no longer have to make any decisions if you're out of business.  Our decisions are also weighed with a lot of information that is not available to a speculative outsider.  If this business was failing, then we'd have to look at what we're doing as clearly wrong, but that's not the case.  Some people seem to have a pretty big bone to pick with us because we don't share their vision of what we should do(I don't mean you btw).  I suppose they don't like the fact that their favorite sports teams don't confer with them on drafts and trades either even though they may be season ticket holders. <shrug>

Anyway, back to what you would do.  First of all, try to imagine how people would react to your scenario if this is what we did.  Would this make everyone happy?  Do you think this would make more people happy?  Would those people be happy for long or get bored even quicker?  Would I just be having this conversation with somebody else who thinks we should have done it the way we did in reality?

On more specific issues, look at the planes you've selected.  Is it fair?  Does it bring parity, or is there enough of a mismatch to it that makes one side very unpopular to fly?  What would you do if you encountered a mismatch that you didn't see coming?  How would you introduce these planes?  The order in which they were introduced would become critical and they would have to always be introduced evenly between the sides.  

Other issues would be how you would handle a large scale two sided war from becoming a huge constant furball in one location?  Would delaying all other aspects of the game except furballing for over a year be able to provide you with enough customers and cash flow to keep you going?  Or would you have to get more cash to keep the company afloat, thereby diluting your ownership or even have to forfeit controlling interest in your company.  What if you couldn't get more money and all your hard-earned money and effort went poof?  How would those issues affect your decision making?

I mention this stuff just because it is necessary to consider.  It's great that people tell us what they want to see because we can often implement those things.  Other things we can't, because we can't be all things to all people and are smart enough to know that.  But I do get a kick out of some of the pundits we have out there.  I really have no idea what their major malfunction is, but it's probably something I can't pronounce.  I love the we don't listen to our players because we don't implement every suggestion(read theirs) that is given us and when players suggestions (read not theirs) are implemented, it's because we're pandering.  That stuff is priceless.



------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations