Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Axis vs Allies => Topic started by: Reschke on August 10, 2004, 01:36:52 PM
-
I have been thinking about different ways to run a setup for a long time now and with the recent TFT suggestions along with some "guidelines" from HTC I want your input. After my visit with HTC last week my mind has been going over this idea.
The thoughts I have been talking over with some of the CT staff since I got onboard here was to have a long series run over the course of two weeks. It would almost be like a rolling planeset in a way since aircraft that were available in the first week wouldn't be available in the second week and the "front lines" and some base locations would move accordingly. This would foster more mission ideas between squadrons and I think would prepare the way to get new blood who is looking to get out of the MA and find something different.
Another one was brought up by some of you way back when and has been stuck in my mind as well. A "featured" matchup so to speak where we have two aircraft from allied and two from axis planesets going up against each other. The idea I have is to make this sort of a historical and fantasy setup. What I mean by that is that we don't always have to see the P-51 go up against the late 109 series and the Zekes to go up against the Wildcats, Hellcats and Corsairs. This would go a long way toward eliminating the MA attitude that so many of you complain about creeping into the CT.
Unless you all want to continue with that attitude and if so then we will simply let this arena fall off into nothingness.
Keep in mind these are very rough ideas that needs polishing and may never come to fruition simpy because of the way this arena differs from the others we have available. I honestly don't want to step on the SEA CM guys toes by running "mini"events over here because they have put lots of time into getting their events presented and want to see them succeed and sometimes I feel like some of the ideas presented to us by the players step right into the SEA domain. Feel free to email me directly through either reschke@hitechcreations.com or nicholsw@charter.net .
Thanks Guys! I look forward to see what you all think.
-
yes i agree missions need to stay in the SEA. your going to draw a crowd by big numbers but just have them just as quick because they see no furball, just a huge blob of green, and no red but yet there are 40 people on the other side.
"screw this im going to the MA where there is a fight."
-
"The thoughts I have been talking over with some of the CT staff since I got onboard here was to have a long series run over the course of two weeks. It would almost be like a rolling planeset in a way since aircraft that were available in the first week wouldn't be available in the second week and the "front lines" and some base locations would move accordingly. This would foster more mission ideas between squadrons and I think would prepare the way to get new blood who is looking to get out of the MA and find something different."
Sounds ok by me.
"Another one was brought up by some of you way back when and has been stuck in my mind as well. A "featured" matchup so to speak where we have two aircraft from allied and two from axis planesets going up against each other."
Thumbs down, this sounds like the Duelling Ladder to me.
"Unless you all want to continue with that attitude and if so then we will simply let this arena fall off into nothingness."
Not sure what you mean by that.
"I honestly don't want to step on the SEA CM guys toes by running "mini"events over here because they have put lots of time into getting their events presented and want to see them succeed and sometimes I feel like some of the ideas presented to us by the players step right into the SEA domain."
Your not competing with the SEA so don't worry about it. The CT can have its own "TFT" or whatever and SEA events like Squad Ops will still be there...I see no problem. SEA CM's aren't going to say "Gee we shouldn't run Snaps because that's stepping on the toes of the CT". There is room for both.
-
i still think you CT staffers need to seriously consider the input you've recieved from the MA-types who don't come to the CT for xxxxx reason.
-
Squire the attitude I was referring to was the current MA attitude that makes the CT arena into a mini MA with the pork and auger types running over bases in the middle of the night just to acrue perk points. For me this arena isn't about how many points you can pick up its about how to have good fights with guys like Shane who typically want to teach us by caving our virtual skulls in with pretend cannon shells.
Shane...I am not sure what you mean by the MA types input. I haven't seen it or if I have I haven't recognized those guys as strictly MA types.
Thanks for the input guys
-
Originally posted by Reschke
The thoughts I have been talking over with some of the CT staff since I got onboard here was to have a long series run over the course of two weeks. It would almost be like a rolling planeset in a way since aircraft that were available in the first week wouldn't be available in the second week and the "front lines" and some base locations would move accordingly. This would foster more mission ideas between squadrons and I think would prepare the way to get new blood who is looking to get out of the MA and find something different.
I like the idea of continuity over a couple of weeks. The one thing I did like about WWIIonline was the sense of a war with a frontline, not just base capture after base capture by a couple of noe milkrunners. Make the bases harder to capture, making missions and cooperation play a more important role for capturing territory. But still keep airfields close enough to satisfy the furballers.
I don't see any of this as mimicing the SEA events. Still the same CT, just a progression in planeset, time periods and with a couple hours on Thursday nights for those who choose to be involved in a larger mission, whether they be individuals or a squad. No one would be forced to participate. The option is always there to just fly as they normally would.
-
"Squire the attitude I was referring to was the current MA attitude that makes the CT arena into a mini MA with the pork and auger types running over bases in the middle of the night just to acrue perk points"
Ok, I have to say I agree...as to what to do about it im not so sure, but you have my support in trying a fix.
-
Originally posted by Skyfoxx
I like the idea of continuity over a couple of weeks. The one thing I did like about WWIIonline was the sense of a war with a frontline, not just base capture after base capture by a couple of noe milkrunners. Make the bases harder to capture, making missions and cooperation play a more important role for capturing territory. But still keep airfields close enough to satisfy the furballers.
I don't see any of this as mimicing the SEA events. Still the same CT, just a progression in planeset, time periods and with a couple hours on Thursday nights for those who choose to be involved in a larger mission, whether they be individuals or a squad. No one would be forced to participate. The option is always there to just fly as they normally would.
I agree with Skyfoxx on this one... 52 days a year having something planned will not take away from SEA... you still have 313 days of flying with out it. When is the last time you saw 70 people in the CT... whether it be the mission or just being in there... It is a choice whether or not you want to fly it or not... Even flying TOD every friday night won't take me away from the TFT... and I know the 880 won't either... (just making a guess on that one)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/269_1087181432_checkbanner_mod_01.jpg)
Colonel Stream
Commanding Officer
-
Originally posted by Reschke
The thoughts I have been talking over with some of the CT staff since I got onboard here was to have a long series run over the course of two weeks. It would almost be like a rolling planeset in a way since aircraft that were available in the first week wouldn't be available in the second week and the "front lines" and some base locations would move accordingly. This would foster more mission ideas between squadrons and I think would prepare the way to get new blood who is looking to get out of the MA and find something different.
I like this idea although I don't think you're going far enough with it to attract and more importantly, hold squadrons in the CT. If you want to attract squadrons, give them long term goals to buy in to. That means longer term setups than two weeks. Two week setups are like 1/2 sitcoms stretched to fit an hour's worth of prime time. More of the same, just a little longer. I'd go for a month per setup, even 6 weeks. Although that's going to mean the fans of any particular theatre will have longer to wait between their favorites.
Another one was brought up by some of you way back when and has been stuck in my mind as well. A "featured" matchup so to speak where we have two aircraft from allied and two from axis planesets going up against each other. The idea I have is to make this sort of a historical and fantasy setup. What I mean by that is that we don't always have to see the P-51 go up against the late 109 series and the Zekes to go up against the Wildcats, Hellcats and Corsairs. This would go a long way toward eliminating the MA attitude that so many of you complain about creeping into the CT.
Fighter-town. Good for some, not good for others. I garauntee this will alienate some people - me for one.
Unless you all want to continue with that attitude and if so then we will simply let this arena fall off into nothingness.
:rolleyes:
I honestly don't want to step on the SEA CM guys toes by running "mini"events over here because they have put lots of time into getting their events presented and want to see them succeed and sometimes I feel like some of the ideas presented to us by the players step right into the SEA domain.
The SEA CM's are grownups and they can look after themselves. There a fairly visible line between the CT and events that will remain no matter what you do in the CT (except of course if you start hosting full-blown, pre-register style events).
The two ideas you've presented here are diametrically opposed to each other. They are presented as "pick one or the long term consequences are dire". This is incorrect and misleading sir. Leaving the CT as it is most likely means it's population will remain about where it is now and the level of civility in the arena will vary according to the popularity/difficulty of the setup as it has in the past. Even my crystal ball isn't clear enough to forecast the death of the CT in the near future.
There is no stated goal in your post here Reschke. However, permit me to make a guess. There are two:
Improve the atmosphere in the CT: If you want to increase the level of civility in the arena, there is only one way to do it - present a consistent face for the CT. Pick a method of setups, weighted either to a fighter-town style of play or weighted towards a 2-country winnable war style of play. Once you've got it picked, stick with for a year or so to see how it shakes out. People get frustrated when they expect one thing and are presented another.
Increase the population base of the CT: If you want to increase the population base, more specifically increase the number of regular squadrons in the arena you need to have setups over extended periods of time. Squadrons need long-term game goals and short term player challenges to hold interest in the arena. The long-term goals just don't exist in 1, 2 or 3 week setups. Less change, more variety is what's called for here. 1 week "balanced" setups are just the same-old, same-old. People in the CT have their favorites and wait for them to show up, and the waiting part is a part of what keeps the CT population as small as it is. If you truly intend on increasing the population you need to build in player/squadron buy-ins. The only buy-in available in the CT right now is immediate player gratification, which if fine for a large transient population. I can't quote the numbers, but from what I've seen as I pop into the arena on occasion is a steady backbone of about 10-12 regular "CT" players - these are the people I see everytime I visit the CT no matter what the setup. The rest of us are transients. If there was more to hold my interest I'd stay longer, and that's likely true of the other transients. If there was enough to buy into in the CT I'd be able to move my squadron in on a permanent basis - we came from the AvA in AirWarrior and we do miss not having something like it in AH - but given the current CT, that's just not going to happen.
All totaled up. You're leaning in two directions at the same time while avoiding having to take a leading step in either path and trying to force "the community" to take their choice of your proposals "or else". IMO CT CM's are leadership slots. Leaders lead - that means out in front, choosing the direction. So pick one, take a step and see where it gets you. If I like the direction you head off to I'll go with you. If I don't I'll wish you well and be on my way and let you get on with yours. That is my attitude.
-
I kinda like all those ideas, blended into one. Have a two week setup that focuses on a specific air unit or theater with a planeset that evolves over the week. Will get multiple planes into one setup, but just not as one big lump.
For example a two week setup that focuses on the Eighth Airforce. Start off with Spitfires and early Model P47s, B17s and Bostons. Couple days later add the next P47 lose the Spit and maybe add the P51b. Next add the P38 and the B26, drop the early P47. The last 47. Then finally adding the P51d, dropping the 51b.
This is just a rough example and the Luftwaffe would follow in a similiar, historic progression.
We could set up big bomber raids couple nights during the two weeks. Say for a total of 4-6 raids, with some objectives listed by the CT staff, if the Allies successfully level 3 out of 5 targets assigned during the CT "Missions" they win.
It would take some planning and organizing to get it to run. But it would be a sense of history role-playing and a bit closer to the TfT people desire, without really changing the open atmosphere of the arena. If people wish to partake they can, if they wish to interfere, just take it as the random chances of war. :D
I think a lot can be done to enhance the CT experience(for some) without really changing things too much. It's just gonna take some people to step up, lead and apply the energy. Also gonna take a much greater interaction with the CT staff than we have at this point.
But along those lines I just wanted to offer some of my "token" praise to Reschke, for sharing with us what they've been discussing on the Staff forum and proposing some potential ideas to make the CT better.
Keep it coming, it is sorely needed
-
Originally posted by detch01
All totaled up. You're leaning in two directions at the same time while avoiding having to take a leading step in either path and trying to force "the community" to take their choice of your proposals "or else". IMO CT CM's are leadership slots. Leaders lead - that means out in front, choosing the direction.
Exactly, I like the way you're thinking there asw
-
This all sounds promising. It will require a great deal of co-operation from what seems to me to be a great big wad of type "A" personalities who have spent their entire lives having their own way. I'm willing to participate and will admit that Bug's idea sounds good providing we get one critical element in place. Buff drivers. For any of these scenarios to play out well we will need a healthy and competent cadre of those fellows. If there were, as an example 16-20 good buff drivers that could fly formation and stay together in and out of a target and they were escorted by already proven players such as the 325th or the 880 FAA (as an example I'm aware there are others) they have a very good chance of hitting their target and landing with acceptable losses. Just think of it for a moment 48-60 buffs pounding one target!!!!! oh my aching frame rates!!!!! In PTO set ups that would be a CV complement 8 TBMs 8 SBDs 16 fighters. That would be grand indeed. Play that out once weekly and your advancing front idea would work. You guys may end up being short Axis types to oppose you!
-
Originally posted by Reschke
Shane...I am not sure what you mean by the MA types input. I haven't seen it or if I have I haven't recognized those guys as strictly MA types.
Thanks for the input guys
the icon range is the worst thing about the CT
I can see well anyway and dots are harder to see in Ah2 than ah1
but planes are easy to see in real life.
Its the biggest complaint against the CT there is.
And none is willing to make it normal means CT staff dont care if the numbers improve
Thats a fact.
-
Originally posted by X2Lee
the icon range is the worst thing about the CT
I can see well anyway and dots are harder to see in Ah2 than ah1
but planes are easy to see in real life.
Its the biggest complaint against the CT there is.
And none is willing to make it normal means CT staff dont care if the numbers improve
Thats a fact.
Not to discredit your opinion on icons, but I have to disagree that planes are easy to see in real life. They can be very difficult to spot, especially in the sun or with the ground detail behind them.
That would fall in line with Erich Hartmanns comments that he believed that the majority of his victims, never knew he was there.
-
we might wanna do a test with long icons. we are just turning away people in the CT by our icons. that was figured out in the General Forum when p6e posted a poll. radar was also a big issue.
-
Reschke I have posted this so many time its not funny!
Have a TOD for two weeks. Start early war and progress to late war. Stretch five years into two weeks. Thats about two days per year. Lets take the ETO. Start out early war where the LW have taken a few bases in France, etc. Every two days the CT Staff will capture bases to represent the German's advancements untill all thats left is England. This gives the LW a chance to go on thire capturing spree. They can capture XX number of bases untill the Staff advance the map. Then the tide turns and the allies start retaking the land lost to the Germans. This gives everone a chance to fly the better planes and capture fields. This also gives two thursday TFT nights to fly historic type missions both sides having the worse and better planes. All planes will be used for that theater, lots a fileds to capture, and even some GV assaults.
Do the same with the PTO. IJN attacks pearl, then CV battles, Then island hopping, then to the N1K2J vs F6F/F4U over Okinawa!
I'm tellen you guys, with these setups and the help of "participating" CT Staff and "monitors", this can be a great arena!
-
Like idea with "RPS" in any form :aok
Originally posted by Reschke
Squire the attitude I was referring to was the current MA attitude that makes the CT arena into a mini MA with the pork and auger types running over bases in the middle of the night just to acrue perk points.
CT perks system almost same as in MA now. Its one of reasons for gathering perks i believe.
-
Each setup can be unique, it wouldn't *have* to be something where several years past...it could be months, or even weeks. Eg a BoB setup would just be 1940. Keep it flexible, dont insist it can only be done one way.
...btw most CT setups dont even have perk rides.
-
All I have to say is something new in the CT is something good.
This kind of creative thinking is what I want in the CT.
As long as we all know it is limited in duration, I am all for it.
GO with your bad self and do it.
-
Originally posted by X2Lee
the icon range is the worst thing about the CT
I can see well anyway and dots are harder to see in Ah2 than ah1
but planes are easy to see in real life.
Trust me, planes arn't all that easy to see in real life. It is quite common to have ATC tell us there is an aircraft 12oclock 5 miles opposite direction 1000 feet below, and neither me nor captain ever see it. And these are 737's and such, much bigger and not painted to blend in like most fighters.
-
Something else, you better get used to the idea that there is a large # of players that will insist on the P-51D and the 109G-10 in every setup or they won't come. No ammount of work will get them here either, the MA is where they will stay. Beleive it, and move on.
-
Something else, you better get used to the idea that there is a large # of players that will insist on the P-51D and the 109G-10 in every setup or they won't come. No ammount of work will get them here either, the MA is where they will stay. Beleive it, and move on.
Then let them stay in the MA. We do need people but if they can't fly anything other than those planes they would probablly not stay very long in the CT anyway once the ACE'S of the CT shot there butts down. I'm not saying that they can't fly any other plane i'm just stating that i have seen guys from the MA come into the CT get blown away and leave grumbling that if they had had there runstang or G-10 or lala that SOB would be dead. I know this is going to sound harsh but if they don't like the plane set then fine "Go back to the MA where they can fly whatever they want" because we know only real MEN & WOMAN fly the CT.
Ok so i got a little out of hand and hijacked this thread a bit sorry.
I love all the idea's that are being proposed and look forward to there implemetation.
-
Originally posted by detch01 The two ideas you've presented here are diametrically opposed to each other. They are presented as "pick one or the long term consequences are dire". This is incorrect and misleading sir. Leaving the CT as it is most likely means it's population will remain about where it is now and the level of civility in the arena will vary according to the popularity/difficulty of the setup as it has in the past. Even my crystal ball isn't clear enough to forecast the death of the CT in the near future. [/B]
Thanks for the opinion Detch as I said in the closing of my opening post these are extremely rough and basic ideas that are meant to get an understanding of what you all want a taste of. They represent the two sides of arguments that I have seen since my involvement as a CT player and a member of the staff. These are not to lead anyone in a specific way but to be stimulating to you guys so we can get ideas. I made an error and didn't finish a thought sitting at work posting this and corrected it in my response to Squire's first response here.
To address an issue posted here someone mentions that a large number of players will "insist" on planes like the 109G-10 and P-51D in every setup...well we already get that from my friends in the "Corsair Mafia" (of which I am a proud member) and we get guys who beg for certain setups no matter what we may have on the table. That is something we already put up with and even if we catered to those players I believe they would leave within a few weeks simply because of the way this arena is.
For me this post is strictly a fact finding mission that I hope will result in fair and good changes for the hopeful long life of the CT. Honestly guys I feel that the CT consistently runs the razor's edge of extinction and its not from lack of enthusiasm its from self destruction. As a staffer for the CT its my job (no pay volunteer I might add) to find out what we can do to make it better for all of us. Maybe this coming week will be the tour of duty extension for those of us in the South Pacific or maybe we transfer you all to a different Operational Theater...I will have more of an idea tomorrow evening.
-
I was very surprized to see how many folks in Hawks poll said they didnt fly the CT because of the Icon range. I can understand folks wanting their favorite ride, but the whines about the short Icon ranges caught me off guard. The thought that you could positively ID a plane at 6000 yards EVERY TIME is preposterous. Short Icon ranges is one of the things that MAKES the CT what it is. Is 3000 yards, two miles away, not enough? Holy cow.
Maybe give more dot dar coverage, but I say we should keep the short Icon ranges.
-
Originally posted by Squire
...btw most CT setups dont even have perk rides.
Yes, but you can use collected perks in next setups
-
Originally posted by Grits
I was very surprized to see how many folks in Hawks poll said they didnt fly the CT because of the Icon range. I can understand folks wanting their favorite ride, but the whines about the short Icon ranges caught me off guard. The thought that you could positively ID a plane at 6000 yards EVERY TIME is preposterous. Short Icon ranges is one of the things that MAKES the CT what it is. Is 3000 yards, two miles away, not enough? Holy cow.
Maybe give more dot dar coverage, but I say we should keep the short Icon ranges.
well... considering the lag effect, short icon range can get pretty iffy, especially in conjunction with the already new icon system.
having said that, it really doesn't matter to me... but it seems to others, as well as radar...
-
what would you rather want to keep short icons or people?
i like anything with a rolling planeset thing going loved it with my short stay at warbirds
-
I was very surprized to see how many folks in Hawks poll said they didnt fly the CT because of the Icon range. I can understand folks wanting their favorite ride, but the whines about the short Icon ranges caught me off guard.
I dont quite get it either but, Im willing to see what happens.
-
I guess it doesnt really make that much difference, I'll fly no matter what the Icon range is set at. If the longer range icons gets me more targets, then thats OK . :)
-
i can see why icons is a problem. i ran a 1024x756 setup on the last ETO we had. i had a royal pain in the bellybutton finding cons. i didn't see most til i saw red. even on the sea. most these guys and you guys i bet are running at high screen res. impossible to see dots at more than 3k. you could litterally fly over one and not he was there.
-
Originally posted by TheBug
Not to discredit your opinion on icons, but I have to disagree that planes are easy to see in real life. They can be very difficult to spot, especially in the sun or with the ground detail behind them.
That would fall in line with Erich Hartmanns comments that he believed that the majority of his victims, never knew he was there.
well if the sun is in your eyes is a given. I can see aircrafy miles away. whether im in the air or on the ground. I say u can see them for 5 to 6 miles according to conditions and sunglint and such.
The icon range reminds me of AW FR
a unreal consequence to put you in a flight parameter.
The Icons are unreal to make u fly in certain parameters.
-
Originally posted by talliven
Originally posted by X2Lee
the icon range is the worst thing about the CT
I can see well anyway and dots are harder to see in Ah2 than ah1
but planes are easy to see in real life.
Trust me, planes arn't all that easy to see in real life. It is quite common to have ATC tell us there is an aircraft 12oclock 5 miles opposite direction 1000 feet below, and neither me nor captain ever see it. And these are 737's and such, much bigger and not painted to blend in like most fighters.
Disagree, I am a pilot also and sure you dont see all the traffic,
But you CAN see planes 3-4 miles out lots of times.
in other words, you CAN see that far, even if you dont see the traffic.
-
Originally posted by simshell
what would you rather want to keep short icons or people?
Nope - don't want no short people round here ;)
-
Originally posted by Grits
I was very surprized to see how many folks in Hawks poll said they didnt fly the CT because of the Icon range. I can understand folks wanting their favorite ride, but the whines about the short Icon ranges caught me off guard. The thought that you could positively ID a plane at 6000 yards EVERY TIME is preposterous. Short Icon ranges is one of the things that MAKES the CT what it is. Is 3000 yards, two miles away, not enough? Holy cow.
Maybe give more dot dar coverage, but I say we should keep the short Icon ranges.
Geez me too!!! You guys would never agree with me about no dot dar then huh.
Wait here's an idea why don't we extend Icon range to the max and take turns flying on auto at 3k. would that bring more people into the arena?
Seriously, the thing I like about the CT is the overall skill level in here. It's better than in the MA. There are some guys who participate in the MA and are stars, you get them in here and ehhhhh. It is a little harder to game the game here. The ones that become upset leave angry do so because they don't want to play. They want to rack up points blowing up cartoon things.
We are seeing more new faces and also old faces returning. Let's just continue to welcome everyone but essentially keep the arena progressing through small changes rather than sweeping ones. That way it will be easier to see what works and what doesn't and to what degrees.
As to the Icon thing. Extend, shorten it or eliminate it. It doesn't matter to me I have great mk1 eyeballs.
-
Originally posted by simshell
what would you rather want to keep short icons or people?
i like anything with a rolling planeset thing going loved it with my short stay at warbirds
Short icons. Wanna run me off, bring in the D6.0 icons
-
Originally posted by B17Skull12
i can see why icons is a problem. i ran a 1024x756 setup on the last ETO we had. i had a royal pain in the bellybutton finding cons. i didn't see most til i saw red. even on the sea. most these guys and you guys i bet are running at high screen res. impossible to see dots at more than 3k. you could litterally fly over one and not he was there.
I use 1280 res and hate icons set further than D3
-
I don't really care all that much about the short or long icons in the CT...if it really brought the #s up in a meaningfull way I would say go with long, but im not convinced it would. "My squad flies 190D-9s and Typhoon's, where are they?" groups will still stay away.
ASW...I have read your post three times and maybe you could tell us why exactly your squad doesn't come to the CT?, because its not clear, and what is a "squad buy-in" because I have no clue what that is either.
-
Originally posted by Squire
I don't really care all that much about the short or long icons in the CT...if it really brought the #s up in a meaningfull way I would say go with long, but im not convinced it would.
Same here, I prefer short icons, but if long icons by themselves will increase the number of victi....err....players, I'd be all for it. I'm not so sure it would really make a difference but it cant hurt to try.
-
Originally posted by Grits
Same here, I prefer short icons, but if long icons by themselves will increase the number of victi....err....players, I'd be all for it. I'm not so sure it would really make a difference but it cant hurt to try.
Try the MA icon settings. In response to P6e's thread over in General Discussions, that was the most frequently given reason for avoiding the CT. I doubt that any one of us - including the sleep-deprived P6e - would give short icon ranges as the most important reason we fly in the CT (heck, it turns out he's been flying with long icons for awhile and just now noticed it). By changing that one thing, we at least shut up a large group of anti-CT people.
Follow Arlo's and Bug's advice on being good ambassadors from the CT. We already see the results with the new faces appearing every night. Plus, it's just plain good manners.
I certainly think it would be fun to try Reschke's ideas about rolling plane sets and limited match-ups. I believe it was Fork who tried a version of RPS in one of the Pac setups, and most of us fondly remember the week of P-38 v. Nik. But I don't think that sort of thing will bring in new people (instead, it keeps the rest of us interested).
We're never going to be able to grab the people who insist on always flying late-war planes, and I don't think it's worth spending a lot of effort trying to bring them in. They'll occasionally stop by when we're running a late-war week and the Pizza Map is up in the MA, but otherwise we just don't offer what they want. The ones who come are the ones who want to try something different, and they stay because this place is both different and more pleasant.
....er....that's what I think, at least.
- oldman
-
btw Reschke i agree. just dont do rolling plane sets that start new each month.
-
Originally posted by storch
We are seeing more new faces and also old faces returning. Let's just continue to welcome everyone but essentially keep the arena progressing through small changes rather than sweeping ones. That way it will be easier to see what works and what doesn't and to what degrees.
There are many good points in this thread but I think this is one of the better ones that should not be ignored.
Change can be just as bad as it is good, I wouldn't think that changes should be implemented that gain 15 to 20 new players but end up losing 10 to 15 current CT regulars. I'm not whining nor complaining as to change-merely trying to emphasize storch's point.
One example would be the elimination of manable guns on the CV's due to "beach parking"-good idea, for the right reasons, but... Last night there was at least one (maybe two) allied fleets sailed in close proximity to one axis CV. There were good fights, hardly any flight time, big continuious furball. But we were each flying in each others flak-to me-just like beach parking but more of an equal basis I guess. Anyway the point being-I believe that several people logged-I know I did, and there were many before me that expressed frustration. No matter what you change or how much-there will still be people that game-the-game.
Keep the eye on "progress" and not so much "change". Contrary to some beliefs Reschke, there is a lot of good intel on the current and reserve CT staff, listen to them, listen to the CT community, make your decisions and carry on.
BTW- to Reschke for asking, and to all others for giving the input that he requested.
-
Yup, I moved the northern allied CV farther away, not too far away only about 1/2 a sector, but that was after you guys logged.
So far I think the no-CV-gunner thing has been a big success. You still get chewed apart if you fly through the CV group, but TBM's and B5N's have a slight chance to make a torpedo run, where with gunners they have none.
The only possible problem is if one side has a significant advantage in Jabo (like now with the F6F-5) and that side made a concerted effort to sink a CV, I dont see it getting stopped. If we had even Jabo capabilities (like if we had the F6F-3) it should be fine. I'm not saying the F6F-5 should be removed, just using it as an example of how not having the CV gunners might be exploited.
-
My thought's
No dat dar was fun but a pain in the butt however it keeps you on your toes not knowing if that dot you see on the horizion is friend or foe i vote we keep it for a little longer.
Long and short icons i think the short icons is more realalistic even though it is just like the no dot dar in the sense that it is a pain in the butt. I think that is one of the things that sets the CT apart from the MA. If you go to the long icons i think you are just making the CT more like the MA. The idea behind the CT is to be more Historically accurate (right or not) that being said if someone comes over from the MA and then leaves because the icons are to short or there is no dot dar then more than likely they have no interest in playing in an historiacally accurate setting any way.
Manned ack Off very bad idea. I agree that with it off you don't have to worry about being shot down by all the eagle eyed sharp shooter's on the other hand when someone new or from the MA does come in and see's that there is no way to defend the fleet other than upping a plane there going to log. Is there any way to turn off just the 8 and 5 inch guns and still leave the forties and twenties. It is harder to hit a screaming nme with those but it does give the chance to defend the fleet a little bit.
Rotating plane sets Brilliant idea there's not much more to say other than i think this is the transfusion that the CT needs right now:aok
CT ambassadors another excellent idea would help the CT staff out as well as getting the word out to others in the different arena's. I talked with a guy a couple of nights back and he was telling me that he was wanting to bring his squad over from the MA so he and another squadie was checking the CT out. I told him that if he had any questions to ask and that i would try to answer if i knew the answer and if not someone else in the CT might. He seemed very pleased when he left. Now with that being said there was a little altircation with he's squad mate and a CT regular which ended with the MA person leaving with a bad taste in his mouth about the CT. If we are going to have CT Ambassador's we all need to be them.
Advertising: To get more people into the CT we need to let them know it exist's. I have said this before and i will say it again Arlo's banners are fantastic but they don't reach everyone. There are alot of poeple that play AH that don't even come in here and read the message board's so how can they see the banner. I still say that we need to ask Hitech, Skuzzy, or whoever about posting a message in the buffer of the MA, TA, and the DA about the CT and let them know it exist's. I can't count how many times when i was in the MA and was chating with someone and made mention of the CT and they said what is that.
I think it was Grits that said that it is up to us the CT community to make the CT better and into what it can be. Let's do it let's make the CT so enjoyable that everyone will want to be in the CT.
-
I venture into the CT everynow and then. To me as it stands now it is just a mini MA with limited plane set. Add the short ICON range and it really isnt that fun. The problem is finding a fight. Chasing cons just to find out you have been chasing a friendly blows. The rolling plane set up seems interesting and I would be willing to drag my squad in to try it out.