Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Fishu on December 16, 1999, 05:50:00 PM
-
This is getting already old, usually when I login at late times, when theres over 40-50 people online, I see Rooks being kicked into hell by Bishops and Knights (sometimes luckily both, bishops and knights have outnumber against rooks) together, but not a single fight between knights or bishops (well, luckily i've managed to start fight between knight and bishops myself couple times)
This is already getting too old, I've seen 3-country setups, which doesn't seem to work.
Always that third country (whichever it is, will be always that unwanted third party) has usually begun attacking mostly one side and had some kind of pact with the other.
Ok, I am heard now and everyone knows that I don't like that knight/bishop usually attacks rooks together...
<wears flame resistant clothes on>
-
Solution: only have two countries.
I've never understood why CK/WB and now AH have always had more than 2 countries.
-
Since someone else brought it up (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) I as well believe 3 is a crowd. Even 4 might be better than 3, but I would cast my vote for 2.
Rosco
-
If this has turned into some kind of unofficial vote, I'll cast mine: 2 countries, 1 front.
-
2 gets my vote
-
2. and if it was allied v axis it would be even better.
[This message has been edited by TT (edited 12-16-1999).]
-
If there was an official pact, I think the bishcuits threw it out the window this morning. The nits were down to 2 or 3 fields, with us Rooks holding only one of them when I logged on.
And I'll cast me vote for 2 countries as well. Dinnae about the axis vs allies, though I have to admit it's an intriguing idea =)
------------------
Air power is a thunderbolt launched from an egg shell invisibly tethered to a base. - Hoffman Nickerson
-
I'm for Axis vs Allies
------------------
Newt 487th FG
Project No. U.S.
From CK beta to Warbirds have prop will travel...
-
Yah I'm for axis vs. allies to. Let the guys who want p51 vs p51 or whatever play in head-to-head. Realism = axis vs allies..
-
In theory I'm all for Axis vs. Allies, but in the present form that would be baaaad. The Spits, La's, F4U's and 51's (not to mention B17's) would punish the 109's, 190's, C205's and N1K2J's. I think out of the average 80 arena pilots it would split 12 Axis and 68 Allied (and 50 of them mustangs!). (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
.Squelch Fishu
-
Wardog: I don't think that has something to do with the topic, so if you would quit waving squelch flags all around, thank you.
-
I think Axis Vs. allies would be great too. Just my 2 canadian cents worth a half a penny.
Not that I represent or have ever represented anything to do with Canada in any way shape or form. Thank you
-
Axis vs. Allies would be neat. AW did it but Im note sure how far they went. Sounds awesome to me and especially for all history minded folk(I refuse to say BUFF now that I know what it means)
-
I'm game for a 2 country system.
Axis vs Allieds is the way I prefer it.
As to side inbalance, well it would help if they would model a couple more Axis planes.
(& I don't mean another 109 or 190 varient)
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
AH is not yet ready for real allies vs axis war, due to lack of planes, maybe then when we get more planes and flight models more balanced (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But 2-country or even 4-country setup would be alot better than 3-country, where one country always tends to concentrate forces against one country (which is already under supression of one country)
-
I think there ready (aint afraid of no ufo,s) id signe up for the luft wobbel.
BTW i like that nits thing. Good name
[This message has been edited by TT (edited 12-16-1999).]
-
2 countries
------------------
129 IAP VVS RKKA
-
Two country's sounds good to me, three's
one to many.
-
Roughly 20 posts and *nobody* likes the three country system?
I too think an Allies/Axis set up would be great...don't know quite how to put it into words, but it would give the sorties here a much greater sense of purpose. It wouldn't be practical with the current limited plane set, so until then...
Hows about chopping it down to 2 sides, open plane choice? I think it'd be a worthwhile test if in fact the gang at HTC would consider going as far as the Allied/Axis set-up in the future. Plus we'd all get a nice change of scenery (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But I would bet any money that they have already thought about this (of course) and have decided on a 3 country system. That being said, 100% of the responses have been in favour a 2 country system. I wonder what considerations we must be leaving out.
-
The best experience which I had in AH was when 5 rooks intercepted 3 B 17s, flying at 20-22k. We were all in 109s and 190s. Only one rook spoiled the event, flying the Pony.
Please, two countries, with Axis vs Allies setup.
-
Only hold up in doing this i think would be making a new map. I vote for 2 countries too tho.
-
I think I know why WB and now AH didn't have 2 countries and preferred 4 (in the case of WB) and 3 now. This is because having only one front would result in too many planes in one area. With too many planes the "traffic" strain becomes readily apparent. By having 3 or 4 countries you increase the number of fronts by well.. a lot ;0 Thus a 100 people online means there will never be 50 people fighting 50 people in one area.. more like 16 fighting 16.
I really would prefer 2 fronts though. I dont care if I can only see a max of 36 planes (anything higher isn't displayed?)- I would prefer that instead of seeing the max of 10 planes I usually see because of all the fronts.
-
Big battles up at Rook 23 and 24. I go down south to Knight 16 to fight Biscuits. Small scale but fun never the less. When ever Knights and Rooks go at it hard. Seems the Biscuits like to get their licks in at 16.
The other nite against rooks was one of the best flights I ever had at 23. Massive furball.
Every country has its good days and bad days. Depending on the time and who is logged on. But there are pilots that only want to fly against a certain country. I guess it is because they generally don't like them.
Doesn't bother me. I can get flamed by a Rook as easily as I can get flamed by a Bish.
------------------
Damn Ghostrider! This bogey is all over me!!
-
For what it's worth, I'd support a 2-country, Axis v. Allies setup. However, I would also advocate giving the Axis use of at least the B-26 until some Luftwobble or Japanese bombers become available. B-17 would be a little weird, but I have no objection otherwise. B-26 would seem to be a better fit for Axis air doctrine to the extent that I actually understand it.
------------------
Flathat
'Black Dahlia'
No10 RNAS "The Black Flight"
Angel on your wing, devil on your tail
-
Another vote for 2 countries only. And axis vs allies. Just give the axis a ju-88 or something :P a 'good' 109 pilot (not me, maybe fishu or histro..or does he do the 190 thing..ne how) can beat the living crap out of any of those pansy spit/51 pilots (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Most of the outnumbering problems we rooks have suffered have been directly related to trying to maintain an offence against knights as we struggle to defend against bishops..This forces the defensive players into 3-1 odds against bishops and allows the knight bombers free access to our infastructure.
I like the sounds of two countries. But we could make it better with more team work.
-
IMO it is not so much a gangbang as it is "PAYBACK TIME, BABY"!
The Rocks have been having their way for the most part (and doing some bragging about it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/redface.gif) ). I have seen many Rock dominated arena's, with much fewer Bishop or Knight dominated arena's (<S> to the Knights for hanging in there). Now the Rocks lose once in a while and the whining starts. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Get used to flying in defence, outnumbered, and losing bases like dominoes. That is part of the game also.
Merry Christmas Everyone!
Mino
[This message has been edited by Minotaur (edited 12-17-1999).]
-
Fishu, have you tried flying for one of the other two sides? It can change your perspective.
As to two sides, that can be a very fun arrangement, but it's hard to put into practice in a main arena environment. If you think it would make the arena more balanced, think about it. Under a 3 country setup, it's more difficult for any one country to dominate through numbers when they're fighting a 2 front war. In a 2 country setup it's very easy for one country to get a substantial number increase and put it to good use. Think about how unbalancing it would be just for a squad to show up in force at a time when the arena is evenly split. A further problem that a one front war causes is that it funnels most of the action into a small area, typically between the two shortest opposing fields.
The allied/axis set is also a fun setup, but doesn't lend itself well to a 24/7 arena. One side is always perceived as having an advantage, in this setup it would probably be true as the Axis doesn't have the bombers to compete with the Allies. It also makes introducing new planes a lot more difficult. I think the hunger for these types of setups can be sated through regular and special events, but I don't see it working well in a 24/7 format.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
"The side with the fanciest uniforms loses."
-
HaHa brought up a valid point about why there may be 4 or 3 countries instead of 2: the ultra-massive furball. This would be a problem, definitely.
Okay then, here's my solution: 4 countries, but two of the countries are allies of the other, ie WesternAllies/Soviet vs German/Japan. Create a map that loosely resembles the world (forget about scale), or at least the primary fronts. Allies can land on each other's field, but not spawn from them. Planes are linked to specific countries (or not). This way there'd be a dispersion of units, since then each country would have a seperate identity that was based on history.
-
Leonid;
This is not a flame, just a wish. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I don't really care what the map is. I just would love to see them lovely mountain's and valley's everywhere . As far as the "Simulated Eye" can see!
Merry Christmas Everyone!
Mino
-
It's just the old "what goes around, comes around". For a while, the Rooks did have a pretty smooth road. They always seemed to have numbers and it seemed the Bishops were always struggling.
Lately it seems the shoe has been on the other foot. Right now the Rooks seem to be playing a lot of defence.
That will change; it's all been seen before.
I'd prefer 2 country historical (and NO icons <G> ) but also don't think we have the planeset for it yet. Pyro's point about balance is also well-taken in this area.
I never did like the 4 country set up in WB. I'd definitely prefer 3 country over that.
Just my .01!
-
id like to take a crack at this. First off ive never seen a fight thatt an orginised, squad couldnt disrupt. As far as even sides go. Ive never seen the knights with more than a fraction of what the other 2 have in terms of numbers. even sides will never happen anyway.
Now to the fronts. If you use the arena we have now. Country 1 and 3 could be allied and axis. Country 2 would be no mans land. We could pretend that it is France. With fields controlled by the vecci(spelling) or the resistance, depending on who is attacking. At reset there would be a surge of activity in no mans land. tacticly just grabbin the nearest field might not be the smartest move. On the other hand if you go for the farthest field. They might just go for the ones on your common border. It could turn into a real chess match. This doesent have to happen until after some axis bombers are made. But since this is beta, im sure the axis wouldnt mind useing some captured allied bombers in the mean time.
-
Pyro said:
Under a 3 country setup, it's more difficult for any one country to dominate through numbers when they're fighting a 2 front war. In a 2 country setup it's very easy for one country to get a substantial number increase and put it to good use.
Uhm not really.. if there are a 100 people in the arena then say 33 1/3 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) players on each team. Now lets say a buncha smoes (20) of em decide to jump onto team #1. Well now there is 53, 33, 33. Worse is that those smoes decide to start fighting poor #2 team so there is say 45 against #2 with a few fighting #3. And even worse the nasty #3 (25 of em) decide to beat up on #2 as well result: 45 + 25 = 60 vs 33
Now if we had a two team situation:
50 vs 50
20 smoes join resulting in:
70 vs 50
This is a lot more balanced than 60 vs 33 as shown above.
The problem with 3 teams is this.. say #1, #2 have a lot of players but #3 doesn't so they complain. The people seeing it think to themselves, "Well I don't care its even between #1 and #2 and I'm having fun".
If there were 2 teams and say #1 outnumbered #2. So #2 people complained, people would see this and think, "hmm they are outnumbered, (fighting outnumbered people isn't always fun), I'll join and help them out". Hence there is a much stronger tendency to even things out with a "2 team environment". I believe FA2 has 2 team arenas and they are quite fun but the FM sucks ;0
-
Fishu,
Since this was your original thread I am addressing you. (first)You make an assumption that is NOT true. There is NO agreement between Knights and Bishops. I have been on some weekend mornings when it started 3 Knights 13 Bishops 24 Rooks. We started with only 3 fields and the Rooks owning 2/3 of the world. I spent 7 hours online fighting the numbers increased but the odds changed very little. When we finally got back all of our ground and 3 extra Rook fields.... what happened! I FRIGIN hear you WHINE!!!! "The Knights and the Bishops have an agreement! Then you come over to the Knights to kill for a while.. later you go back to the Rooks when you get more ground back.. I speak only for myself here but the reason I personaly focus on the ROOKS is (1) The WHINE the most! (2) most of the time they need a bigger spankin! JUST THAT SIMPLE! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Thunder
-
Heya Pyro,
I thought about your point of having all of the planes take off from the 2 closest fields if it were a one front war. I'm not sure this is how it would turn out though.
Eg. (a simplified map I idea)
The border is a horizontal straight line disecting the middle of the map. 8 bases on each side bordering on the front. Additional inland bases like we have now, with strat targets etc.
Let's say the main fur started up between the two sides at the front fields between North #4 and South #4. Now, just picture how vulnerable fields 6, 7, and 8 are to capture.
From what I've seen of the players in AH, you have your furballers, but you have many other people who are interested in the strategic objectives, and will fly bombers or 47s if it means advancing thier country's position. They are not going to look at these vulnerable fields and choose instead to fly thru the Fur between the #4 fields.
So a group from the North decides to take F8 south instead. What happens now? Defence of course, and voila there are now two heated battles between F4 and F8 (north and south).
Now picture a South group going after a quiet F1 North. Defence springs up and you now have 3 battles going on.
This is a simplified version of a map, but I think it gets my point across. This 'spreading out' of the hot spots would happen naturally and quite quickly I think.
Just imagine the tension when a couple of your front bases start to fall and you're now at risk of getting flanked. Do all the planes defend? Or does your country make an offensive push at the other side of the map to relieve the pressure? One thing for certain at least is that the massive single fur between the F4 fields is now long forgotten about.
-
Er, I realize now I failed to address what seems to be your main point, and that is the balancing when one side is outnumbered. To be honest, I have no idea what to do with that.
Anybody else wanna take a crack at this? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Or... Does that situation rear it's head under the system we have now, anyways? I dunno.
Regarding introducing planes, I also don't have much input here. Perhaps introduce new planes two at a time?
Like I said earlier, I'm sure you guys have thought long and hard about all of these issues. It just seems a shame that while *every one of us* would like to see a two country map, nobody...*nobody* has developed it for any of us to even see what that would be actually like.
My wish is for you guys to disband the Knights, chop the map in half, and let us go at it for a week. Make us eat our words (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). That way we'd finally know if it's truely workable or not. And I would bet that you guys are a little curious about it too.
In 2 years when this debate opens up again, we can say "No, tried it in the AH beta, didn't work"...OR..there will BE no debate as it worked so well that it would be what we were flying then anyways. I doubt though that you will lose any potential customers by giving this experiment a week during AH's beta period.
Maybe it's too expensive for you to implement at this point in AH's development. I just can't help feeling that a topic like this, which is so *fundamental* to our experience in AH, is one that if not addressed now in beta, will be too burdensome to ever address in the future.
-
After reading all the priors, many good ideas are presented. I think the 3 party system is best. With 2 sides, unbalace is possible-anytime of the day. A country may never recover from an onslaught from the morning/evening sorties. At least with 3 countries, a couple of folks can "sneak" back a couple of bases undetected-sort of.
Being under seige all day long will make one side leave and go somewhere else to play. (Like WB or AW) I havent seen many Knights playing. I was ROOK and Bishop too. And I usually hit the same ROOK or Bishop tgts-or planes.
I havent dropped the first egg, or killed the first Knight plane-to my knowledge.
Keep it a 3 party system, who cares if 2 form a temporary pact to help build their territory back! It wont last! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
KKEN
-
Pyro: Yes I have, already from the times of Dawn of Aces where I did first time get familiar with 3-country system, guess, I never liked it.
Now I am getting quite enough of this 3-country in AH also, when usually 2 countries kills the third one together.. whether it was rook/knight vs bishop or bishop/knight vs rook (same thing)
Also sides doesn't ever (well, maybe very rarely) split so that equal numbers of that "third" country would kill bishops and rooks same time.
Usually I see no knights on the another front, only there where is most of them, was that either bishop or rook front.
-
K-Ken said:
After reading all the priors, many good ideas are presented. I think the 3 party system is best. With 2 sides, unbalace is possible-anytime of the day. A country may never recover from an onslaught from the morning/evening sorties.
Didn't you read my post? I clearly showed that in fact a 3 team system is WAY MORE unbalanced than a 2 team system.
I have no clue why people think a 2-team system is more unbalanced.. it makes no sense math wise.
-
3 is a crowd man. I vote for 2.
And if you think the balance would be off in a two team arena go play for awhile take a hard look at this three team setup and...well gues what still unbalanced most of the time.
------------------
Gijoey,Joetwo,JoeMud=me
DHBG!!