Author Topic: Ok, my solution for the non-problem of 'diversity' (Read 2076 times)

Urchin · « **on:** June 26, 2003, 07:50:32 PM »

Yes, we all know that the "Big 4" have at least 50% of the usage in the arena. I say at least 50% because there is no way to tell how many sorties are flown by different planes. Now, I, and I alone, think Aces High has gotten stagnant in the past year, with no updates to speak of and none of the near horizon. So, instead of doing the whole perk everything approach, which would obviously be a bad financial decision for Hitech and company, and thus unthinkable, I posted in a couple other threads about a different way of doing things.

There is a rating known as ENY in Aces High. Apparently it is assigned at random to different planes, and it impacts how many 'perk points' you get for landing a sortie. So, instead of assigning the values at random, or based on some purely subjective means of 'how good' a plane is, the values should be assigned based on how much use a plane gets compared to the most-used plane in the arena. To prevent 'runs' on certain planes, the values could be updated daily. At the beginning of each new tour, the values are calculated anew based on the usage for the previous tour. Thus, if we were to implement the system now, you might see the following numbers for ENY values at the start of the first day.

Spitfire IX: 1 ENY (41,764 kills)
La-7: 1 ENY (39,606 kills / 1.05 rounded down to 1)
P-51D: 1 ENY (37,516 kills / 1.11 rounded down to 1)
N1K2: 1 ENY (32,158 kills / 1.31 rounded down to 1)

Now for some random selections

P-47-D11: 15 ENY (2,832 kills/ 14.74 rounded up to 15)
190D9: 3 ENY (14,467 kills / 2.88 rounded up to 3)
P-40B: 192 ENY (218 kills / 191.57 rounded up to 192)
Spitfire I: 68 ENY (614 kills / 68.01 rounded down to 68)

This would be a strictly proportional system. As it stands now, the vast majority of the population of the MA would not be impacted AT ALL by this. They can keep flying their Spits/N1Ks/La7/P-51 and they will never have to move to a different plane if they don't want to. This method does not restrict anyone's 'free choice' of airplane. On the other hand, it DOES reward those who choose to fly inferior planes. A person who flew a sortie with a P-40B and killed an La-7 and a N1K2 would earn 384 perks as a base, possibly more if he managed to land them. Yes, we know collectively that perk points are pretty useless, since the La-7 is a Tempest in all but name, but it could have two effects, or rather 1 effect but at two ends of the scale.

Firstly, some people will gravitate towards the inferior early war planes because by doing so they will earn perks. This may push the use of the C202/P-40b/109E/Spit I out of the .001% range for usage. Furthermore, it will lead to more perk planes flying around. Now, most people realize that the perk planes are not all that great compared to the La-7 in particular, and the rest of the Big 4 in general, and so they are somewhat rare now, and usually flown very timidly by people that are afraid to get shot down and lose their precious perk points. I think that if the perk planes were made more easily attainable (as this method would do) people would fly the perk planes more, and more aggressively because they would be more comfortable in them (since they get to fly them more often), and since losing one would not mean you couldn't fly another one for a month.

Now, with all that said, I'd like to point out that in one instance the proliferation of perk points might not be a great idea. That would be in the case of the Me262. As crappy as the plane is, most people still can't stand having one buzzing around them ineffectively. So, in the 262s case I would recommend raising the perk cost. For the other perk planes I would keep the perks as they are now, and not increase them. The goal is to increase variety in the MA, and perk planes would be a welcome sight to so many who can tell whether or not a con is a N1K, Spit, La-7, or P-51D at about 10,000 yards.

Again, this method would not restrict ANYONE'S choice. If all you want to fly is the La-7 or P-51D, you are more than welcome to. Furthermore, even your perk point gathering would not be that affected, since you could still get 1 point per kill as long as you killed the more common planes. I do believe that this system of constantly changing ENY values would increase variety (and fun) in the MA by quite a bit. If you feel like making a suggestion, or have a comment on the system, please feel free to add anything. Anyone in the FDB's, you are exempt from that request. Please keep your inane bull**** out of this thread.

Rutilant · « **Reply #1 on:** June 27, 2003, 12:47:00 AM »

You go Urchie.

For it.

AKcurly · « **Reply #2 on:** June 27, 2003, 01:19:33 AM »

Well, for starters, if it's a "non-problem," no solution is required.

Finally, why is it a problem? Spits are no more difficult to kill than a 109 unless a good stick happens to be in the plane. And if he's a good stick, it doesn't matter what he's flying, it's going to be tough to kill him.

The only problem that I see is that a large fraction of the MA crowd flies planes that you think inappropriate.

I have an idea. Why don't you weenies that worry so much about what others fly put your money where your mouth is? You can each sponsor a MA pilot. The idea is that you pay his HTC bill for a month and he will fly planes that you think are appropriate.

curly
----------------------------
Available to be sponsored

Mini D · « **Reply #3 on:** June 27, 2003, 01:27:05 AM »

Top 4 haven't had over 40% of the fighter kills since Tour17.

MiniD

BUG_EAF322 · « **Reply #4 on:** June 27, 2003, 01:30:28 AM »

My K\D on the top 4 is very positive

what's the prob ??

They are my food

Rutilant · « **Reply #5 on:** June 27, 2003, 01:32:38 AM »

Because we want diversity, spit/p51/n1k/la7 gets pretty damn old after a while.

I'm sure the 'non-problem' was sarcasm,

All this is doing is adding incentive to fly different planes without limiting a choice.

The problem isn't in the suggestions provided, it's the fear of anything new and the bandwagon tendancies of people to stand behind someone.

Personally i think all these threads are pointless because HTC doesnt give a flying fark anymore, at least not enough to devote 15 minutes to change these values, let alone COMMENT on them, yet time and time again i'm here supporting new ideas just to have doomsayers start screaming "bad idea, i'll quit!".

These forums are now for our community conflicts, and that alone.

Mini D · « **Reply #6 on:** June 27, 2003, 01:38:02 AM »

The problem is also "the perceived problem". This is an attempt to try to modify other people's plane choice.... because someone doesn't like what other people are flying. As a rule, they modified that in war by shooting the planes down, or died trying. In AH, you just come to the bbs and whine about it.

MiniD

funkedup · « **Reply #7 on:** June 27, 2003, 01:43:28 AM »

If you want to dictate what the enemy flies, they have these things called "single player boxed sims".

SOB · « **Reply #8 on:** June 27, 2003, 01:50:24 AM »

Shyaddup Mini-d, you're not as good of a pile-it as Urchin. You shouldn't be participating in his thread. Speaking of which, I'll be leaving now.

SOB

10Bears · « **Reply #9 on:** June 27, 2003, 01:56:07 AM »

Problem

Too many people flying around in la7s, niks p51’s and spit9s

Solution

Urchin’s idea.. plus perk above planes 5 pts each as base. If your new, you gotta fly an old funky spit1 or a huricane.. and earn the right to a spit1X..

Same with the pony.. you gotta get real good with the eleven before your allowed to get near the shiny Cadillac

Luffie planes too... ah naw naw.. you don’t be taking the Dora up on your first night online.. That ought to be a reserved ride

Arlo · « **Reply #10 on:** June 27, 2003, 02:07:17 AM »

There should be F4Us available in the newly dedicated Pac arena 24 hrs a day at their current perk levels. Along with some more IJ planes modeled.

Just thought I'd throw that in.

And we despirately need a dedicated SCW arena and planeset.

Pac ...

SCW ...

Urchin · « **Reply #11 on:** June 27, 2003, 03:03:10 AM »

No, I don't think perking anything that isn't perked already (besides maybe the La7) isn't that good of an idea. There are a lot more new people than there ever were before, and a lot of those need to have something easier just to compete. What I would like to do is to give the people that don't need those planes to compete a reason to fly something else.

Is the La-7 better than the Spitfire 14? Who knows? Honestly, who knows? Who has enough experience in the Spit 14 to say? I don't and I've flown the Spit 14 quite a bit. I, personally, THINK the La-7 is better, but I haven't flown the Spit 14 enough to really come to a conclusion. Why? Simple, it isn't worth flying. Being a rare "perk plane" the gangbanging gets even more intense than normal if you try to actually get down and fight in one. So who really has enough experience in the Spit 14 to get all the performance the plane can give? Probably nobody right now- but that might change if people started flying it more often. And I think people would start flying it more often if getting the enough perks to fly one meant shooting down two Spit 9s in a 109E4 or a C202 or a Hurricane I, or some other crap airplane that nobody flies because there is no reason to fly them.

Mini- you are exempt from the exemption, as long as you can keep yourself from displaying the kind of idiocy SOB kindly added to the thread. The top 4 may not have 40% of the fighter to fighter kills, but they've been steady at ~40-41% (its been a couple months since I added up the totals) of TOTAL kills. And the MA has GVs and bombers flying around too, and they get killed just like fighters do. And you know as well as I do that the total percentage of kills doesn't mean a thing as far as total percent of use. I'd be willing to bet that the top 4 actually make up at least 50% of the sorties flown in the MA, at a minimum.

Curly & Mini, apparently you guys aren't tired of seeing the same 4 planes over and over again ad nauseum. I am. Doesn't mean you are wrong, but I know I'm not the only one that is sick of it. There are other things I'm tired of as well, like the constant fuel porking and the sorry state of the ground vehicles, so the overwhelming proliferation of the top 4 planes may or may not be the primary reason for my lack of enthusiam for the game- but it is definately a factor. It also happens to be one that could be fairly easily "fixed" to add some diversity to the MA without "forcing" people to fly planes that I think are "appropriate".

I, personally, don't hold much hope of anything changing before AH2.0 comes out, whenever that will be. So yes, perhaps I'm just squeaking, or whining, or griping, or however you want to put it. However, pigs may fly, and hell may freeze over, and Hitech just may look at this idea and think it is a good idea, and change it. So that is why I'm doing it.

WarChild · « **Reply #12 on:** June 27, 2003, 03:25:54 AM »

Urchin, you and I have been around AH for many years now. I have remained in the background. You have put forth wonderful ideas over the years. In the past this effort was rewarded and respected.

Now, it is easier to defame and incite than to support and constructively criticize.

Add to that that HTC is a shadow of the company it once was. I personally think its gotten too large, and attitudes by its clientel to rude. There is no more interaction between the developers and the clients. HTC can't stand the pain of the interaction anymore.

I'm sure they read and listen, but there is no cementation or communication. To communicate would be a one way conversation, and not at all polite or respectful for HTC employees.

As a long time vet back to near beta, this is my perception.

As a perfect testament to the degrading of HTC's involvement in their product can no better be illustrated by the amount of flight time put into it by its employees. They no longer play their own game for fun. Its a 9-5 job for them now. The camaraderie has passed and the sun has set.

HTC has resorted to cash contests where once it only needed to log on and wing with its customers in a wicked dog fight on the deck.

I cherish a fight I had with Dale in his HogC vs my C205. But I have to remember 2+ years for that. No new memories, no new stimulations.

I have no answers, I am just a customer that has lost his faith. I continue to pay my monthly dues in the hope that one day, good times will fly again. At this price point I can afford to hold on to that hope. At the old price point, the account would have been canceled. Personally, I think at the old price point, things would not have deteriorated quite so far into the cesct pool of human existence.

Back into the background with me where I will continue to cherish old camaraderie in a virtual world that has long passed its prime, and pay for my hopes of future enjoyment.

Karnak · « **Reply #13 on:** June 27, 2003, 03:50:26 AM »

WarChild,

I saw that too. I looked at HiTech's monthly totals and there was nothing in the last two months and practically nothing in the months before that.

Then I looked at his totals in the first few tours...

I hope HiTech is still enjoying himself.

That goes for all of the HTC employees.

As to the naysayers regarding Urchin's ideas: How was his idea forcing people to fly different aircraft?

Would suddenly facing Tempests, F4U-4s and Spitfire Mk XIVs in your P-51Ds and La-7s be the thing forcing you to change?

Welcome to the world that we fans of non-"top ten" aircraft have had to deal with always.

You say that we are not being forced and that we have free choice, but you know that is a load of pure BS.

Flying P-51Ds around in a sky full of Tempests and Spitfire Mk XIVs would sure put a dent in your "free choice", and that is really no different than us flying around in a sky full of P-51Ds and La-7s.

Personally I think Urchin's idea is too extreme because it is sucha dramatic change that the results are nearly impossible to identify and they could be quite harmful, but you shot it down on baseless charges.

AKcurly · « **Reply #14 on:** June 27, 2003, 07:12:17 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak

Personally I think Urchin's idea is too extreme because it is sucha dramatic change that the results are nearly impossible to identify and they could be quite harmful, but you shot it down on baseless charges.

Baseless? You mean his plan wasn't based on his perception of folks flying planes that he was tired of seeing? You mean his plan didn't involve a scheme to involuntarily move folks out of the planes they want to fly?

Damn, guess I need to take perception 1001 again.

curly