Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Pieper on August 13, 2004, 10:56:41 PM
-
OK guys....Im a rook, but that makes no difference, the new patch is crap. Look at it this way.....most of the times when a country has high numbers its because traitors have switched sides to be part of a reset. It dosent matter if they get the perks for it or not.....seen this too many times. In fact I bet lots of Bish and Knits that started this crap are guilty of it.
So far all I've seen the disabled planes effect is the number of people who say screw it all together and log off.
It hurts squads
Bish...Knits...If you were in an attack squad and had to sit in the tower and wait for your plane of choice to be enabled so you could stop an enemy push........how would you feel?
There is no way Im ever switching sides......although HiTech told me to as a solution on god channel........
I think its alot of BS.....
For Christ sakes! you cant even defend your HQ in a 163.....thought about that yet?
All this is doing is effecting dedicated squads....not the root of the problem....the country swaping furballers
-
choose a different plane. or do you suck so bad that only the best planes will do for you?
-
Originally posted by Pieper
blah..blah.. blah..
So far all I've seen the disabled planes effect is the number of people who say screw it all together and log off.
blah blah blah
Holy crap! Do you think this might be what Hitech was trying to DO?
-
Originally posted by Pieper
Bish...Knits...If you were in an attack squad and had to sit in the tower and wait for your plane of choice to be enabled so you could stop an enemy push........how would you feel?
Since you asked......I would feel like a dweeb if 80%-90% of the plane set was availible, and I was sitting in the tower pouting about my choice ride.
-
ALL sides will out number the others throught the day. They to will suffer the lack of Lgay7's.
When I get up tomorrow Bish will out number all in my GMT time frame. No gay7 no 163 no dar-dee-dum.
GET A GRIP and ride another plane. I know some of u can't so it's an ideal time to start.... start with the spit 1. After summer hols when the rooks are back to 237 players on a Sunday spit 1's will be rooks limit:rofl
-
Originally posted by LYNX
ALL sides will out number the others throught the day. They to will suffer the lack of Lgay7's.
When I get up tomorrow Bish will out number all in my GMT time frame. No gay7 no 163 no dardeedum.
GET A GRIP and ride another plane. I know some of u can't so it's an ideal time to start.... start with the spit 1. After summer hols when the rooks are back to 237 players on a Sunday spit 1's will be rooks limit:rofl
*GASP* What's that I see?!? The voice of reason?!?! Sir.
-
Originally posted by bigsky
choose a different plane. or do you suck so bad that only the best planes will do for you?
First, tell me what you think the "best" plane is for JABO ?
The "best" plane is a completely subjective opinion. You're right that some squads specialize in certain planes and have practiced their operations around them. It could very well be that we would suck in other planes - for a while. I fail to see how being forced into another ride "balances the numbers universe" (which was the original complaint) the way it is currently being conducted.
The P51-D has the best long distance "legs" (fuel) and combination of ordinance with dogfighting capability of any of the JABO rides (F4U, F6F, P47, Typhoon).
This doesn't seem to be about numbers balancing. It seems to be about forcing a style of play on another group because you don't like it. Rooks play more strategic, joint ops, base-taking missions, I guess. Most of the whines I have seen about hordes seem to have their source in some flyer wanting to up to dogfight and having a porked base or hordes of strat players to contend with.
It's not a numbers problem - it's a game "playing style" orientation. The current implementation punishes large squad players who enjoy cooperative missions.
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Since you asked......I would feel like a dweeb if 80%-90% of the plane set was availible, and I was sitting in the tower pouting about my choice ride.
You might be a dweeb because you didn't read the question.
How many planes are available to you as an attack squad (that means "JABO" missions) if the ENY penalty pushes over 6 ? 10 ? 20 ?
Not the 80%/90% number you tossed out.
-
Mossie has great range, great guns, good payload and can be used effectively as a dogfighter if you put yourself to it.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Mossie has great range, great guns, good payload and can be used effectively as a dogfighter if you put yourself to it.
Let's see... 10 Mossies diving from 10K to the field.... BANG !
Oh, there goes our elevators. Also, 10 Mossies would be ganged by the normal cloud of La7's, 109's, Spits, etc... waiting to meet them. Mossy can't extend away from even a Yak.
-
very well said hyrax. I am in total agreement
-
So far all I've seen the disabled planes effect is the number of people who say screw it all together and log off.
It hurts squads
and being on the side that was out numberd and valched at all avlable baces was good for squads ? come on grow up
-
The only time I saw it on it said no planes less than 6.0 may launch. That left alot of planes to use. I dont think it will bother me much. I doubt it will ruin the game...Im willing to see how it affects it.
The ramming is another story. Use that for scenarios but leave MA as it was.
-
Originally posted by yb11
So far all I've seen the disabled planes effect is the number of people who say screw it all together and log off.
It hurts squads
and being on the side that was out numberd and valched at all avlable baces was good for squads ? come on grow up
First, If you're going to quote me - don't change my statement to suit your purposes.
My statement was "The current implementation punishes large squad players who enjoy cooperative missions."
The Rook proved this the other night when we were down to 3 bases and roared back to 17 in 2-3 hours.... with about 30 more players than the least #'d country.
Non-Rook squads are not hurt by Rook numbers but by their own inability to COOPERATE or depart from their (apparent) furball and runway vulching missions. THAT'S what is hurting non-Rook squads - not Rook numbers...
-
I saw eny disabled to 15 today. numbers were low and rooks only enjoyed an 8 person majority on the lowest team
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
Non-Rook squads are not hurt by Rook numbers but by their own inability to COOPERATE or depart from their (apparent) furball and runway vulching missions. THAT'S what is hurting non-Rook squads - not Rook numbers...
That is complete bull and you know it.
You try logging on every day for a week and always being down to two to four bases, no dar and all fields being suppressed and then you come back and say it doesn't hurt the players on that side.
All you effing whiners keep talking about how you're being denied doing what you want to do sometimes. Well eff you. Every time I log on to see a few supressed bases and no dar I am denied doing what I want to do to every single time. Somehow that doesn't register at all with you simple minded I WANT MY P-51D NOW!!!! WAAAAHHHHH!!!!!! types.
As to your comments regarding the Mossie, it is clear you have no concept of how to actually fight. Dive, bomb and run like chickens is your plane of attack?:rofl
-
I can honestly say that I have not logged on in a very long time to see a reset imminent (on behalf of the Rooks). I have seen Rooks work very hard towards a reset and after hours and hours seen it snatched away from us at the very last moment by Bish or Knights.
Originally posted by Karnak
Every time I log on to see a few supressed bases and no dar I am denied doing what I want to do to every single time.
Perhaps because you are the lone-wolf type who prefers to fight in the MA without having to work with your squadmates ?
Originally posted by Karnak
As to your comments regarding the Mossie, it is clear you have no concept of how to actually fight. Dive, bomb and run like chickens is your plane of attack?:rofl
Please make sure you use MY words when quoting me. I will be sure to return the favor.
You must be the typical base diver who gets 1 or 2 vulches before dying from ACK or base defense. The point of a JABO is NOT to die in the ack, but to get back up to some reasonable altitude to make another pass or engage in a dogfight. The Mossie being such a stellar JABO choice must be the reason I never see a single Mossie raid to a base.
By the way, since there are no actual statistics being made available to us to back up what either of us is saying regarding base availability and country resets - you can disregard this post and I will completely disregard yours.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
That is complete bull and you know it.
You try logging on every day for a week and always being down to two to four bases, no dar and all fields being suppressed and then you come back and say it doesn't hurt the players on that side.
All you effing whiners keep talking about how you're being denied doing what you want to do sometimes. Well eff you. Every time I log on to see a few supressed bases and no dar I am denied doing what I want to do to every single time. Somehow that doesn't register at all with you simple minded I WANT MY P-51D NOW!!!! WAAAAHHHHH!!!!!! types.
As to your comments regarding the Mossie, it is clear you have no concept of how to actually fight. Dive, bomb and run like chickens is your plane of attack?:rofl
Preach on brother Karnak!!! :D
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
I honestly can say that I have not logged on in a very long time to see a reset imminent (on behalf of the Rooks). I have seen Rooks work very hard towards a reset and after hours and hours seen it snatched away from us at the very last moment by Bish or Knights.
Since there are no actual statistics to back up what either of us is saying - you can disregard this post and I will completely disregard yours.
I don't need statistics. It is a description of what happened two weeks ago.
Every day I logged on the Knights were in the corner, completely outnumbered and with Rooks and Bish (I don't look to see who, red is red) overhead preventing any fights from happening. That is a denial of service to me and as I pay the same as you do, I likewise deserve to have a shot at some air-to-air combat.
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
Let's see... 10 Mossies diving from 10K to the field.... BANG !
Oh, there goes our elevators. Also, 10 Mossies would be ganged by the normal cloud of La7's, 109's, Spits, etc... waiting to meet them. Mossy can't extend away from even a Yak.
Actually a while back my squad did a mossie run.. I think we had about 10 mossies, and when we landed I believe there was something like 45 total kills on the one sortie.. I have a screenshot of it somewhere, I'll see if I can find it.
Honestly, if you limit your speed in a dive, the mossie can take quite a bit of torture, and if you fly it enough, there are ways to keep the yaks on their toes. The firepower however is hard to beat =) I like to fly it for fun.
--Mike/Howitzer
-
Originally posted by bigsky
choose a different plane. or do you suck so bad that only the best planes will do for you?
His ability to fly other planes isn't really relevant is it? He WANTS to fly a certain type of plane and the current plan is to deny him that option without forcing him to change countries.
-
Frankly, I would rather have seen the aircraft in question be perked than disabled. Say, start at 20 perk points and work their way up from there.
But that isn't what we got, so for the time being we have to live with it. As Pyro said it will be tweaked.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Holy crap! Do you think this might be what Hitech was trying to DO?
Long as they don't cancel their accounts... what does HiTech care?
-
Originally posted by 4510
His ability to fly other planes isn't really relevant is it? He WANTS to fly a certain type of plane and the current plan is to deny him that option without forcing him to change countries.
Instead of being denied his P-51D he wants to deny me all aircraft. Nice.
-
Originally posted by Howitzer
Actually a while back my squad did a mossie run.. I think we had about 10 mossies, and when we landed I believe there was something like 45 total kills on the one sortie.. I have a screenshot of it somewhere, I'll see if I can find it.
Honestly, if you limit your speed in a dive, the mossie can take quite a bit of torture, and if you fly it enough, there are ways to keep the yaks on their toes. The firepower however is hard to beat =) I like to fly it for fun.
--Mike/Howitzer
I agree Howitzer, if you limit your speed in the dive - you can survive the attempt (and pull out gently at the other end). This is also true for the P-38, which makes a great JABO plane if you are careful not to compress in the dive. The problem isn't entry into the bombing phase, but having the speed to climb out of the well before the base defense dives in on your 6 and blows you out of the air. If I dive flap, cut throttle and spiral in with the 38 - I typically don't have the E to climb back out and away from the La7 and 190 200ft behind me (at that point).
By the way - did your Mossie mission go into a capped field ? Were the kills "A2A" or GV and runway vulches ? Did you have any light fighter escort with you ?
-
omg this is to good to be true!
-
My record streak in the Mossie, air-to-air, is 31 kills before I collided with a Spitfire while going for #32.
To be clear, these were not all in one mission. They weren't even in one night.
It can be used air-to-air. La-7s are a real issue though, you are right there. I have won a one on one Mossie v La-7 from a co-E or worse position a total of 3 times that I can recall.
-
every day for a week and always being down to two to four bases, no dar and all fields being suppressed
Now that is a bunch of crap. That means there was at least 7 if not more resets that week:rofl When did that happen because I sure missed it:lol :lol :lol :rofl
-
In at least one case (the only time I checked later before going to bed) the Knights had fought back to about 10 bases and had the numbers to hold out. However, that happened after the time I could play.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Frankly, I would rather have seen the aircraft in question be perked than disabled. Say, start at 20 perk points and work their way up from there.
But that isn't what we got, so for the time being we have to live with it. As Pyro said it will be tweaked.
On this we can certainly agree. Perking is a known constraint and would be easier to understand and accept. The argument then becomes whether the perk system needs a completel "redo" to level anomaly planes like the La7.
Tonight I saw the SpitXIV perked at 40 and the Tempest at 45.... geee... tough decision there as to which one was the better value....
LOL !!!
-
The Spitfire Mk XIV is my favorite WWII fighter. I practically never use it though. I actually lost two of them tonight getting only one kill in the process. I had a lousy night.
However, I would point out that my favorite aircraft has always been effectively denied me by it's gangbang icon. The perking is fine, but it is too slow to survive the icon.
-
Originally posted by bigsky
choose a different plane. or do you suck so bad that only the best planes will do for you?
This is hardly a constructive input and probably not the sort of comments HT wants supporting his case.
What do you say to the person who only flies once a week with his friends, and they all fly a particular plane for historic reasons?
Is this person responsible for the odds being skewed night after night? No.
Is his showing up with his friends on a given night likely to completely unbalance the arena? No - not unless it's a 30-member squad - and even then it's a maybe.
So ... why should this person - who sets aside one evening a week of his time to play AH - who practices offline in his favorite plane so he can do well - why should he arrive in AH and find that he can't fly his plane because the country odds just happen to be in his favor at the time. Why is he being punished? Why should he be forced to fly a plane he doesn't want to at all? Why should he have to choose between flying with his friends and flying his favorite plane?
Also there's the trend of Truce Warrior, where two countries gang up on the third who may or may not have a slight numeric edge - or not. The balancer in it's current form can't compensate for this.
In another thread I suggested an easy-to-implement alternative. Have the load-balancer only apply to captured fields. If you can advance without needed a huge numeric advantage, then you can fly whatever you want all over the map. But if you can't advance without The Horde, then once you're on foreign soil you lose the benefit of La-7's, etc. from those captured fields. You can still use these planes from homeland fields. Which allows squads to find fights on un-Horded areas of the front closer to these bases. This preserves what HT had in mind without making the wrong people suffer.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
The Spitfire Mk XIV is my favorite WWII fighter. I practically never use it though. I actually lost two of them tonight getting only one kill in the process. I had a lousy night.
However, I would point out that my favorite aircraft has always been effectively denied me by it's gangbang icon. The perking is fine, but it is too slow to survive the icon.
I would attempt to fly the F4U-4 much more but for the very same reason...
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
I agree Howitzer, if you limit your speed in the dive - you can survive the attempt (and pull out gently at the other end). This is also true for the P-38, which makes a great JABO plane if you are careful not to compress in the dive. The problem isn't entry into the bombing phase, but having the speed to climb out of the well before the base defense dives in on your 6 and blows you out of the air. If I dive flap, cut throttle and spiral in with the 38 - I typically don't have the E to climb back out and away from the La7 and 190 200ft behind me (at that point).
By the way - did your Mossie mission go into a capped field ? Were the kills "A2A" or GV and runway vulches ? Did you have any light fighter escort with you ?
Hyrax,
I understand what you are saying 100%, we are on the same page. As for the sortie, I think about half were air to air, but we were working together for the kills as well, so it wouldn't be a 1 vs. 1 dueling type of scenario. That mossie can be a bit of a pig sometimes. :D
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Since you asked......I would feel like a dweeb if 80%-90% of the plane set was availible, and I was sitting in the tower pouting about my choice ride.
Yesterday 80% of the planeset was not available - I couldn't even up in a A8.
-
Originally posted by Howitzer
Hyrax,
I understand what you are saying 100%, we are on the same page. As for the sortie, I think about half were air to air, but we were working together for the kills as well, so it wouldn't be a 1 vs. 1 dueling type of scenario. That mossie can be a bit of a pig sometimes. :D
I like the gun package on the Mossy. If you can find someone in your squad who filmed it, I would love to view it. I agree that wingman tactics become very important in a plane that's a little less mobile than the Spit V (grin). The nice thing is that you usually get the kill (and not the assist) when you depress your trigger...
heh heh...
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Instead of being denied his P-51D he wants to deny me all aircraft. Nice.
Well Karnak.. work with me here let's turn your argument around. He has no problem with status quo. You do. Why don't YOU change countries to one not so badly outnumbered? Then you have your flying experience, your problem is solved, and you didn't solve it by changing someone else's experience.
Of course I'm sure that's not what YOU want to do.... so that makes HIM wrong.:aok
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Frankly, I would rather have seen the aircraft in question be perked than disabled. Say, start at 20 perk points and work their way up from there.
But that isn't what we got, so for the time being we have to live with it. As Pyro said it will be tweaked.
Perking would have been far better I agree.....
-
wow Karnak posting without being a jeroff? big surprise here. i posted pretty much the same whine no offense and was met by damn near every flamer in the game figures lol.
i agree with the poster of this thread. taking away our favorite rides was the wrong way to do it. its hurting my squad and i no of at least 3 others who are hurting cause of it. i saw our number at 7.0 tonight which totally killed pony runs for base taking. and we had 108 players on rook with the bish and nits less than 10 to 15 behind in numbers. utter crap.
would love to see it changed back or something else fingered out.
-
LIMITING plane set because you have more numbers is only going to encourage more ganging.... Rooks could have 100 more players.. limmited to 109fe and spit1.. and be ganged by bish and knights and be effectively outnumbered. I for one am lustily looking forward to exploit this arcade feature....
BTW,, do we get monthy fee decrease based on lower percentage of totl plane set use? we should.
KaK3
"that which doesn't kill you isn't dangerous enough":aok
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
Let's see... 10 Mossies diving from 10K to the field.... BANG !
Oh, there goes our elevators. Also, 10 Mossies would be ganged by the normal cloud of La7's, 109's, Spits, etc... waiting to meet them. Mossy can't extend away from even a Yak.
Funny. I have no problem diving in on a field form 10K.
You just have to learn how to do it right.
Actually if your having problems diving in a feild in a mossie then your probably diving in on feilds wrong in every other plane too its just that your able to pull out of them easier in your other rides. but at the cost of great E.
Try comming in on a more shallow dive(in any plane) and in the end you will end up faster on your egress then you would if you dove straight down then pulled out.
BTW the YAK isnt exactly a slowpoke here.
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
Non-Rook squads are not hurt by Rook numbers but by their own inability to COOPERATE or depart from their (apparent) furball and runway vulching missions. THAT'S what is hurting non-Rook squads - not Rook numbers...
Hmm, if this is really true...then the rooks should be able to kick butt without the huge odds they have had recently....shouldn't they? Here's a clue for yah, if HT didn't believe there was an odds problem in the MA...he would never have done this.
Personally, I will be interested to see how things shake out this weekend. You never know, you might find that doing a P40 mission could be fun. Guess it is all in how you chose to look at it. You can sit around and piss 'n moan about how unfair it is...or take it as a challenge to create missions that don't require the "Big 4".
Pieper
I believe HT will exempt the perk planes from the balancing act. Since all of them have low ENY's and the perk cost goes up with the odds, it really is double dipping them to disable them.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
...Actually if your having problems diving in a feild in a mossie then your probably diving in on feilds wrong in every other plane too its just that your able to pull out of them easier in your other rides. but at the cost of great E.
Try comming in on a more shallow dive(in any plane) and in the end you will end up faster on your egress then you would if you dove straight down then pulled out...
Maybe...
I do use a shallower approach when using rockets. I prefer greater dive angle with bombs to insure accuracy. What is your angle and top speed (in the Mossy) when you decend from 10K ?
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Here's a clue for yah...
You can sit around and piss 'n moan about how unfair it is...
I re-read your statement several times but couldn't get past the insults to see if there was any intelligent contribution to be made.
Try again.
-
I'm not really sure what to think of this ENY limiter. On the one hand, I'm a Knight who rarely fly planes that have a very low ENY, so it shouldn't really affect me (I can't see the Knight's, or, anyone really, having their FW190A5's taken away any time soon).
On the other hand, I can see where some people are coming from when they say they're being denied their ride of choice. Some people just really like a certain plane. When I first started, I only flew the Mustang, not because it was easy (to this day my K/D in one is atrocious), but because of "all I'd read, watched, or heard". I snapped out of my affection, but I could see how others might not. Some people might very well play this game purely to pretend they're really in a Stang or a LaLa, ya know?
I'd have to say that I didn't mind the update that lowered the ENY values of La7's, Spit9's, Mustangs, A8's, etc. I thought that was a fair compromise because (since I am usually in an A5), although I might not be able to always escape from such planes, if I could shoot them down I'd be rewarded for my troubles with oodles of perk points, which I could then trade in for a C-Hog to beat them up in :D
I'd also have to say that I'd be in favor of perking many of the top performing planes. But I wouldn't be in favor of heavily perking them at all. A perk point of 1, which would then rise no higher than say, 3-5, even if one side had 200+, would be a good solution in my opinion. That way, if a side had a massive numbers advantage, and someone wanted to fly their favorite low ENY plane, they still could. Of course, their rewards for shooting down planes would be low because of their numbers and ENY, and they could very well come back with a negative score even if they got 2-3 kills before dying.
The two major problems with this idea are that:
- it might discourage new players, as it could be difficult for them to score a kill or two in some of the "rougher" rides. Then again, so might the current updated approach. It's too early to tell.
- Perked rides usually like to get some alt. And if there's one thing worse than an La7, it's an La7 that's above you.
:)
-
Originally posted by KaK3MAW
LIMITING plane set because you have more numbers is only going to encourage more ganging.... Rooks could have 100 more players.. limmited to 109fe and spit1.. and be ganged by bish and knights and be effectively outnumbered. I for one am lustily looking forward to exploit this arcade feature....
BTW,, do we get monthy fee decrease based on lower percentage of totl plane set use? we should.
KaK3
"that which doesn't kill you isn't dangerous enough":aok
Someone get a calendar and write this down....
I actually agree with KAK....
(Lawd I hope my mother doesn't find out)
-
Well I have issues but it has nothing to do with a single plane. I can find something to fly.
This game was developed on a model. The model had many facets.
First... 2 countries? 3 countries? 4 countries?
Decision was 3 countries. Why?
Checks and balances. 2 countries.. one outnumbers the other... we have issues.
3 countries... one gets too far ahead the other two focus on the one. This was chosen.
Why isn't this working? One country significantly outnumbers the combined strength of the other two... repeatedly... day after day for large blocks of time? ( I think not) One country has more than any single other country...yes....but why don't the lesser two countries focus on the larger?
The 3 country check and balance worked well.. Weds and Thurs this week.
Next...
Gameplay success =
Two tracks here...
Individual... Perks for kills.. based on plane type... consecutive kills... kills per hop... on and on.. stats. Lone wolf....
Country... Perks for RESET... land grab... bombing scores... resupplies... etc. TEAM WORK.
Now we say.... the 3 country model doesn't work. ( I suspect because the lesser two countries at any given time WON'T make it work)
That we need to put provisions in to "encourage" people to change sides. Well.. let's see.. that violates the Country based portion of the game play model. You don't garner team success which is ultimately RESET by switching sides to keep things even. You don't engender cooperative interaction by "encouraging" people or squads to change sides.
So are we now saying that the country focused, land grab, RESET oriented game model is a failure? It doesn't work?
We all should learn to use the game model...with the 3 country checks and balances to counter any overwhelming numbers. It is a given that specific points in a day... even that might not be enough (RJO) but that isn't a reason to declare the whole game model broken.
This latest balancing effort contradicts the very underlying model of the game. If we need to leave it in place. Dump 3 countries, go to 2, dump land grab as reset and the country based organization and teamwork have no place in the game and lets go back to an Air to Air game play.
Hey wait... I LIKE that idea!
-
I can just see it now if HT perked LA7's and 51's - same complaints, different reasons.
I believe for a while tonight the Knits were ENV limited, didn't see them complaining on CH200.
Whatever HT does people are gonna complain, hell I don't like the 75% fuel or no night situation, but thats the way it is.
To say you are being 'forced' into doing anything is absurd, you have the choice.
Remember also in the README ( if you read it ) HT says he is going to tweak the ENV values.
HT tried to encourage people to change sides using the perk modifier, frankly I think he will admit it didn't have the required effect.
Long run it is up to us to sort a lot of this stuff out e.g. when Rooks were outnumbered a lot of Bish squads (ours included) went Rook. When it swung back we went back, a lot didn't.
-
Denial of Service? That is rather amusing considering when you paid to play you should have read the description of the game stating each side would work to reset the other by denying them of their bases and being awarded perk points.
Where was it stated that you would be denied of an aircraft due to variables that no one person can control completely. I can control whether or not I get better to get perks to ride the perked ride I want. I cannot however control getting the sides balanced so I can fly a particular airframe. So now you tell me who has denial of service?
I commend HT for trying to find a fix for the imbalance issue but in the same respect I find that there may be more variables that need to come into account before any one country is limited of a particular plane or vehicle. This game is dynamic and is not under any one persons control to change amount of personel, how and where the game is played. Amount of enemy cons at the front lines of each base on each country should come into play not the overall number of personel in the game per country. Though one side may have more numbers than the next two. The two with the lower numbers can and have frequently in the past placed added resources to the front lines. This in the end causing the true imbalance to even out or go into the two lower numbered countries favor. Either way folks still are able to fight and though a map may not be reset folks still get a ton of action.
If this game is purely about the land grab and reset as some may think then why haven't folks complained about who is deserving of the perks in the event of a reset. I've spent many hours in the past directly supporting the push to reset and in the end was only giving in return the enjoyment of playing. Though my contributions were key in helping with the reset along with the amount of time I spent trying to help I was not awarded the perks unless I was online at the time of the reset. Now how fair is that when someone who rarely spent time during that map cycle gets awarded when you don't?
I was a Bish once and yes I remember the hordes but it was war and I just upped from a base farther back. If that wasn't an option and we were about to be reset I just logged off. I was also on the side of the horde when Bish and Knights would press hard purely on the Rooks with little fighting between eachother. Or Rooks and Bish pressing on the Knights. Those last examples are exactly what makes the current checks and balances incomplete. The overall numbers isn't the deciding factor of who is really being outnumbered. It's only the cover to a book that actually has a story inside which may or may not be similar to what you see on the front cover. I give HTC a thumbs up for trying to get an insight on what the community thinks so they can help to fix the imbalance issues.
-
In Piepers original post he mentions side jumpers for reset.
Wouldn't this help deter this, as the more side jumpers the more the ENV disablement comes into play?
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
In Piepers original post he mentions side jumpers for reset.
Wouldn't this help deter this, as the more side jumpers the more the ENV disablement comes into play?
As I understand it, Pieper is saying that side-jumpers will muck it up for a country about to win reset by coming over and skewing the ENY for the country and still collect reset points. It hurts the country more than it hurts the side-jumpers.
-
Kev unfortunately you'll have those who lack the integrity to take the defeat and press on. Instead they'll jump sides to gain something that they did not work for in the first place. If they are that desperate for perks then let them jump sides. Because in the end those who actually work for them will still have some sense of pride that though they didn't get any points for a reset they are acknowledge by their fellow country for a job well done. For some that may not be enough but oh well.
Unfortunately in this game we have had quite a few examples of folks with lack of integrity but some aren't worth the time to fight. Instead that time could be used to find better ways to award the folks who actually can and do work for their points. In the end those guys are only cheating themselves because no matter what short cuts they take they'll still be below par.
-
Nothing wrong with the mossie in the dive, you have to be careful not being agressive with the stick thats all. I can dive to 500mph without anything falling off with throttling back to make sure i don't overspeed. The amount of times i've been called a cheat because the mossie "can't go that fast" hehe.
The mossie turns very well at high speed, this surprises many opponents. It also turns well in general to get the single snapshot you need. The mossie is fine for 1v1s too if you have a bit of alt to play with (say 5k). Get fast and use it's large E bleed at high speed to force an overshoot or to gain angles. You must be aggressive if you expect to get kills in the mossie.
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
You might be a dweeb because you didn't read the question.
How many planes are available to you as an attack squad (that means "JABO" missions) if the ENY penalty pushes over 6 ? 10 ? 20 ?
Not the 80%/90% number you tossed out.
Oh great mister data and numbers guy who doesnt even know that reset perks are not awarded to players who are not in country for 12 hours. I must have missed them memo where my replies are required to be framed as you or anyone else sees fit.
I can read "and wait for your plane of choice to be enabled" just fine. It must be your reading comprehention since I did not state that the all remaining enabled planes were suitable for attack sorties.
-
Originally posted by Cobra412
I was a Bish once and yes I remember the hordes but it was war and I just upped from a base farther back. If that wasn't an option and we were about to be reset I just logged off. I was also on the side of the horde when Bish and Knights would press hard purely on the Rooks with little fighting between each other. Or Rooks and Bish pressing on the Knights. Those last examples are exactly what makes the current checks and balances incomplete.
This is why we need four countries instead of three.
In Warbirds, it usally turned out that the purples and golds would fight each other as the reds and greens fought each other... or any combination of all four.
Never really understood why HT never carried over the 4 country setup.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
What do you say to the person who only flies once a week with his friends, and they all fly a particular plane for historic reasons?
Is this person responsible for the odds being skewed night after night? No.
Is his showing up with his friends on a given night likely to completely unbalance the arena? No - not unless it's a 30-member squad - and even then it's a maybe.
So ... why should this person - who sets aside one evening a week of his time to play AH - who practices offline in his favorite plane so he can do well - why should he arrive in AH and find that he can't fly his plane because the country odds just happen to be in his favor at the time. Why is he being punished? Why should he be forced to fly a plane he doesn't want to at all? Why should he have to choose between flying with his friends and flying his favorite plane?
Because his choice of fun ruins the evening for the other two countries. He can change countries and do all of the above.
In another thread I suggested an easy-to-implement alternative. Have the load-balancer only apply to captured fields. If you can advance without needed a huge numeric advantage, then you can fly whatever you want all over the map. But if you can't advance without The Horde, then once you're on foreign soil you lose the benefit of La-7's, etc. from those captured fields.
Implementation details, please. It's always easy to suggest solutions based on qualitative ideas. Turning those ideas into 0/1s can be very difficult. Why do think TOD didn't happen instantly?
curly
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
The Rook proved this the other night when we were down to 3 bases and roared back to 17 in 2-3 hours.... with about 30 more players than the least #'d country.
Non-Rook squads are not hurt by Rook numbers but by their own inability to COOPERATE or depart from their (apparent) furball and runway vulching missions. THAT'S what is hurting non-Rook squads - not Rook numbers...
Fascinating isn't it, just 18 months or so ago, the rooks were on the other side of the numbers equation. Did their superior cooperation solve the problem? In a word, No. They squealed like little piggies until some Bishop and Knight squads changed countries to relieve the problem.
The current large squads in Rookland lack the character (or whatever) to help manage the arena so that all countries can enjoy Aces High.
If the large squads in Rookland had helped balance the arena, then HTC wouldn't have been forced into extreme measures. Pity.
curly
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Fascinating isn't it, just 18 months or so ago, the rooks were on the other side of the numbers equation. Did their superior cooperation solve the problem? In a word, No. They squealed like little piggies until some Bishop and Knight squads changed countries to relieve the problem.
The current large squads in Rookland lack the character (or whatever) to help manage the arena so that all countries can enjoy Aces High.
If the large squads in Rookland had helped balance the arena, then HTC wouldn't have been forced into extreme measures. Pity.
curly
Curly,
First where are the squads that changed and rescued the Rooks? If they were the squads of character you mention, why don't they just move back? Leopards changed their spots?
Second why doesn't the 3 country model work to offset overwhelming numbers? I'm not talking about Sunday evening. Can't turn the arena on its ear because of one large singular event. On the other evenings and times do the Rooks significantly outnumber the COMBINED strength of the Bish and Knits? I flew all last week, every night, 4-6 hours each night, and I don't recall seeing the Rooks with such an advantage. Perhaps more flyers than the Bish... or the Knits... when compared country to country but if the Bish and Knits numbers were combined not even close.
The whole reason you have 3 countries is for play balance issues. So are we saying that this model (which worked in another online flight sim that preceeded AH) suddenly no longer works? Or is the real issue that the smaller two countries don't like the idea that 1 v 1 they don't generate the same numbers as the Rooks? That they don't want to have to adjust their effort to fight primarily Rooks?
If we have to start forcing even numbers distribution then we don't need three countries. Need only two and a forced numbers distribution to keep the sides even. If we want to emphasis equal distribution of numbers with constant leveling (and how do you do that with the current requirement to stay in a country for 12 hours) then we need to do away with the 12 hour requirement, with country based land grab and arena resets. They no longer matter because having equal sides is the priority and building of numbers to grab land to accomplish a reset is now not only frowned upon, but is legislated against.
We are talking changing the major fabric of AH's design. Oh it isn't quite there yet because everyone can argue that these measures aren't that bad. But what happens if they don't work? What is next?
I think this whole idea is ill conceived and poorly executed.
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Because his choice of fun ruins the evening for the other two countries. He can change countries and do all of the above.
One person - all alone - is responsible for the odds being skewed? I think not.
What I think you meant is that squadrons lead to the imbalance. Which is partly true - for the squadrons which fly heavily every night and more or less dictate the odds. But the "weekend flyer" should not be penalized for this.
And making statements like the one you made only heighten the feeling of injustice because the people who only fly once a week know that their impact on the odds is minimal.
And so they take your advice and decide to change sides. What if that same night another squadron has decided to do the same thing and arrives at the same country they did? So they now went to all the hassle of telling everyone to move, getting everyone re-joined in the squad - and they still can't fly the plane they want. Through no fault of their own - and they followed your advice. Now you can explain to this squadron CO how fair the system is.
No matter how "big" the problem you're trying to fix here, it still all boils down to how it affects individual players.
Implementation details, please. It's always easy to suggest solutions based on qualitative ideas. Turning those ideas into 0/1s can be very difficult. Why do think TOD didn't happen instantly?
This kind of high-handed response may work with others, but not with me. This could be implemented in a way which wouldn't require any terrain data structure changes at all. Such as:
- Create a global array called "homeFields."
- During terrain load on the host, walk the fields array or data structures and for each field set the associated value in homeFields[fieldNum] to 1, 2, or 3 depending on Rook, Bish, or Knit.
- Then when the balancer is determining plane availability at a field, add an and-if condition such as (player->countryNum != homeFields[currentPlayerField]) to test if the current field belonged originally to the player's country. If it did, the balancer behaves as it does now at that field.
That's what? Three lines. Even if the data structures or database is more complex, I can't see how adding this little piece of logic would take more than 10 lines and add 1 extra clause to an "if" statement somewhere - meaning no performance hit.
If the terrainfile or runtime structures already track which country a field belongs to at load-up, this gets even easier.
And I'll give you yet one more reason this system should be changed: and that is that it can be exploited. I'll even tell you how. Suppose you're a Rook CO who "always" has such superior odds (odds which I never seem to enjoy the nights I fly ... how odd?). Well, to get even with some of the morons who belittled me in the BBS for wanting to keep my squad night, I'd move my squad to their country and just log in and go AFK on my non-squad nights. Keep their odds jacked up so they can't get the good planes all damn night. Boo. Hoo.
-DoK
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
What do you say to the person who only flies once a week with his friends, and they all fly a particular plane for historic reasons?
Bring the Malcolm hood P-51B to Aces High!
Bring the Ki-44 to Aces High!
Bring the Ki-100 to Aces High!
Bring the D.502 to Aces High!
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
If the large squads in Rookland had helped balance the arena, then HTC wouldn't have been forced into extreme measures. Pity.
curly
If I recall, the same situation existed in Bishopland when Rooks were the whipping boys. I seem to recall an AK came on this message board and suggested some squads switch to Rooks to balance things out. What country have you been flying for since 2001? ;)
-
Haven't read through the whole line of posts yet. But I am Rook and my squad is a Rook. The ENY disablements didn't really affect us too much during last night.
Then again we normally conduct JABO operations in P38s, P47s, 110s and Mossies. Also some of the midwar planes as our fighters .. F4Us and F6Fs.
So it did encourage flying different type of planes but new patch livable.
-
Hyrax and Cobra,
I thought you had to be with a country for a certain time before you collected perks for a reset?
-
Originally posted by 4510
Curly,
First where are the squads that changed and rescued the Rooks? If they were the squads of character you mention, why don't they just move back? Leopards changed their spots?
Right here! We jumped from Knights to balance play, even before the perk value variable was implemented. We're thinking of jumping back to Knights since they seem to be on the ropes so much.
-
Originally posted by gofaster
Right here! We jumped from Knights to balance play, even before the perk value variable was implemented. We're thinking of jumping back to Knights since they seem to be on the ropes so much.
GoFaster...
;)
Everyone keeps pointing to how things cross-leveled naturally three years ago...and suddenly how everyone is so selfish that it won't work now. I am of the opinion that if it worked before it will eventually work again. The people who made it work before will make it work again.
Thanks for being one of those who will...
-
Originally posted by gofaster
Bring the Malcolm hood P-51B to Aces High!
Bring the Ki-44 to Aces High!
Bring the Ki-100 to Aces High!
Bring the D.502 to Aces High!
Actually, in a way ... yeah.
If there was a rolling plane set then the proliferation of quasi-uber planes wouldn't be an issue. Not sure it'd affect the odds much but it could help in ways (like, vultching ain't as easy when you got 8 .303's instead of 4 20mm's).
Don't forget the P-39, Yak-3, Ki-43, Hs-129, and Beaufighter in your list either.
-
Originally posted by 4510
GoFaster...
;)
Everyone keeps pointing to how things cross-leveled naturally three years ago...and suddenly how everyone is so selfish that it won't work now. I am of the opinion that if it worked before it will eventually work again. The people who made it work before will make it work again.
Thanks for being one of those who will...
I wonder if this happened to any other squads:
The Shills changed to Knights in the Beta, with the intention of staying Knights in AH2. But when we imported our settings from AH1 during the changeover, it put us back in Rooks (where the AH1 squad remained). There was a confused week where we were spread out, then we just sort of dropped it (summer being here and participation in the summer lull).
-Sik
-
Oh no, waaaaaa, I'm crying so hard, waaaaaaa, I'm blubbering, waaaaaa, waaaaaa. :rolleyes:
-
First where are the squads that changed and rescued the Rooks? If they were the squads of character you mention, why don't they just move back? Leopards changed their spots?
my squad did move back, before this new patch, so some of us did. what we will see is all the squads/players that jumped ship to fly with country with most numbers will end up going back to fly with their respective countries they left to fly the their choice of planes and the numbers will eventually even out. this will end up proving that it wasnt the "superior teamwork" crap why people went rooks, well, not all people. and if it was the teamwork, i dont see why this is an issue, you still have the ability to fly as a team. this patch was just introduced yesterday for gawd sake. give it a little time.
~S~
-
Originally posted by 4510
Well Karnak.. work with me here let's turn your argument around. He has no problem with status quo. You do. Why don't YOU change countries to one not so badly outnumbered? Then you have your flying experience, your problem is solved, and you didn't solve it by changing someone else's experience.
Of course I'm sure that's not what YOU want to do.... so that makes HIM wrong.:aok
So I can become part of the problem and compete with 10 other players for each enemy? For some reason that doesn't sound very fun.
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Oh great mister data and numbers guy who doesnt even know that reset perks are not awarded to players who are not in country for 12 hours.
How bizarre that I never stated they were and you think I did.
I can read "and wait for your plane of choice to be enabled" just fine. It must be your reading comprehention since I did not state that the all remaining enabled planes were suitable for attack sorties.
It gets so tiresome to have to read back to posters what they wrote... You suggested you would feel like a dweeb complaining about losing a preferred plane with 80%-90% of the plane set still available. Your comments didn't address the posters concern that it was related to ATTACK planes...i.e. JABO. It is NOT the total planeset the thread comments are about. It's the JABO capable planes.
I bet you still don't understand even after this lengthy explanation.
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
...They squealed like little piggies until some Bishop and Knight squads changed countries to relieve the problem.
The current large squads in Rookland lack the character (or whatever) to help manage the arena so that all countries can enjoy Aces High.
If the large squads in Rookland had helped balance the arena, then HTC wouldn't have been forced into extreme measures. Pity.
curly
It's funny... when our squad came over from AW - we were on Bish first... didn't like the company - moved to Rook...liked the company.
No other reason than that.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Hyrax and Cobra,
I thought you had to be with a country for a certain time before you collected perks for a reset?
You do... timing is everything, of course, but Rooks have seen significant influxes of other country members (in the past) centered around known RJO's, squad ops and even country placement on a particular map. It's just savvy "gaming-the-game" by experienced free-lancers.
I shouldn't even call these players "other country members". They are free-lancers who switch when it suits their purposes and have no particular country allegiance.
-
Look, if squadrons aren't moving to more target-rich pastures, or if a bunch of horde-loving freelancers is able to mess up the balance, it's probably better to figure out why and fix that. This new balancer hurts too many people who aren't causing the problem in the first place.
In amongst the childish sniping in these topics I've seen a lot of good ideas about alternate approaches to fix the problem. The use of Perks is one of these. But I'd flip the logic ... meaning I'd accelerate the perk discount for outnumbered countries rather than charge perks for "normal" planes. So if you're outnumbered all the time, you may be able to actually fly Tempests and C-Hogs and Spit XIV's to your hearts delight even if you don't have 1000's of perks. And that gives people a reason to move, instead of a punishment for not moving.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
But I'd flip the logic ... meaning I'd accelerate the perk discount for outnumbered countries rather than charge perks for "normal" planes. So if you're outnumbered all the time, you may be able to actually fly Tempests and C-Hogs and Spit XIV's to your hearts delight even if you don't have 1000's of perks. And that gives people a reason to move, instead of a punishment for not moving.
Another great idea using the already established, common and relatively well known PERK system !
Thanks, DoKGonZo.
-
perking the top rides over numbers will only work if you reset everbodys perks
:)
-
Dok...
Unfortunately, HT is convinced that altering the perk system is fruitless (at least that it has been thus far). Something I was thinking of that might address a few of the concerns I have seen expressed would be to tie the current balancer to the number of fields each country has.
Hyrax81st...
Sorry that you seem so ego challenged that you can't accept critisim unless it is couched in friendly terms. The clue is there for anyone prepared to dismount their vitural high horse :).
-
Originally posted by simshell
perking the top rides over numbers will only work if you reset everbodys perks
:)
OK... let's give everybody in the arena (any newly starting player and current) 100 perks to start.
-
Originally posted by simshell
perking the top rides over numbers will only work if you reset everbodys perks
:)
FWIW, I think perks should be like vacation days. You can carry a certain number from campaign to campaign but the rest you lose.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Hyrax81st...
Sorry that you seem so ego challenged that you can't accept critisim unless it is couched in friendly terms. The clue is there for anyone prepared to dismount their vitural high horse :).
OOPS !
You still failed the "content" test and resorted to slamming right out of the gate.
Please play again...
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Dok...
Unfortunately, HT is convinced that altering the perk system is fruitless (at least that it has been thus far). Something I was thinking of that might address a few of the concerns I have seen expressed would be to tie the current balancer to the number of fields each country has.
Hey NB ... good to see another old fart on here.
I don't know HT's politics on these things, we haven't spoken about this stuff. Any time I see people talking about "strike" I'm reminded of the old AW boycots.
Just seemed like it was time to get people talking about solutions instead of calling each other "princess."
-
Originally posted by dragoon
would love to see it changed back or something else fingered out.
Hehehe ...
Ahem ... but .... actually .... I've not seen you post ANYTHING akin to what Karnak just posted .... even remotely.
You and several players seem to be suffering some sort of shock over something that doesn't have quite the drastic effect you perceive. Something that worked amazingly well and accomplished what it was designed to from the first day it was implemented. Consider this:
1: As many others have stated. You can fly whatever you want, you just have to be willing to do it from the underdog's side.
2: The % of imbalance has already dropped by a huge margin.
3: HT/Pyro stated in the patch details that the setting is adjustable and will be adjusted to suit the needs of the community. OFF and ON aren't the only two options here.
4: It's NOT the only time a mmog has imposed restrictions on the "better" equipment. It probably should have been a part of the game from the beginning. Then it's intrinsic value would have overshadowed it's current shock value and nobody would have even considered it a liability.
5: Squads don't HAVE to be all dedicated to flying the La-7, 24/7 or take their ball and leave. I don't think all that many are. I do think the few that are are screaming the loudest, though.
-
Originally posted by simshell
perking the top rides over numbers will only work if you reset everbodys perks
:)
If you think the signal to noise ratio is bad now ......
:D
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Hey NB ... good to see another old fart on here.
I don't know HT's politics on these things, we haven't spoken about this stuff. Any time I see people talking about "strike" I'm reminded of the old AW boycots.
Just seemed like it was time to get people talking about solutions instead of calling each other "princess."
Backatcha Dok :). Saw your new site. Hope the new scenerio works out....looks like fun.
I did talk to HT this afternoon and he is currently reserving judgement on how well the balancing code works until after the weekend. Thus far, he seems satisfied that it is doing what he intended. I did run my idea of tying it to the number of fields each country has as a way of placating the folks worried about one country being ganged by the other two. While he wasn't excited by the idea, he was willing to take it under advisement. I would hope that most of the folks complaining here can be sensible enough to give it a week or two and see what happens.
Hyrax81st...
Nevermind...you have obviously made your choice :).
BTW...HT did say that he was thinking that he might need to raise the 'threshold' on the balancing code. That would mean the odds would have to be higher for it to kick in.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
BTW...HT did say that he was thinking that he might need to raise the 'threshold' on the balancing code. That would mean the odds would have to be higher for it to kick in.
Cool.
Having the odds shift to and fro is part of the game and always has been, it would kind of suck to see that go away. But there does come a point when one side has just so many players that it ruins it for everyone else. If the new threshold prevents that kind of dynamic, then great. But if you're going to attack that, you also need to do be careful that it doesn't induce Truce Warrior to happen more than it already does.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Cool.
Having the odds shift to and fro is part of the game and always has been, it would kind of suck to see that go away. But there does come a point when one side has just so many players that it ruins it for everyone else. If the new threshold prevents that kind of dynamic, then great. But if you're going to attack that, you also need to do be careful that it doesn't induce Truce Warrior to happen more than it already does.
Agreed. From talking to him about it, it isn't HT's intent to prevent resets or force even odds all the time. He has, obviously, seen evidence of a serious arena odds imbalance in the past that has not balanced out and chose to try and do something to adress the issue. Frankly, I do find it strange that the odds didn't balance themselves, in the years that I have been playing this kind of game, they always did...eventually. The more I think about it, the more I think the 'reward' for a reset can be partially blamed for this. Without the perk bonus, many folks might have been more interested in the fight...instead of the reset.
-
Originally posted by 4510
Curly,
First where are the squads that changed and rescued the Rooks? If they were the squads of character you mention, why don't they just move back? Leopards changed their spots?
Dunno. The AKs switched to Rooks for a week or two until it became evident the numbers problem had been solved.
Second why doesn't the 3 country model work to offset overwhelming numbers? I'm not talking about Sunday evening. Can't turn the arena on its ear because of one large singular event. On the other evenings and times do the Rooks significantly outnumber the COMBINED strength of the Bish and Knits? I flew all last week, every night, 4-6 hours each night, and I don't recall seeing the Rooks with such an advantage. Perhaps more flyers than the Bish... or the Knits... when compared country to country but if the Bish and Knits numbers were combined not even close
Dunno about the 3 vs 2 vs 4 country model. It's a HTC decision and they've made it clear they aren't changing.
Didn't notice your country of origin. If you fly prime time USA, then the rooks had numbers every night prior to the latest patch.
The whole reason you have 3 countries is for play balance issues. So are we saying that this model (which worked in another online flight sim that preceeded AH) suddenly no longer works? Or is the real issue that the smaller two countries don't like the idea that 1 v 1 they don't generate the same numbers as the Rooks? That they don't want to have to adjust their effort to fight primarily Rooks?
If we have to start forcing even numbers distribution then we don't need three countries. Need only two and a forced numbers distribution to keep the sides even. If we want to emphasis equal distribution of numbers with constant leveling (and how do you do that with the current requirement to stay in a country for 12 hours) then we need to do away with the 12 hour requirement, with country based land grab and arena resets. They no longer matter because having equal sides is the priority and building of numbers to grab land to accomplish a reset is now not only frowned upon, but is legislated against.
We are talking changing the major fabric of AH's design. Oh it isn't quite there yet because everyone can argue that these measures aren't that bad. But what happens if they don't work? What is next?
I think this whole idea is ill conceived and poorly executed.
Dunno about any of the above. I'm just concerned with approximately even numbers. So far, the latest patch is working fine.
curly
-
Originally posted by gofaster
If I recall, the same situation existed in Bishopland when Rooks were the whipping boys. I seem to recall an AK came on this message board and suggested some squads switch to Rooks to balance things out. What country have you been flying for since 2001? ;)
I don't understand. I suggested some squads switch to rook. They did. The AKs did. When the numbers evened out (approximately), we switched back to Bishop.
curly
-
it seems to be working great right now
cant wait till sunday night:D
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
Maybe...
I do use a shallower approach when using rockets. I prefer greater dive angle with bombs to insure accuracy. What is your angle and top speed (in the Mossy) when you decend from 10K ?
Typically less then a 45 degree angle.
Honestly Couldnt tell ya my speed. Damn brits forgot to havbe those screwey speedo's. LOL
Really I do it more by feel.
Just a hair before compression When the plane starts shaking I reduce throttle till it stops then throttle up again just before I drop and hit full wep as soon as I drop and am going level.
You can bomb fairly accurately in a shallow dive though.
Just like with the steeper dives it takes a bit of practice to get it down. but once you do it becomes second nature.
-
one problem that NONE of this will fix--a mentality issue...WHEN was last time a county OTHER than the SE lost the small pac map?...there are a few similar things i cant think of right now...but the thing is, often (more often than not, it would seem) 2 countries gang up on the third, and no amount of plane meddling will solve situation---its human nature to go after the easiest target. (that being said, I cant beLIEVE anyone is complaining about a scenario that limits 'dweeb' rides)
-
Originally posted by bj229r
one problem that NONE of this will fix--a mentality issue...WHEN was last time a county OTHER than the SE lost the small pac map?...there are a few similar things i cant think of right now...but the thing is, often (more often than not, it would seem) 2 countries gang up on the third, and no amount of plane meddling will solve situation---its human nature to go after the easiest target. (that being said, I cant beLIEVE anyone is complaining about a scenario that limits 'dweeb' rides)
As I keep saying.
"A Horde is a horde is a horde"
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
Your comments didn't address the posters concern that it was related to ATTACK planes
I bet you still don't understand even after this lengthy explanation.
Listen jerkoff. Mabey you didnt read it since it is the only sentence you sniped from the quote, but Im not required to respond according to your paramaters. I was not even addressing you when you decided to jump in and start poping off with your implied intelectual superiority. So FO.
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Listen jerkoff. bzzzzzzzzzzzzz-bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.... bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
The lights are on, but clearly nobody is home...
Goodnight.
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
The lights are on, but clearly nobody is home...
Goodnight.
Ha, still not accepting the fact that you are not the BB moderater, and every word typed by others doesnt have to meet your standards. Fine, keep sticking your fingers in your ears then.
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
I wonder if this happened to any other squads:
The Shills changed to Knights in the Beta, with the intention of staying Knights in AH2. But when we imported our settings from AH1 during the changeover, it put us back in Rooks (where the AH1 squad remained). There was a confused week where we were spread out, then we just sort of dropped it (summer being here and participation in the summer lull).
-Sik
Hard to say ..... my squad didn't try and change countries coming over. It is interesting you mention that you were flying in the AH2 beta tho.....
I would suggest you are still flying in an AH2 beta. The AH2 that was advertised was TOD .... not the current AH1 type game play (which FWIW I am fine with... but). So if AH2 design isn't fully implemented you are STILL playing in an AH2 beta. You just have the honor of paying for it.
:aok
-
Originally posted by Karnak
So I can become part of the problem and compete with 10 other players for each enemy? For some reason that doesn't sound very fun.
Well you certainly support making someone else inconvienced so you can have your fun. Where is it someone else's responsibility to willingly take measures to ensure you have fun?
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
It's funny... when our squad came over from AW - we were on Bish first... didn't like the company - moved to Rook...liked the company.
No other reason than that.
You didn't mention that after you came over we made you take delousing showers, TWICE... before we would let you guys fly any ENY planes!
:rofl
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Look, if squadrons aren't moving to more target-rich pastures, or if a bunch of horde-loving freelancers is able to mess up the balance, it's probably better to figure out why and fix that. This new balancer hurts too many people who aren't causing the problem in the first place.
In amongst the childish sniping in these topics I've seen a lot of good ideas about alternate approaches to fix the problem. The use of Perks is one of these. But I'd flip the logic ... meaning I'd accelerate the perk discount for outnumbered countries rather than charge perks for "normal" planes. So if you're outnumbered all the time, you may be able to actually fly Tempests and C-Hogs and Spit XIV's to your hearts delight even if you don't have 1000's of perks. And that gives people a reason to move, instead of a punishment for not moving.
Ah but the Gestapo was never into positive reinforcement.... they always applied the heavy hand. I mean in how many businesses do you see the business tell the paying customer....
"This is what we are doing... we will do it as long as we like... quit whining about it... " ?
:eek:
-
Originally posted by 4510
You didn't mention that after you came over we made you take delousing showers, TWICE... before we would let you guys fly any ENY planes!
:rofl
LOL!!!
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Dok...
Unfortunately, HT is convinced that altering the perk system is fruitless (at least that it has been thus far). Something I was thinking of that might address a few of the concerns I have seen expressed would be to tie the current balancer to the number of fields each country has.
Hyrax81st...
Sorry that you seem so ego challenged that you can't accept critisim unless it is couched in friendly terms. The clue is there for anyone prepared to dismount their vitural high horse :).
NB...
I have to get past the first point.... that a fix of ANY KIND is really needed. I'm stuck on the fact that the three country model DOES provide a tool that enables numbers to be counter balanced. (well except for Sunday night.. but darn... remember the old GANG THE BZ SUNDAY NIGHTS?... same sort of animal... a one day... so what event.... well unless you were a BZ... my butthole STILL hurts)
But for sake of discussion... if a fix IS needed I like the real estate consideration. A numerically superior country sitting on home island with 6 fields isn't going to do anything immediately. Oh yes they may come storming out... and if one doesn't want to face them as they do.... think Russia..... trade space for time and wait for "THE FIX" to kick in. When a certain % of real estate is then owned it trips "THE FIX". (Of course this is directly counter to the game play model on which AH is built.... field capture, cooperative missions, arena reset, PERKS !)
But I think the planes should be limited to fields they can take off from and not removed from the plane set. When "THE FIX" kicks in.... get ready to fly from say the ME163 field.
But I still can't get past the first issue.... I don't think the fix is needed.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Just seemed like it was time to get people talking about solutions instead of calling each other "princess."
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
Can't type.... :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
In Piepers original post he mentions side jumpers for reset.
Wouldn't this help deter this, as the more side jumpers the more the ENV disablement comes into play?
Subtract 20 perks in evry category to anyone who jumps countries and that country wins reset within 24 hours.
I feel this game should make changes that enhances country loyaltiesand and not dicourage it.
KaK3MAW
-
Originally posted by 4510
...
But I still can't get past the first issue.... I don't think the fix is needed.
Yeah ... I don't know why squads aren't moving like they used to.
Maybe all that was "needed" was a command which allowed a squadron leader to move his squad and all his pilots with one action. It'd need some kind of failsafe - like launching a nuke - have 2 other squad members online at the time to "approve" the move.
But rounding up 20 or 40 guys to move or set up a squad is a pain.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Thus far, he seems satisfied that it is doing what he intended. I did run my idea of tying it to the number of fields each country has as a way of placating the folks worried about one country being ganged by the other two. While he wasn't excited by the idea, he was willing to take it under advisement. I would hope that most of the folks complaining here can be sensible enough to give it a week or two and see what happens.
Well I thought the three country model had kicked in nicely prior to this fix. All last week ( I haven't flown since Thursday.. but did all week) the Rooks were PINNED on the main island Weds and Thursday. Then we implement a fix for something that apparently isn't broken....
So I am amused that HT claims success for something that was fixing itself.
Also on this numbers issue. HT claims frustration... can't fix the problem. Exclude the BBS .... where has he reached out to the community and explained...."We have a numbers problem.... and as a community to ensure a great gaming experience... I need some help in fixing this. I would like some volunteer squads to move to help balance numbers... etc." Anyone get an email like that? Anyone get presented with the problem, and a community approach? Again don't use the BBS many folks don't come here regularly. I would suggest no. We got a "FIX" jammed down our throats and told to live with it.
As for not being excited by your suggestion. Doesn't surprise me. HT does some great things, but customer / human relations is not one of his better skills. If it didn't come from HT it is already painted with the broadbrush of irrelevance.
BTW...HT did say that he was thinking that he might need to raise the 'threshold' on the balancing code. That would mean the odds would have to be higher for it to kick in.
He needs to change the equation entirely. It isn't Country A having more than the next most numerous country.... it should be Country A having more than the combined numbers of country B and C kicks in the equation. If you are going to FORCE something to work... FORCE the game model you built to work...the three country model. If you use the current equation you don't even NEED three countries.
:p
-
Originally posted by 4510
But I still can't get past the first issue.... I don't think the fix is needed.
OK, so we don't need it. Is it problem for you for any other reason? If so, why? If not, then who cares? ;)
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Dunno. The AKs switched to Rooks for a week or two until it became evident the numbers problem had been solved.
Kudos.. I was a Rook then....
Didn't notice your country of origin. If you fly prime time USA, then the rooks had numbers every night prior to the latest patch.
But Curly... did the Rooks outnumber the COMBINED strength of Bish / Knits. They didn't... and as a result were pinned on their main island most of the week. The three country model (the smaller countries adjusting how much they fight between each other to counter the larger country) worked like a charm. However fliers in the smaller countries have to know how to do that.... and of course be willing to do so.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
one problem that NONE of this will fix--a mentality issue...WHEN was last time a county OTHER than the SE lost the small pac map?...there are a few similar things i cant think of right now...but the thing is, often (more often than not, it would seem) 2 countries gang up on the third, and no amount of plane meddling will solve situation---its human nature to go after the easiest target. (that being said, I cant beLIEVE anyone is complaining about a scenario that limits 'dweeb' rides)
Because people have the right to fly dweeb rides if they want to.
If the limit was arena wide (read rolling plane set... beginning of camp only early war rides available... other rides phased in over the length of the camp) then it wouldn't be such an issue (IMHO) but to offer changing countries as the only way to fly what you want. Boo Hiss !
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Ha, still not accepting the fact that you are not the BB moderater, and every word typed by others doesnt have to meet your standards. Fine, keep sticking your fingers in your ears then.
I'm not sure he acted as a moderator... otherwise he would have locked you from the thread or deleted your posts. I thought he was after some intelligent exchange of ideas.... so far I don't think he has achieved his primary purpose....
Of course I could be wrong... I've only read about 50 of your posts......
-
Originally posted by KaK3MAW
Subtract 20 perks in evry category to anyone who jumps countries and that country wins reset within 24 hours.
I feel this game should make changes that enhances country loyaltiesand and not dicourage it.
KaK3MAW
KAK... will you go the hell away..... I keep finding I agree with your posts and it is bothering me terribly !
:aok
-
Originally posted by 4510
He needs to change the equation entirely. It isn't Country A having more than the next most numerous country.... it should be Country A having more than the combined numbers of country B and C kicks in the equation. If you are going to FORCE something to work... FORCE the game model you built to work...the three country model. If you use the current equation you don't even NEED three countries.
Just so you know its
ENYdiable = (YourCountry% - (SmallestCountry% + NoFactor%) ) * ENYScale
Hence if country A & B are above NoFactor% both have the peanalty.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Yeah ... I don't know why squads aren't moving like they used to.
Maybe all that was "needed" was a command which allowed a squadron leader to move his squad and all his pilots with one action. It'd need some kind of failsafe - like launching a nuke - have 2 other squad members online at the time to "approve" the move.
But rounding up 20 or 40 guys to move or set up a squad is a pain.
DOK... A GREAT IDEA... and I wager a lot easier to implement than the current ABORTION... (cough) I mean idea that has been implemented.
See this is the very thing that emails to the customer base could have provided the Gestapo .. (cough)... damn this direct thought keyboard of mine keeps typing exactly what I am thinking instead of what I MEAN to say... where was I ... yeah... the Gestap... (oops.. I'm changing keyboards.. wait one)
Ok.. lets try it again....
HT could have dropped emails in everyone's box...and gotten a lot of great idea.... whittled them down to handful and dropped them back out again .... finally coming up with a consensus....
Again.. GREAT Idea....
:aok
-
Originally posted by phookat
OK, so we don't need it. Is it problem for you for any other reason? If so, why? If not, then who cares? ;)
Well you know Phoo... I haven't flown since it was implemented...
I fly the German plane set... and move up and down that plane set. I prefer the upper end of it naturally... but that has more to do with the speed of the aircraft being able to extricate me from a situation my poor judgement and horrendous gunnery get me into. I doubt the ME110-C4 or G2 will ever ENY off the table....
However... I have major gas because I don't believe the fix is needed. I don't think the attitude of "your silly loyalty to a country is rediculous" and "so what if you leave your friends you will make friends" etc. is correct. This isn't about a plane.... it is about all the other things that are affected if one decides to move for a plane. It is about the game play design that AH was built on... and now... we are being told... ignore those things if you want to fly a certain plane.
Also if you we are going to adjust things ofr the "betterment" of the community....then reach out to the community and get consensus and move forward. Don't talk/listen to a small number... then slam down a change and tell everyone else to suck it up. That isn't "community" that is dictatorship.
So that is how it looks to me on this end of Whosville. Which end of Whosville do you live on?
;)
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Just so you know its
ENYdiable = (YourCountry% - (SmallestCountry% + NoFactor%) ) * ENYScale
Hence if country A & B are above NoFactor% both have the peanalty.
Damn Murdr... this is your best post yet... I like it when you are more rational in your posts. You go dude!
So even if my first equation was off... it shouldn't be about individual countries.. per my first post. FORCE the three country model to work.
Also.. for this to work... does each country have viz on each other countries status? I mean... here I am in Rookland and they tell me I can't fly my favorite ride Bf109E... do I know which other country has it or do I just move and go....
Oh GREAT....I'm in another country (FOR TWELVE HOURS) that can't fly a Bf109E either....
-
Originally posted by 4510
I thought he was after some intelligent exchange of ideas.... so far I don't think he has achieved his primary purpose....
Well intelligent exchanges ususlly dont start with "You might be a dweeb because you didn't read the question." If he had just said that I didnt address the Attack plane component of the question without the attitude, I would have replied that I my implication was that there were other attack capable rides in the enabled planes.
-
I dont understand what the big deal is really.
Honestly if you have more players than another country and you can't fly the plane you want, switch sides to the country with the lesser players and go fly it.
This way you can meet new players who play AH and get to see another side of AH.
Also, if you decide that switching isn't your thing and you dont want to log off because you can't fly your 51, or La7 or what have you, you can devote some of your time towards flying a new plane that you have over looked in the past.
There are many great planes in the game that are just as fun to fly as are the 51s and La7s and Niks.
Just learn how they like to be flown and fly em.
-
Originally posted by 4510
Well you know Phoo... I haven't flown since it was implemented...
I see. Maybe you should take a break from the BBS and fly for a while. You might like it. ;)
Originally posted by 4510
I don't think the attitude of "your silly loyalty to a country is rediculous" and "so what if you leave your friends you will make friends" etc. is correct. This isn't about a plane.... it is about all the other things that are affected if one decides to move for a plane. It is about the game play design that AH was built on... and now... we are being told... ignore those things if you want to fly a certain plane.
Your feelings for your chess piece are solely your own. HTC did not tell you to have them. But if you have such feelings, the answer is simple. Stick with your country, through thick and thin. When you have numbers, you won't get all the best planes. So fly a lesser plane.
If you don't have such feelings and want to fly another plane, switch countries and help even the numbers.
It's really pretty straightforward.
-
Originally posted by 4510
Damn Murdr... this is your best post yet...
I think you're exagerating a little. I tend to joke and use sarcasm, especially with old friends. If I get snippy it was precipitated by someones attitude.
I doubt you read my conservitive balancer proposal (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=125863) if that is your impression. There are components like threshold percentage to reach before the peanalty kicks in, that ended up in HTs proposal the following week.
-
Originally posted by 4510
[Well I thought the three country model had kicked in nicely prior to this fix. All last week ( I haven't flown since Thursday.. but did all week) the Rooks were PINNED on the main island Weds and Thursday. Then we implement a fix for something that apparently isn't broken....
Soup...
I can't speak for the last week because I was on vacation for most of it. But, I can speak for the last 4 or 5 months. In that time, things went from RJO's on Sunday nights to most of the weekends being that way. In the last month or so, it was becoming almost a nightly occurance.
Originally posted by 4510
So I am amused that HT claims success for something that was fixing itself.
...and I find it amusing that you take the statements containing "reserving judgement" and "seems satisfied" to be the same as "HT claims success". Perhaps your reading what you want to see instead of what I wrote.
Originally posted by 4510
Also on this numbers issue. HT claims frustration... can't fix the problem. Exclude the BBS .... where has he reached out to the community and explained...."We have a numbers problem.... and as a community to ensure a great gaming experience... I need some help in fixing this. I would like some volunteer squads to move to help balance numbers... etc." Anyone get an email like that? Anyone get presented with the problem, and a community approach? Again don't use the BBS many folks don't come here regularly. I would suggest no. We got a "FIX" jammed down our throats and told to live with it.
Nope, I didn't get an email. Nope, I don't want to get an email. I get enough spam from other game companies...thankfully, HTC isn't one of them. Your email suggestion is impractial from a number of standpoints...not the least being no one wants more spam.
Originally posted by 4510
As for not being excited by your suggestion. Doesn't surprise me. HT does some great things, but customer / human relations is not one of his better skills. If it didn't come from HT it is already painted with the broadbrush of irrelevance.
Soup, where did you find this axe you seem to feel the need to grind? Please, find me a gaming company that does it better than HTC. You might find one, but, I doubt more than that. Someone does have make decisions on how the game works and from my experience, one person is a hellova lot better than a commitee.
Originally posted by 4510
He needs to change the equation entirely. It isn't Country A having more than the next most numerous country.... it should be Country A having more than the combined numbers of country B and C kicks in the equation. If you are going to FORCE something to work... FORCE the game model you built to work...the three country model. If you use the current equation you don't even NEED three countries.
:p
I agree the 3 country model wasn't working. HT asked on the BBS what people felt would be the best way to try and address the issue. He, then, took one of the ideas presented there and attempted to deal with the issue (which is something the AH community refused to do). So, how is this bad customer service, how is this "forcing" a fix down your throat? Soup...put down the axe and back away :).
-
Originally posted by 4510
As for not being excited by your suggestion. Doesn't surprise me. HT does some great things, but customer / human relations is not one of his better skills. If it didn't come from HT it is already painted with the broadbrush of irrelevance.
[/B]
I dont know about all that. When I came here I was told the policy was if its wrong, and you can prove it, it will be fixed. (albeit, that was in regards to planes & FM) They do use player suggestions, when they feel it is the right thing to do.
People complained because their favorite map was being run out of the arena to get to the next map in rotation. They changed it to a a large map a week. Then people complained about not having small maps. I posted along with others to make a week of rotated small maps. They did that. Then players submitted more MA maps, and it became a rotation cycle that lasted two tours. People complained about waiting that long for their favorite map/suffering for weeks on disliked maps. I posted in GPF&R that we have so many maps now why not rotate 1/4 of the maps in a week. They ended up pairing a small and large map together each week.
Thats just one issue, and look at the effort they made to address player concerns (over and over). I think they do well responding to issues and accepting suggestions, and you are being a little harsh.
OTOH, I have also lobbied for a manual flap control option, with what I think is a viable, reasonible damage model. HT was not moved, but I also did not feel slighted or talked down to in any way. The important thing to me was that he did pipe in on the discussion, and at least reviewed the sugestions. On such a small matter having a decision maker even interested inticates good customer service to me
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Well intelligent exchanges ususlly dont start with "You might be a dweeb because you didn't read the question." If he had just said that I didnt address the Attack plane component of the question without the attitude, I would have replied that I my implication was that there were other attack capable rides in the enabled planes.
You're right, Murdr. You were trolling, I chewed down on the bait and you set the hook. My fault.
But you have to be precise when posting or we will all be spending 3 extra posts to figure out what you really mean.
-
Copy that Hyrax. Ive fallen into keeping it as short as possible. There is nothing more eye glazing than a long 4 screen height post. I will try to make sure any unsaid implications are blatently obvious before hitting the post button.
My apoligies for poping off prematurely.
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Copy that Hyrax. Ive fallen into keeping it as short as possible. There is nothing more eye glazing than a long 4 screen height post. I will try to make sure any unsaid implications are blatently obvious before hitting the post button.
My apoligies for poping off prematurely.
Accepted and my apologies as well... I was thin skinned and didn't give you the benefit of the doubt. It's easy to get all wrapped up in this stuff.
P.S. This doesn't mean we're going steady or anything...
LOL !
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Holy crap! Do you think this might be what Hitech was trying to DO?
I hope that Hitech is not so stupid as to do something intentionally to get people to quit playing his game. You know, people only log off in frustration so many times before they just stop paying for something they no longer like.
-
Bottom line is if we are paying $14.95 a month, we should be able to fly what we want for whatever country we want.
Tonite the p51d, la7, p38, spit9, spit5, nik, b17, 190d9, tiger, etc, etc. was unavailable for me to fly. Unless I get a discount on my fee, I am getting less for my money than other players.
Not to mention the crazy collision modeling.
Myself and many many others are getting really fed up.
-
Well some of the posts assume that 2 countries gangbang 1, even tonight (Sunday) this wasn't happening, there were fights on all fronts.
Although it hasn't had the effect of numbers switching yet, in time it will. Newbs who want to fly the low ENV stuff will switch to other countries and the arena will balance.
Frankly I'm at a loss to see why it hadn't sorted itself out as it had in the past.
If you ever decide to read your EULA, $15 does not guarentee you can fly any plane you want, it allows access to the game itself.
I have seen the limit kicking in on 2 countries.
-
Well here's a guarantee that I can keep.........if things aren't changed to be equitable and fair in the planeset....myself and alot of others will be pulling our $15 and going elsewhere.
Whats next....can't fly the goon because a country has numbers? How about just placing 1 bldg in our towns? Both of those solutions are about as idiotic as this one.
-
hi my flying name is GoZilla, and i'm a dweeb.
i like to fly the best planes because they give me the best advantage. i am not a great flyer, and i never claimed to be. i joined htc to fly the best palnes in WWII, and paid handsomely to do so. i did not join to be limited to planes that i do not like. i spend many hours, prolly more like months to a year, perfecting my kill ratio in the la-7. i'm at a point where i feel reletively safe in the air.
i understand the perk system, but this new way of supressing flyers is outta hand. surley there are better ways to deal with certain problems here at htcthan taking away certain planes. there were many good suggestions in this thread.
i've made way too many rook friends to up and switch countries.
i just logged due to the lack of a plane that i wished to fly. i may have re-think my subscription here at htc.
thanks for taking away my sunday night fun
-
So I see Goobman you want a fair and equitable planeset, but an overwhelming superioty in numbers. Sounds fair and equitable doesn't it?
Logging just because you can't fly a plane is a bit off. I was limited earlier, just grabbed another plane.
But actually I think roofer you hit the nail on the head - I want to fly the best plane, feel safe BUT you missed AND fly with a hoard.
Think we're finally getting to heart of things now.
-
Kev, what the heck are u trying to say? Looks greek to me.
However, if you are alluding that I just fly within a hoard then you apparently dont know me. There are about 6 planes I like to fly depending on the situation...ie defending, attacking, goon hunting. Tonite I didnt have the choice of any of them. I couldnt even fly a B-17. So, your suggestion to "just fly another plane" doesnt work. When it got to the point of choosing between a zero or a hurricane...I logged.
-
Originally posted by Goobman
...Tonite the p51d, la7, p38, spit9, spit5, nik, b17, 190d9, tiger, etc, etc. was unavailable for me to fly...
This statement is absolutely false.
-
99% of my time i fly alone
i never have a wingman nor do i feel anyone watches my back.
you can generalize my statement and twist it to make yourself feel better, but my complaint is $ vs. fun.
i doubt i will be playing a game that does not allow me to fly the planes i want to. perking is one thing, but this is way outta line.
-
Are u calling me a liar? Ask anyone flying rooks tonite if u want. Eny limiter was up to 18....all of the planes I listed and more were unavailable during prime time.
-
Goobman, It is absolutly false because if you changed sides you could still fly them.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Well intelligent exchanges ususlly dont start with "You might be a dweeb because you didn't read the question." If he had just said that I didnt address the Attack plane component of the question without the attitude, I would have replied that I my implication was that there were other attack capable rides in the enabled planes.
Uh.. I never said anything about reading questions etc. etc. Think you have me mixed up with someone else...
-
Originally posted by phookat
I see. Maybe you should take a break from the BBS and fly for a while. You might like it. ;)
Your feelings for your chess piece are solely your own. HTC did not tell you to have them. But if you have such feelings, the answer is simple. Stick with your country, through thick and thin. When you have numbers, you won't get all the best planes. So fly a lesser plane.
If you don't have such feelings and want to fly another plane, switch countries and help even the numbers.
It's really pretty straightforward.
Oh.... you can write this in stone... I'm not changing countries.
:)
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Soup...
I agree the 3 country model wasn't working. HT asked on the BBS what people felt would be the best way to try and address the issue. He, then, took one of the ideas presented there and attempted to deal with the issue (which is something the AH community refused to do). So, how is this bad customer service, how is this "forcing" a fix down your throat? Soup...put down the axe and back away :).
You got it.... I put the ax away.....
-
Originally posted by 4510
Oh.... you can write this in stone... I'm not changing countries.
:)
Well... here goes again. Sorry, I keep repeating myself. But WTH right?
You may want to consider a change of perspective: instead of "three countries", think "one community". You are not changing sides at all, you are simply making the game better by evening the teams. If you and your buddies at work did a friendly pick-up basketball game, and two guys had to leave the other team, you'd fill in their place so the game could continue. Right? This is no different.
-
Hitech:
I cannot believe what I am reading. You are suggesting that I leave my team....my teammates...my squadmates... just to be able to fly a plane I should be able to fly anyway? I am not a mercenary and I take this very seriously. Country hopping should not be your solution.
On my team, every plane I listed earlier were unavailable. If they were for the other 2 countries it proves my point of the system being unfair. My opinion may mean nothing to you, but if it does I urge you to rethink this plan of evening out numbers. It doesnt work and is only hurting the game. There has to be a better, more equitable solution.
If it comes down to me choosing a different country to fly for, I will choose not flying at all.
-
Originally posted by 4510
Uh.. I never said anything about reading questions etc. etc. Think you have me mixed up with someone else...
Notice the "If he" in the quote as in 3rd person, as in refering to someone other than you.
You're running so many conversations, I think you just misread or forgot the context. No prob, not important.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Goobman, It is absolutly false because if you changed sides you could still fly them.
HiTech
This is certainly true, and since I rarely fly aircaft with an ENY of less than 15, it only blocked my use of the P-38.
However, what options are available to guys who are part of a squad that has strict rules about side-switching? If they switch they may be booted from a squad they enjoy flying with. I've seen it happen several times. My squad is one of those that require loyalty (although I personally find it silly).
While the solution offered was worth a try, I don't see it accomplishing the goal of side balancing. And frankly, I find the whole issue moot anyway. Where were the attempts to balance sides two years ago when on any given night, the Rooks were out-numbered 3/1? Why is this now a big issue? Do we have more crybabies now than then? It seems so. Besides, only during a few hours of prime time do the Rooks have a noteworthy numbers advantage, and not every night. All day long Rooks have the lowest number of players. I didn't see any whining about that.
As we have seen in the past, numbers will go up and down in an almost cyclic pattern. Trying to manage that is probably not a good idea in light of the fact that a great many players are getting annoyed because they can't fly what they want and fly with whom they want at the same time. Adding to this is the problem of the smaller side still having low-cost access to perk planes. Therefore, the side(s) having the greater numbers get penalized twice. They must fly second tier aircraft, and often against dirt cheap perk planes.
Now, I realize that HTC is not finished with this experiment as Pyro wrote that the ENY cut-off may be changed. But, based upon what I'm seeing on the BBS and what I saw and heard online, I conclude that the cure may be worse than the disease.
I'd rather see zero restrictions on types and a revised perk system go into effect when the numbers are badly skewed. perhaps cutting perk cost to just 10% of normal for the under-manned country. If Tempests cost only 10 perk points, they'll get a lot of use. You will probably not force a significant number of players to switch sides. They simply will not abandon their squads. But, you can offset numbers with perk values low enough that even newbies can afford a 262 or Tempest. I'm not sure that's a real solution either, but it sure will cut down on the overall volume of whining.
My regards,
Widewing
-
System is working very well, a lot better than I expected. This is the first sunday night that was enjoyable in a really long time. I was even able to up a 110C and 202 and have fun with them when I wanted too.
There were steady battles on all fronts, and nobody had to hunt for work. At the same time it was not a gangband on monumental scale that ruins everyones fun (except the perpetrators of course).
Unexpected benefit is a lot more diversity (sp) of opponents. We were still outnumbered, rooks had as many players as bish and knights combined, but it was a fun time anyway.
Hell hitech, you just maybe maybe might actually know what you are doing:) I still hate HQ, but this is 200% better.
-
Originally posted by Goobman
If it comes down to me choosing a different country to fly for, I will choose not flying at all.
Now that is just flat-out silly.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Now that is just flat-out silly.
My regards,
Widewing
The silliness is that I am being coerced (by cutting my choices of planes in half) to become a country hopper. I believe in loyalty to your team, not switching when the odd are against you. My next statement is evidence of this: I am, and will always be a New Orleans Saints Fan. :)
-
Originally posted by Goobman
The silliness is that I am being coerced (by cutting my choices of planes in half) to become a country hopper. I believe in loyalty to your team, not switching when the odd are against you. My next statement is evidence of this: I am, and will always be a New Orleans Saints Fan. :)
And LORD knows the Saints have TRIED to get you to switch teams!
:lol
-
Originally posted by Goobman
The silliness is that I am being coerced (by cutting my choices of planes in half) to become a country hopper. I believe in loyalty to your team, not switching when the odd are against you. My next statement is evidence of this: I am, and will always be a New Orleans Saints Fan. :)
What in the world would you do if HT changed the current three county rook/bish/knight setup to a four country hearts/clubs/diamonds/spades setup overnight? Quit because your team got renamed and moved and an expansion team was formed? :)
-
Originally posted by Arlo
What in the world would you do if HT changed the current three county rook/bish/knight setup to a four country hearts/clubs/diamonds/spades setup overnight? Quit because your team got renamed and moved and an expansion team was formed? :)
Speaking only for myself (and what our squad did when we arrived in AH). We would look to see who has the squads that like to play the way we do, which country has squads who we have good history with, and we also evaluate the general tone and temperament of the population at large and determine whether we will spend most of our time working together or squelching them as soon as we log on.
It was never about a particular chess piece. It has always been about the people we like to fly with.
-
Ah .. but figure in the dynamic of a fourth side and the possibility that there would be some mix and match. It wouldn't be "Rooks all go Spades, Bish all go Hearts and Knights all go Clubs" (well, I guess technically it could ... but ....). You've got a fourth hand now and you'd probably see some mix of friend and foe, preferred accompli and preferred target. If not you, someone would. And, to tell ya the truth, a little mix and shake probably couldn't hoit right now.
-
Originally posted by Arlo
Ah .. but figure in the dynamic of a fourth side and the possibility that there would be some mix and match. It wouldn't be "Rooks all go Spades, Bish all go Hearts and Knights all go Clubs" (well, I guess technically it could ... but ....). You've got a fourth hand now and you'd probably see some mix of friend and foe, preferred accompli and preferred target. If not you, someone would. And, to tell ya the truth, a little mix and shake probably couldn't hoit right now.
Perfectly true, but it wouldn't change the way we would make our selection. Maybe in a 4 country scenario we would end up in one with 5 of the squads we like to work with (rather than 12 in a 3 country setup). Just like when AW closed down. Country A,B and C didn't uniformly move to Knight, Bishop and Rook here. Same deal...
-
Originally posted by hitech
Goobman, It is absolutly false because if you changed sides you could still fly them.
HiTech
not an option for me.
if this is going to be your solution to this "problem" then i don't see me shelling out cash on this sim for very much longer
my lone 15 bucks a month is pennies in your eyes, but it's alot of money to pay to be limited on what planes to fly.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
In another thread I suggested an easy-to-implement alternative. Have the load-balancer only apply to captured fields. If you can advance without needed a huge numeric advantage, then you can fly whatever you want all over the map. But if you can't advance without The Horde, then once you're on foreign soil you lose the benefit of La-7's, etc. from those captured fields. You can still use these planes from homeland fields. Which allows squads to find fights on un-Horded areas of the front closer to these bases. This preserves what HT had in mind without making the wrong people suffer.
I agree with DoKGonZo's idea. If you want to bring your plane of choice up to the front, you could fly it in from 100 miles away or so. It would take you 20 minutes or so to get there and you'd be careful not to loose it.
I general, I just don't agree with the ENY plane limiter idea. I haven't had a chance to fly for a while, and was quite surprised to get the can't fly message.
-
OK so whats the difference between a hoard of lala and ponys coming in from a field 25 miles away at 25k and a field 50 miles or 75 miles away. Still get the endless conveyor belt, with the added bonus of a huge increase in runners.
Of course to bring a lala 100 miles how much time you gonna get over target. Wouldnt affect ponies though. Unless the fuel burn was decreased, but then we're back to the fuel pork issue.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
OK so whats the difference between a hoard of lala and ponys coming in from a field 25 miles away at 25k and a field 50 miles or 75 miles away. Still get the endless conveyor belt, with the added bonus of a huge increase in runners.
The difference is that someone in the air transiting for a half hour is out of the battle. And if they have 10 min of fuel over the front, they'd hit bingo on fuel and have to hot load at a closer base, which would also take them out of the battle.
But, players would still have the choice of what aircraft they want to fly at all times.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
OK so whats the difference between a hoard of lala and ponys coming in from a field 25 miles away at 25k and a field 50 miles or 75 miles away. Still get the endless conveyor belt, with the added bonus of a huge increase in runners.
Of course to bring a lala 100 miles how much time you gonna get over target. Wouldnt affect ponies though. Unless the fuel burn was decreased, but then we're back to the fuel pork issue.
Well I guess it depends.... if it is 3 or 4 sectors... perhaps people would be less apt to the use the planes.....
But remember.... this move isn't REALLY designed to make hi performance planes go away so the underdog has a better chance. It is designed to inconvenience people so they will change countries.
You can get mauled by a horde of P40s just as effectively as by a horde of P51s.
-
Originally posted by 4510
Well I guess it depends.... if it is 3 or 4 sectors... perhaps people would be less apt to the use the planes.....
But remember.... this move isn't REALLY designed to make hi performance planes go away so the underdog has a better chance. It is designed to inconvenience people so they will change countries.
You can get mauled by a horde of P40s just as effectively as by a horde of P51s.
I like Dok's idea too ... but it would require alot more coding on HTs part to implement, but still believe that it might be worth the effort. Having to fly the late war monsters 2 to 3 sectors to get to the front line and when kiiled, they would have to do it all over again ... yuk !!!
I dislike the idea of changing this to a "perk-um" solution. Adding perks to these rides would only promote MPRE timidiness, which is already a problem.
This change was designed to do both ...
If the imbalanced is not changed due to people refusing, fine, but be prepared to fly the higher ENY planes for attack while the other team has all the performance planes that will eat you for breakfast. This does not balance the numbers, but does level the playing field.
Change sides and balance the numbers and all planes are available, and again, the playing field is level.
I seriously doubt that a horde of P-40s will be as effective as a horde of P-51s. Especially when they run into defenders flying P-51s and La-7s and N1Ks. It wouldn't be a pretty sight.
The object here is to level the playing field which has been completely off the hook for quite some time now.
-
Originally posted by 4510
But remember.... this move isn't REALLY designed to make hi performance planes go away so the underdog has a better chance. It is designed to inconvenience people so they will change countries.
In that case, I guess it's working. I got so disgusted, I logged off. The more guys log off, the better balanced the game becomes. And the more guys log off for good, the more likely a repeat of Air Warrior will happen. That will solve the whole problem.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
I seriously doubt that a horde of P-40s will be as effective as a horde of P-51s. Especially when they run into defenders flying P-51s and La-7s and N1Ks. It wouldn't be a pretty sight.
The object here is to level the playing field which has been completely off the hook for quite some time now.
Oh it will make a difference I agree.....if no other reason than bombload. But if 30 P40s arrive with some alt.... over a base defended by 10 (take your pick) .... that base is going to get hammered. Most of the mudmovers don't even carry enough gas to go home. They aren't going to be concerned with what happens after they dive thru and drop their eggs. They'll just reload and come back again. Also... I've seen what a P40 does in the hands of guys who can really fly. I think the issue of whose lunch gets consumed isn't that clearly cut.
-
ENY is BS! If the Knits and Bish would ever organize themselves, they could make up for their meager numbers. That is what the Rooks did some time ago.
If we had a Liberator for a buff, then enying the B17 would not be so bad. But the '17 is the only viable heavy bomber in the arena.
Any attempt to level the playing field will not be good. If one cannot organize and improve tactics, then one is doomed as a military unit.
Frankly, if there was a viable alternative to AH, I would go there now.
-
Even before the ENY modifier, some people would fly 51s/La7s/190s sectors to a fight, even if their team had a CV already there. I reckon they'd fly any distance if it meant they could keep their preferred ride.
This isn't a dig, well maybe a slight one, just made me laugh :)
Originally posted by roofer
i've made way too many rook friends to up and switch countries.
Originally posted by roofer
99% of my time i fly alone
i never have a wingman nor do i feel anyone watches my back.
Some friends eh?
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
I like Dok's idea too ... but it would require alot more coding on HTs part to implement, but still believe that it might be worth the effort. Having to fly the late war monsters 2 to 3 sectors to get to the front line and when kiiled, they would have to do it all over again ... yuk !!!
I analyzed the implementation in another thread. It's pretty trivial - maybe 5 or 6 lines of code.
-
Originally posted by Chortle
This isn't a dig, well maybe a slight one, just made me laugh :)
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by roofer
i've made way too many rook friends to up and switch countries.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by roofer
99% of my time i fly alone
i never have a wingman nor do i feel anyone watches my back.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some friends eh?
ok i may have to explain this further for you.
i rarely up with a wingman say during the day, or if i have only an hour to play. on squad nights i have twenty wingmen, a purpose along with an objective.
when it's not squad night, i tend to fly alone, not relying on anyone to clear my six. thus the fastest plane is most preferable due to my skills, when i get in trouble i cut and run.
if that makes me a dweeb in people's eyes, so what? i usually end up landing my plane rather than getting shot down. i take getting shot down personally and do everything i can to avoid it. sorry i'm not the arcade kind of guy upping turny airplanes, nor am i the "i'm better than you, so i can shoot you down flying a lesser plane". if a guy breaks off my six and i still have fuel and ammo, i will turn back on him.
i need all the help i can get, and i'm not ashamed to admit it.
the rook friends i have made are the kind of guys that will help you out with questions, and give you tips about flying. they also have a good sense of humor and do not fall in the "i'm better than you" catagory. they truely help you out whenever they can, including clearing my six.
-
Originally posted by 4510
Oh it will make a difference I agree.....if no other reason than bombload. But if 30 P40s arrive with some alt.... over a base defended by 10 (take your pick) .... that base is going to get hammered. Most of the mudmovers don't even carry enough gas to go home. They aren't going to be concerned with what happens after they dive thru and drop their eggs. They'll just reload and come back again. Also... I've seen what a P40 does in the hands of guys who can really fly. I think the issue of whose lunch gets consumed isn't that clearly cut.
I guess we have to agree that we disagree here.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
I analyzed the implementation in another thread. It's pretty trivial - maybe 5 or 6 lines of code.
Come on Dok ... I am a software developer too, and very rarely do things get done in 5 or 6 lines of code ... maybe it is trival, just a gut feeling on my part that it wouldn't be.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Come on Dok ... I am a software developer too, and very rarely do things get done in 5 or 6 lines of code ... maybe it is trival, just a gut feeling on my part that it wouldn't be.
No ... seriously ... add an array for "Homefields", a 1-line "for" loop to load each entry with the countryID of the original owner at terrain load up, then add an extra "and-if" clause when determining if the load balancer kicks in to test if the player is at a field originally owned by his country (i.e. if (player->country == homeFields[player->currentField]).) and that's about it.
I don't know what the data structures actually look like, so I'm making some assumptions. But if things are set up the way you'd expect, the above 3 additions should be all you need - more or less.
-
Dok that dosn't take into account the change of owner ship of fields in the arena.
It would tend to create very hotspot in the terrain.
To make your idea work it would have to be based off from the dist to the nearest enemy field, That creates a problem as I see it when you take a look at the exceptions of no field avaiable.
It also dosn't handle a the case very well where a country is beetin back and then a lot of numbers show up.
AND Btw on your other sugestion of perks being lowered for underdog, they are already, Underdog gets decrease, Big country gets increased.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
It also dosn't handle a the case very well where a country is beetin back and then a lot of numbers show up.
Wow. Hitech reads my posts.
Malcolm Hood to the P-51B. When? :(
-
Might be able to define it as distance from HQ. Then the farther you move lines from HQ the higher ENY values only would be availible. Just another scale opertation base on that distance.
This also has the added advantage of increasing avergy flight time to enemy. Which is also a very odds evening force.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Dok that dosn't take into account the change of owner ship of fields in the arena.
It would tend to create very hotspot in the terrain.
To make your idea work it would have to be based off from the dist to the nearest enemy field, That creates a problem as I see it when you take a look at the exceptions of no field avaiable.
It also dosn't handle a the case very well where a country is beetin back and then a lot of numbers show up.
AND Btw on your other sugestion of perks being lowered for underdog, they are already, Underdog gets decrease, Big country gets increased.
HiTech
What you see as flaws are actually what I thought would work best. If you get beat back and then reinforcments arrive you can then retake ground without penalty of numbers - because you were probably beaten back *by* superior numbers - so you should at least be able to get back to the starting line.
The change in ownership is what gets tracked with the "homeFields" array - it says who owned what field when the terrain loaded. As long as you fly from a field that was originally on your "soil" you can fly whatever you want.
But when The Horde advances, they must attack from captured fields with inferior planes.
As for the perk modifier, I suggested accelerating the ramp. What I've observed (and I'm sure you have stats that are a better indicator) is that the side with numbers rarely uses perk planes as it now stands anyway. And the defender rarely does (save for jets) because the odds of losing the perk ride are so high. But if you accelerate the discount so that if you're outnumbered it's almost in your best interest to invest in a perk ride, then the face of the battle may change.
-
That would address the concerns of both defending HQ with 163, and if the country with the numbers are backed up on their core territory. Reminds me of a former AvA AW setup where the best planes were only avalible at the rear.
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
First, tell me what you think the "best" plane is for JABO ?
The P51-D has the best long distance "legs" (fuel) and combination of ordinance with dogfighting capability of any of the JABO rides (F4U, F6F, P47, Typhoon).
I didn't know that only Allieds had 'jabbo's. :D
-
As to the 163 and perk planes the 163 will definetly be excluded and im favoring the idea of all perks to be excluded from the eny system.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
As to the 163 and perk planes the 163 will definetly be excluded and im favoring the idea of all perks to be excluded from the eny system.
HiTech
That sounds like a good idea - would add a little more "value" to perks in out of balance situations. You can fly a p51d or la7, but you can spend 60 or so perks for a tempest, ect....
-
Instead of making some planes unavailable altogether, why not just perk every plane in the set, but make it so that when the numbers are even only the "perk planes" have an actual perk cost. However as the number start to grow unbalanced more planes gets perk costs attached to them. This way if someone REALLY wants to fly a certain plane he can, but he will have to pay for it.
-
The change in ownership is what gets tracked with the "homeFields" array - it says who owned what field when the terrain loaded. As long as you fly from a field that was originally on your "soil" you can fly whatever you want.
Keep going Dok ... I think that HT missed the point that the "home" array would be intially loaded with all the airfields that each country owned when the map was initalized.
homeFieldsRook[] = [A1,A4,A8,...]
homeFieldsBishop[] = [A34,A66,A99,...]
homeFieldsKinights[] = [A22,A44,A7,...]
When sitting in the tower, you would look at the "home" country of the pilot and at the airfield number. If the airfield is not in the "home" array, disable the planes if there is an imbalance.
This would, in effect, be the same, if not better than "distance from HQ".
SWEET !!!
-
GS, then it would still be like pre patch 8. Perks wouldn't matter that much. (imagine 51s/la7 would be peked around 10 or less in that situation with perk mod applied - not that many points)
But if you cant fly certain planes when your side is grossly over populated, and you want to fly a better plane - then you have to pay premium perk points for it - based on ther perk mod.
And I don't think it's a punishment. If folks want to stay on one side because of any reason (squads, loyalty) and the 51s / la7s are disabled - then they have a choice to up a fast ride - only they have to pay for it. And they would also be dealing with the perk mod.
Kinda adds a little emphasis now back on the perk points.
-
I think it would work. The F4U-1C was the scourge of the MA before it got its tiny little perk cost attached to it. Now it's a novelty in the MA. If the lemming horde has to pay say 10 perks for every Pony or Spit they auger they will run out of perks in no time. ;)
OTOH this system allows the hardcore one-plane-enthusiast-chess-piece-loyalist to fly his particular brand of poison, but at a cost if he flies for the biggest team.
-
Didn't miss that idea slap shot. I just do not care for that one becase it only starts having an effect after the captures start.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
...
When sitting in the tower, you would look at the "home" country of the pilot and at the airfield number. If the airfield is not in the "home" array, disable the planes if there is an imbalance.
This would, in effect, be the same, if not better than "distance from HQ".
SWEET !!!
You got the idea. A lot easier to do than measuring distances too. This almost rewards the side that can advance without a huge odds advantage.
-DoK
-
Originally posted by hitech
Didn't miss that idea slap shot. I just do not care for that one becase it only starts having an effect after the captures start.
OK ... lemme play devils advocate then ...
If odds are 100:100:125 and the front is static along the country borders, why is there anything that needs balancing? One side has a numerical edge, but its not translating into any kind of advance. So if they can't advance even with superior numbers, why should they be penalized on top of this?
I would think that a static front indicates a balanced arena. No?
While I suppose you could see a semi-permanent vultching in this case, that's easy enough to avoid being affected by - just launch elsewhere. And if the side with numbers does start taking fields, the further into enemy territory the go, the further they are from home bases with the "good" planes they are.
I'm not saying my idea is perfect by any stretch ... but it may be a decent compromise.
-
the further into enemy territory
This is probalimatic in your system, You described as either home or not.
The HQ system could function as you describe or could start removing planes sooner with higher values depending on the scales.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Didn't miss that idea slap shot. I just do not care for that one becase it only starts having an effect after the captures start.
HiTech
NP ... just thought ya might have ... Hi Tech ... :D
I don't see a problem with it. Most of the angst and anguish is when the lesser poplulated country is cornered or beginning to get penned it.
So, if after a reset or a map rotation reset, I don't see a problem with the lesser country duking it out over a large front. At this point there is still room to "spread your wings" and try to stem the tide.
Once base captures start to happen, and there is an over-balance, that is when the "Delirium Factor" would come into immediate effect along the front line (as it moves and encroaches into foriegn land) and it would then slow things down and level the playing field.
-
Originally posted by hitech
This is probalimatic in your system, You described as either home or not.
The HQ system could function as you describe or could start removing planes sooner with higher values depending on the scales.
HiTech
Then again, you know more about the internals than we do, so the "distance from HQ" might work. At the least, it is step to refine what has been implemented.
Cudos to you for doing it, and BIG cudos for trying/listening to ways to refine it and make it work without being too painfull.
Bottom line on this one ... I think the premesis is a definate step in the right direction, however you implement it.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Come on Dok ... I am a software developer too, and very rarely do things get done in 5 or 6 lines of code ... maybe it is trival, just a gut feeling on my part that it wouldn't be.
LOL... I've heard that phrase before. It goes along with "this'll all be transparent to the user".
-
Originally posted by KaK3MAW
LIMITING plane set because you have more numbers is only going to encourage more ganging.... Rooks could have 100 more players.. limmited to 109fe and spit1.. and be ganged by bish and knights and be effectively outnumbered. I for one am lustily looking forward to exploit this arcade feature....
BTW,, do we get monthy fee decrease based on lower percentage of totl plane set use? we should.
KaK3
"that which doesn't kill you isn't dangerous enough":aok
Never in this life could I think that I would ever agree with my arch rival KaK3. But in this case we agree.
I have flown most every Sunday as a Rook, we have numbers advantage but I have never been there for a
reset on Sunday night. We have the numbers, the organization, but still we are not effective in making a reset
happen.
What I think you should do while we are at it, is to place a penalty on the top 100 pilots, Curly, Fester, Kappa,
all Ltars. They all spend time becoming great pilots and should be smacked down for being that good.
What a game, and rest assured that it is a game Pyro said so. This is not a simulation, none of the planes are set
to the specs that they were in WWII. ONCE YOU OPEN A BAG OF WORMS THEY GO EVERYWHERE.
SKPappy SKBG
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
LOL... I've used that phrase before. It goes along with "this'll all be transparent to the user".
I wouldn't say something is "easy" if I hadn't thought through how to do it first. Hell, who do you think was one of the first people to start putting double-quotes around the words two and weeks.
No problem, HT. I was just offering some ways to quickly tweak things and get the signal-to-whine ratio to a more acceptable level,
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
I wouldn't say something is "easy" if I hadn't thought through how to do it first. Hell, who do you think was one of the first people to start putting double-quotes around the words two and weeks.
No problem, HT. I was just offering some ways to quickly tweak things and get the signal-to-whine ratio to a more acceptable level,
Sorry Dok,
I wasn't implying you hadn't thought things through in your original quote. I was laughing at my own memory of how an I.T. Director "over-sold" the benefits of 4GL software development to some COBOL programmers. One of 'em actually said "well, looks like we can replace the whole system with 5 or 6 lines of code." in a very dry tone. It was hysterical at the time because he was not known for being anything less than totally serious. Everyone cracked up and the Director had to start laughing too, or lose his audience.
-
Originally posted by 2Slow
Frankly, if there was a viable alternative to AH, I would go there now.
the unknown is scary, eh?
-
Originally posted by hitech
As to the 163 and perk planes the 163 will definetly be excluded and im favoring the idea of all perks to be excluded from the eny system.
HiTech
Your thoughts on bombers along the same line?
-
Originally posted by Hyrax81st
Sorry Dok,
I wasn't implying you hadn't thought things through in your original quote....
No problem ... I didn't mean my response in a harsh way. I was really agreeing with you. If someone I didn't know said a major functional change could be done in 3 lines I'd go "yeah right" too.
-
Im starting to think this whole thing is a subtle way of encouraging folks to change countries (i.e. Nits) About 2 years ago when the rooks were getting beat up like red-headed stepchildren night after night, our numbers got steadily worse and worse--was hard not to notice peeps I used to fly with were now part of the hoards hunting down my VERY average-skilled d9/b17. After a few months, typical night was 75 Rooks, 120-150 each Nits and Bish---each map was a race to see how fast Rooks could get pushed off map. Eventually a squad or 2 that left returned, AK's came over in gesture of good-will, and within a few more months arena was quite even...and FUN. ITs no damn fun getting ganged, and its equally no damn fun havin 2-3X more guys than your opponent---there's no challenge, and its REALLY hard to find kills...( unless of course a noob keeps uppin a p51 at a capped field.) Im guessin there are quite a few guys in Bish/Rooks that have left Nits over last few months...go back and everythin be even and this patch wont be a topic of discussion
-
Originally posted by Chortle
Even before the ENY modifier, some people would fly 51s/La7s/190s sectors to a fight, even if their team had a CV already there. I reckon they'd fly any distance if it meant they could keep their preferred ride.
This isn't a dig, well maybe a slight one, just made me laugh :)
I will fly several sectors in a 190 or 109. I prefer to fly German only.... so thus I would have to if the only other choice were a CV. (tho the CHOG is an appealing ride )
-
Originally posted by hitech
Might be able to define it as distance from HQ. Then the farther you move lines from HQ the higher ENY values only would be availible. Just another scale opertation base on that distance.
This also has the added advantage of increasing avergy flight time to enemy. Which is also a very odds evening force.
HiTech
HT, I do like that compromise idea. As one side further advances, it'll become more difficult to progress with inferior aircraft. But defending aircraft will have an advantage. And if people want to bring their 51's 400 miles, they'll take really good care of them deep in enemy territory. And what a vulchfest it would be to catch all sorts of high performance aircraft waiting to hotload and get back into the air. There would be defensive vulch squads waiting to pounce, and offensive CAP over a captured field to defend against vulching hotloaders.
I think the distance to HQ CNY idea would really add a lot to playbalance, realism, and strategy.
And people would be able to fly whatever they wanted. It would have to be scaled for the large and small maps. But, I think it would add a lot to the game. You would really have to plan your long distance missions and figure out what aircraft would be available as you advance into enemy territory. The XO's and mission planners would really have to put on their thinking caps to win a reset.
-
Wouldn't hotpadding just defeat the whole idea of making them fly from further away.
Scenario -
Hoard gets together grabs their Lalas / Ponys etc, lifts, flies to within 50 miles of front line. Hotpads, reups, gets to their 25/30k alt. Anyone gets close to them, hit the deck and run, get to field rearm/refuel, rinse and repeat. And your fed up with runstangs and lalas now? This would make things 100% worse.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Wouldn't hotpadding just defeat the whole idea of making them fly from further away.
Scenario -
Hoard gets together grabs their Lalas / Ponys etc, lifts, flies to within 50 miles of front line. Hotpads, reups, gets to their 25/30k alt. Anyone gets close to them, hit the deck and run, get to field rearm/refuel, rinse and repeat. And your fed up with runstangs and lalas now? This would make things 100% worse.
25K? The only stuff I see up there on a regular basis are Lancs and B17's. And why would you even want to take a Russian plane over 15K in the first place?
In theory what you say is correct. Except that vultching puts you close to AAA, so you are likely to get some damage - so you need to replane. Likewise the turn-around time for the hotpad isn't nearly as quick (or sure-fire) as re-planing ... and you are very vulnerable while taxiing to the hotpad, a Tiffy could really do some damage with only a couple runs with all those parked planes.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
All you effing whiners keep talking about how you're being denied doing what you want to do sometimes. Well eff you. [/B]
I dunno about you but I am part of a bomber squad that spends a lot of time in the 17, how is this game balance patch supposed to benefit us?
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Frankly, I would rather have seen the aircraft in question be perked than disabled. Say, start at 20 perk points and work their way up from there.
That seems like a good compromise.
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by AKcurly
Because his choice of fun ruins the evening for the other two countries. He can change countries and do all of the above.
I think you overlooked the set up of that question. The hypothetical person is part of a squad and changing countries is going to muck that up so therefore it is not an option that this hypothetical person is going to entertain. Most likely he/she will log off. enough nights of this and he/she will cancel his/her account. How does this benefit the game, exactly?
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by hitech
Might be able to define it as distance from HQ. Then the farther you move lines from HQ the higher ENY values only would be availible. Just another scale opertation base on that distance.
This also has the added advantage of increasing avergy flight time to enemy. Which is also a very odds evening force.
HiTech
This idea (making some planes available only when in home territory) really did have an immediate effect on a similar problem at AW.
That particular arena had a constant problem due to one side or the other logging on a lot more people than the other and rolling the whole arena up real fast. Fixing the planeset like this helped a LOT (I hardly ever got my chain yanked to go reset that arena because it was all wiped out after doing this ;))
Something to think about - bombers. Its pretty realistic to limit their availability to home territory, if you think about it, and that helps slow down a steamroller too.
culero
-
Originally posted by MoRphEuS
I dont understand what the big deal is really.
Honestly if you have more players than another country and you can't fly the plane you want, switch sides to the country with the lesser players and go fly it.
Doesn't work all that well for people in squads....
This way you can meet new players who play AH and get to see another side of AH.
If I wanted to do that I would have moved on to other countries already. i like the guys I fly with.
Also, if you decide that switching isn't your thing and you dont want to log off because you can't fly your 51, or La7 or what have you, you can devote some of your time towards flying a new plane that you have over looked in the past.
This will alienate the weekend flyer. Is that the goal here now, to tighten up AH so that it becomes more of an exclusive club to those with an excess amount of time to spend in the game?
There are many great planes in the game that are just as fun to fly as are the 51s and La7s and Niks.
Yes there are, but there had to be a better, or at least lest arbirtrary way, of getting people to fly them.
Just learn how they like to be flown and fly em.
That might be easy for you but I have been working on learning the 51D for over a year now and still don't have a good grasp of it. Switching off to other planes is only going to exacerbate my low score and pitiful k/d ration. Maybe that's because I am a weekend pilot with only a small amount of time to spare for AH.
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by hitech
Goobman, It is absolutly false because if you changed sides you could still fly them.
HiTech
I think you missed the point that a lot of people do not want to change sides. Saying that Contition A in Country A is false because Condition A is not true in Country B seems way off base and smacks more of a justification than anything else.
Will I change countries to fly a plane I want? Not a chance in hell.
Will I fly other planes to stay with my squad mates? Sure.
Will I not change countries because of my friendships with my squadmates? Bingo.
Is my squad going to survive this? I dunno. Most of them were plenty ticked off about this last night.
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Now that is just flat-out silly.
My regards,
Widewing
Then put me down as one of the silly ones.
I will not change countries, turn my back on the squad I have been flying with for over a year, just to fly a particular plane.
As I said in a previous post I will fly other planes, but I resent the way this is being handled.
All this seems to do is reward people who change sides as it is now rather than those who band together and work together. Wouldn't rewarding the later be a better way of supporting the community?
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by 4510
You can get mauled by a horde of P40s just as effectively as by a horde of P51s.
I agree. I can get mauled by just about anything. ;)
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by Chortle
Even before the ENY modifier, some people would fly 51s/La7s/190s sectors to a fight, even if their team had a CV already there. I reckon they'd fly any distance if it meant they could keep their preferred ride.
For me it wasn't about flying sectors to keep my perfered ride, it was about flying sectors to gain alt and try to have some kindof advantage when I got there.
Skeksis
-
people that use bombers on the fronline bases are the ones flying 1k in lancasters trying to see if they can get to the field before they die:rolleyes:
resets is the idea of winning the war i dont mind at all when fair numbers wins the reset but i do mind when that side has 220 players and the loser has 80
right now i love the new setup because it does fix this so far
as to the other idea of range from HQ i think putting this in is a ant-i reset way of handling the numbers
team A winning with fair numbers good
team R winning with huge numbers bad
so why bring in a idea that would help making resets harder when this is about making numbers more fair?
-
Funny that most of the guys who are suggesting perking are mentioning numbers around 20.
Its the, perk it so WE can fly it as we have loads of perks, and don't want to risk too many hoard.
Sorry guys, if a Spit 14 is worth 45 and a Tempest 60, the Pony and La7 should be perked way higher. How would you feel if the base perk price was around 100, and that was added to as the numbers increased.
Not so keen anymore?
Starting to think we have some real self centered people in the community. i.e. The I want the numbers advantage, I want the top rides, I want to fly in a hoard, I want to gangbang other people, I am enjoying myself doesn't matter if anyone else is.
-
I worry about some people, to the them "country" is pretty real. It is so real for some, they might actually shoot a real gun at some others if they saw them. Not much you can do for these sort, the internet is a wierd place.
-
Originally posted by Skeksis
Most likely he/she will log off. enough nights of this and he/she will cancel his/her account. How does this benefit the game, exactly?
Skeksis
In the short term what you imagine might well happen, just as some left when we went to the new graphics system. What you have failed to consider however is the big picture - how new players are/were integrated which is the future and the real money.
Just like the new graphics, some thigns have to be done for the long haul. If there are some casualties along the way, that is sad, but it had to be done.
-
Originally posted by Zanth
Just like the new graphics, some thigns have to be done for the long haul. If there are some casualties along the way, that is sad, but it had to be done.
Bring out yer dead! Bring out yer dead!
Help! I'm being repressed!
:)
-
Originally posted by simshell
snip
so why bring in a idea that would help making resets harder when this is about making numbers more fair?
Its a different way of skinning the cat, that's all.
Think about it. What is it about numbers imbalance that is undesirable? Really, the only bad thing is if the paying customers on the way-outnumbered side have no chance to play and have fun because they're getting the snot clobbered out of 'em before they can get up to fight. Give 'em a fighting chance, and they can have fun - fighting, which is what the game is about.
If you make it progressively harder to capture the farther a steamroller progresses, the steamrollees have a progressively better and better chance to fight as the steamroller rolls. Therefore, even though the numbers themselves aren't changed, the bad effect of numbers imbalance is compensated for.
Make sense?
culero
-
Originally posted by culero
Something to think about - bombers. Its pretty realistic to limit their availability to home territory, if you think about it, and that helps slow down a steamroller too.
culero
:rofl Why limit availability to home territory? You really think that bombers are a key to any "steamrolling"? Hell, we are usually flying around several sectors simply trying to get to a target before the fighters have leveled everything during an RJO.
If it comes to pass that bombers are not going to be available at a captured frontline base, it should only be for a period of time (perhaps by automatically destroying bomber hangers upon capture). This period of time could be decreased by supplying airfield supplies for the construction crews to prepare the field for heavies.
I think the expansion of the town size was a good move to slow things down, however I still wonder if .50s should destroy them.
p.s. I still don't think bombers should be a victim of the ENY disablement
-
Originally posted by Skeksis
I think you missed the point that a lot of people do not want to change sides. Saying that Contition A in Country A is false because Condition A is not true in Country B seems way off base and smacks more of a justification than anything else.
Will I change countries to fly a plane I want? Not a chance in hell.
Will I fly other planes to stay with my squad mates? Sure.
Will I not change countries because of my friendships with my squadmates? Bingo.
Is my squad going to survive this? I dunno. Most of them were plenty ticked off about this last night.
Skeksis
So, what you are seemingly saying is that your squad is generally unhappy at not being able to fly the low ENY fighters (La-7, P-51D, Spit9, Niki, etc.), correct?
So, what's wrong with the La-5, P-51B, SpitV and Hurricane IIC?
Also, has it dawned on you guys that the Bish, who had 190+ players last night, faced the same restrictions? Did you notice that the neither the Knits or Rooks had any restrictions on types whatsoever? This sword cuts both ways.
Wanna have some fun? Do a squad mission with 1/2 of the squad in the Hurricane IIC, with two 500 pound bombs. Have the other half fly 190A-8s, armed with a 500 kilo bomb. This combination is not only fun, but completely devastating. Best yet, they are never restricted by the ENY limits.
For more of the same type of fun, organize a raid consisting of F4Fs and SBDs. Don't laugh, the SBD can dogfight quite well, and the ironclad F4F can give a good account of itself against anybody in anything dumb enough to get slow. With both types, you save the 100 pounders for vulching or popping M16 and FPs.
My point is this: Get out of the kill-O-matic planes and fly something that presents a challenge. There's few things as fun as landing 6 kills in an SBD. Heck, I've landed 18 kills in Hurricane, and not a single vulch among them. If I can do it, so can you.
Granted, there are some guys who couldn't fight their way out of a nursing home restroom with a submachine gun. But most players can learn to be deadly in the higher ENY fighters. The problem is that most will never fly these planes enough to learn their strengths, or they're so afraid that they can't run away that they never even try them.
Once your squad realizes that you can have just as much, if not more fun in the early-war clunkers, their unhappiness will fade away.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
So, what you are seemingly saying is that your squad is generally unhappy at not being able to fly the low ENY fighters (La-7, P-51D, Spit9, Niki, etc.), correct?
So, what's wrong with the La-5, P-51B, SpitV and Hurricane IIC?
Also, has it dawned on you guys that the Bish, who had 190+ players last night, faced the same restrictions? Did you notice that the neither the Knits or Rooks had any restrictions on types whatsoever? This sword cuts both ways.
Wanna have some fun? Do a squad mission with 1/2 of the squad in the Hurricane IIC, with two 500 pound bombs. Have the other half fly 190A-8s, armed with a 500 kilo bomb. This combination is not only fun, but completely devastating. Best yet, they are never restricted by the ENY limits.
For more of the same type of fun, organize a raid consisting of F4Fs and SBDs. Don't laugh, the SBD can dogfight quite well, and the ironclad F4F can give a good account of itself against anybody in anything dumb enough to get slow. With both types, you save the 100 pounders for vulching or popping M16 and FPs.
...
All true enough ... I personally wish I could get my gunnery skills back on par quicker so I could fly the Yak-9 and La-5 effectively, but that's another story.
But - as is my wont - let me once again play Devil's Advocate. Rather than have the side with a numerical edge get punished for what is just the routine ebb and flow of the game ....
What has been stopping the Bish/Knits from having their own Joint-Ops night?
What's been stopping the other coutries from sending up a flare when it's RJO night? That's what my squad used to do when we were competing for a title - when the guys we were going against were seen online, email was sent out and we scrambled to meet them head on ... this was the dark days before IM even.
What's to stop the other countries - even when outnumbered - from doing wild missions like F4F/SBD as you mentioned? If you're outnumbered anyway, why not have some fun instead of just letting yourself get vultched? Don't you think that if your country launched interesting missions like this - and executed them with some level of success - that people might get the notion it could be fun to fly with you guys?
And I'll give you one more "what if" ... What if rather that implement this balancer, HT decided he didn't need the headaches and that it shouldn't be necessary in the first place and simply posted on the BBS: "Stop whining about being outnumbered, you guys ARE the game ... now go figure it out."
You know, kind of "Ask not what your game designer can do for your country, ask what you can do for your country."
-DoK
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
...And I'll give you one more "what if" ... What if rather that implement this balancer, HT decided he didn't need the headaches and that it shouldn't be necessary in the first place and simply posted on the BBS: "Stop whining about being outnumbered, you guys ARE the game ... now go figure it out." ...
Is it your contention that the folks throwing tantrums on the BBS over the new system would have simply changed sides or flown a less capable aircraft or some made any other sort of effort to balance out the arena if HT had only asked nicely?
The people who were willing to help balance the arena were already doing so.
-
Originally posted by Furious
Is it your contention that the folks throwing tantrums on the BBS over the new system would have simply changed sides or flown a less capable aircraft or some made any other sort of effort to balance out the arena if HT had only asked nicely?
The people who were willing to help balance the arena were already doing so.
No ... it is my contention that the players make the game what it is.
There is a lot more going on in this little debate than it would first appear.
-DoK
-
DokGonZo - There is a lot more going on in this little debate than it would first appear.
How right you are, I wonder who will be the one who finally says what a lot of us are starting to suspect?
I have the gut feeling that HT has already figured it out.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
No ... it is my contention that the players make the game what it is....
And if the players are making it crappy, HT should ___________?
-
Originally posted by Furious
And if the players are making it crappy, HT should ___________?
You're looking at this from the wrong direction.
-
How about turning the BBS off for a month (leaving on only squadron, event, news, and bug report forums) and seeing what happens in the arena? Probably a bunch more killing and less griping. Got a problem with someone? Hunt them down in the arena and give it a go. Settle arguments the good old fashioned way, with guns and dueling, either one on one or squad vs. squad.
Shaddup and fly? Works for the silent majority I think.
One more thing - instead of disabling popular but largely ineffective planes like the P-51D (typical K/D well under 1.0 unlike LA-7), how about just adding a mild perk cost to normally free planes? That way there is a cost associated with those planes, but people who really really really want to fly them with their buddies don't have to organize a mass defection in order to get both their plane and wingmen of choice. Newbies who don't have any perkies to spend might also not feel as much loyalty as those who are well established in the game, so you'd still get some people switching sides in addition to those who'd fly something else that isn't perked.
Or not, whatever. If it's fun, fly. If it isn't, do something else and come back when it's fun again.
-
Originally posted by Orig
popular but largely ineffective planes like the P-51D (typical K/D well under 1.0 unlike LA-7
If the La-7 could carry a couple 1000lb bombs and six rockets it'd have a K/D ratio under 1.0 too. It is the use it gets as a jabo and/or kamikaze aircraft that keeps the P-51D from having a good K/D ratio.
-
Group therapy for the AH player base is not gonna happen. Airhead simply does not have the time to take us all for a walk on the beach. We are not going to get together for a nice hand hold and reaffirm our love for one another.
If its gonna get better, we need HTC to put in place the means and methods for the improvement.
Now that could mean, really pushing a trainer corp, chase the fox type of MA events or limiting the avialabilty of certain planes when numbers become unbalanced.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
How right you are, I wonder who will be the one who finally says what a lot of us are starting to suspect?
I have the gut feeling that HT has already figured it out.
I say it all the time, albeit on ch 200.
:D
-
Originally posted by Zanth
In the short term what you imagine might well happen, just as some left when we went to the new graphics system. What you have failed to consider however is the big picture - how new players are/were integrated which is the future and the real money.
I suspect that a number of thesep layers left because the system requirements went up. I know of a few people that could not get the hang of the changes and left for that reason.
Just like the new graphics, some thigns have to be done for the long haul. If there are some casualties along the way, that is sad, but it had to be done.
This strikes me as an odd view on things especially since other posters here are trying to find other ways to implement things that are not so...well for lack of a better term, antisocial. Mayhap the best way to distill your sentiment is 'Adapt or die' and honestly I do not think that a game that relies on the financial support of playre can really view that as a viable long-term strategy.
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Starting to think we have some real self centered people in the community. i.e. The I want the numbers advantage,
Dont' care about a numbers advantage myself. I just want to fly and score a kill or two and get back so I don't let my squad down.
I want the top rides,
Don't care about that either, just want to fly the aircraft that I have most familiarity with
I want to fly in a hoard,
A squad of 30 people is a horde????
I want to gangbang other people,
Have no idea what this is in reference to.
I am enjoying myself doesn't matter if anyone else is.
One of my squadies said it best. When a side is winning then the side that is losing *should* be at a disadvantage. This is a simulation of a war and in war no one stops to level out the playing field for the losing side.
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by Skeksis
A squad of 30 people is a horde????
In a word... yes. Although some hordes can be fun fights, for instance just yesterday Kev, Jackal and friends (guessing 20+) brought Hurricanes raining down on A25. Got two of them before I ran out of E in that mess ;) Radio chatter was great.
Themed raids are always a hoot... (ie. Stukas to HQ on the deck)
-
Originally posted by Widewing
So, what you are seemingly saying is that your squad is generally unhappy at not being able to fly the low ENY fighters (La-7, P-51D, Spit9, Niki, etc.), correct?
My squad has as it's doctrine that we fly the 17 and the 51D. Now if this change means that we can fly something else and *do* something else then I am all for it. In fact if this change had been implemented because HiTech wanted to see other planes being used and people doing something different then I doubt too many people would have said any thing at all.
So, what's wrong with the La-5, P-51B, SpitV and Hurricane IIC?
Um..for me a lot because I really only know how to fly teh 51D and after almost 3 years of this I still suck and expect to suck even worse now that I am trying to jump from plane to plane.
Also, has it dawned on you guys that the Bish, who had 190+ players last night, faced the same restrictions? Did you notice that the neither the Knits or Rooks had any restrictions on types whatsoever? This sword cuts both ways.
Oh yes, I had a ton of fun last night when I took to the skies in the 51B and when trying to get to a squadie (we are Bish BTW) who was under attack found he was being attacked by a 190 and F6F. I found at that moment feeling that the playing field was *really* level for us...
Wanna have some fun? Do a squad mission with 1/2 of the squad in the Hurricane IIC, with two 500 pound bombs. Have the other half fly 190A-8s, armed with a 500 kilo bomb. This combination is not only fun, but completely devastating. Best yet, they are never restricted by the ENY limits.
I am all in favor of having fun and maybe if I were better at this I would have more fun. It sucks to be every on else's kill marker and get a kill or two a month, now things are going to get even harder for a portion of the game population because of the plane change. Like I said, I really think this was brought in to play with the wrong rational.
For more of the same type of fun, organize a raid consisting of F4Fs and SBDs. Don't laugh, the SBD can dogfight quite well, and the ironclad F4F can give a good account of itself against anybody in anything dumb enough to get slow. With both types, you save the 100 pounders for vulching or popping M16 and FPs.
I am all in favor of flying B26s w cover but those decision are made by my CO. If you are about to say that it is time to move to a different squad don't, a lot of these guys have become friends and I don't want to bail on them.
My point is this: Get out of the kill-O-matic planes and fly something that presents a challenge. There's few things as fun as landing 6 kills in an SBD. Heck, I've landed 18 kills in Hurricane, and not a single vulch among them. If I can do it, so can you.
With all due respect, pipe down. ;) I generally consider a mission successful if I can accompany the bombers to the target and back. Once I engage my only function is to delay the enemy long enough for the bombers to get out because I am as good as dead.
Granted, there are some guys who couldn't fight their way out of a nursing home restroom with a submachine gun.
Present and accounted for, sir.
But most players can learn to be deadly in the higher ENY fighters. The problem is that most will never fly these planes enough to learn their strengths, or they're so afraid that they can't run away that they never even try them.
Okay, I am really tired of this kind of thinking. Too many pilots feel that because they can do it, everyone can do it and it just isn't so. Some of us need training (maybe too much of it) and that is one thing that seems isshort supply.
Once your squad realizes that you can have just as much, if not more fun in the early-war clunkers, their unhappiness will fade away.
FWIW I had more fun in the 51B and the P47 C (I think) last night than in months with the 51D but I am in the minority in my squad.
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by Alpo
In a word... yes.
Okay. This is just as silly as the people playing MechWarrior online complaining because some players favored the 'missile boats'. Then they went on to complain that too many people were using 'laser boats'. Then they went on to complain that people were going for leg shots.
Although some hordes can be fun fights, for instance just yesterday Kev, Jackal and friends (guessing 20+) brought Hurricanes raining down on A25. Got two of them before I ran out of E in that mess ;) Radio chatter was great.
I must be playing the wrong game. Being on the receiving end of 20 of anything is not my idea of fun. ;)
Themed raids are always a hoot... (ie. Stukas to HQ on the deck)
We haven't sone anything like this in a long time so maybe this will be an improvement in things. I just can't shake the feeling that this roll out should have been announced as something other than to keep us all playing fair.
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by Skeksis
One of my squadies said it best. When a side is winning then the side that is losing *should* be at a disadvantage. This is a simulation of a war and in war no one stops to level out the playing field for the losing side.
Skeksis
Actually this is not true, and I think that is where a lot of people get lost with the concept of what Hitech is tryign to do. Winning the war is not the primary objective, having an enjoyable (profitable) game people around the world can log into and out of during a 24 hour day is.
-
Originally posted by Zanth
Actually this is not true, and I think that is where a lot of people get lost with the concept of what Hitech is tryign to do. Winning the war is not the primary objective, having an enjoyable (profitable) game people around the world can log into and out of during a 24 hour day is.
Then why bother keeping any kind of scores at all?
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by Skeksis
Okay, I am really tired of this kind of thinking. Too many pilots feel that because they can do it, everyone can do it and it just isn't so. Some of us need training (maybe too much of it) and that is one thing that seems isshort supply.
Skeksis
Not a problem Skeksis, that's what trainers are for. Should you and any in your squad want to work on anything, send me an e-mail to Widewing@flyaceshigh.com telling me what evening you wish to get together and we can meet in the TA and see if we can help you improve in any area you think needs work.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Zanth
I worry about some people, to the them "country" is pretty real. It is so real for some, they might actually shoot a real gun at some others if they saw them. Not much you can do for these sort, the internet is a wierd place.
that's why I ALWAYS unload the mossberg 12 ga before I log on
-
Originally posted by Skeksis
Then why bother keeping any kind of scores at all?
Skeksis
Many people don't find a game enjoyable unless there is a "score" of some kind. It's human nature.
-
Originally posted by Skeksis
Then why bother keeping any kind of scores at all?
Because it's a game. In a game you keep score. Keeping score doesn't make AH a war, or even a simulation of a war.
But if you still want to fly the same plane, have your CO to switch the whole squad to another country, for a night.
BTW, you might want to spend a little time in the TA or the DA, if you feel you are not skilled. It might make the game more fun. Not trying to slam on ya, honest...it's just that you keep saying how bad you are. This is really an orthogonal issue to what planes are available to you...if you suck in one, you'll likely suck in another. Knowing something about fighting makes the fight more fun, whatever you fly.
-
Originally posted by Furious
Group therapy for the AH player base is not gonna happen. Airhead simply does not have the time to take us all for a walk on the beach. We are not going to get together for a nice hand hold and reaffirm our love for one another.
You're still missing the point.
However, your statement is fair evidence of the problems.
-
Is this some zen monk teaching seminar or is your point a secret?
-
Originally posted by Skeksis
Then why bother keeping any kind of scores at all?
Skeksis
because without points, the game would be well...
wait for it
pointless?
-
OK, look ... I'll try to keep this short ...
I keep seeing people say that AH is a video game, or a combat simulation game and so it should be about hardship, and on and on like that. Well ... that's only half of it - at best. AH is a COMMUNITY that interacts through an online game. That's what has kept this bunch of people more or less together since 1987. The game we play changes, the names do not. And when people get together at Con's, they talk about scenario missions, and great dogfights with the guy they fought against, and the 50-Stuka raid on Bish HQ, stuff like that ... I hardly ever hear a whine at a Con', the pettyness of the MA and the BBS vanish. The players ARE the game.
And, as such, you guys have the power to change the odds and style of play in the arena. By recruiting, by getting organized, by doing wacky missions that let your side have fun (as opposed to the boredom of field vultching), by actively teaching your people to fly better so you can meet superior odds and beat them.
"Group therapy" is asking someone else to solve your (the community's) problem. Whining for a balancing patch is the same thing.
Or, look at it this way. Did HT create the MA environment where players are so dead-set against switching countries? No. Did HT create the MA environment where hardly anyone uses the mission system, preferring instead to vultch? No. The players did that - so it's up to the players to outgrow it or change it or just plain live with it.
-
Originally posted by Zanth
Actually this is not true, and I think that is where a lot of people get lost with the concept of what Hitech is tryign to do. Winning the war is not the primary objective, having an enjoyable (profitable) game people around the world can log into and out of during a 24 hour day is.
Then we have a lot of educaton to do with the flying masses... and might want to look at the end of perkies for reset.. or do away with reset all together... the ideas of indestructable fields etc. Because right now... landgrab and reset ARE the underlying theme to the MA.
In the CT where land grab isn't the issue.. you see people swapping all the time to even up sides.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
...Did HT create the MA environment where players are so dead-set against switching countries? No. Did HT create the MA environment where hardly anyone uses the mission system, preferring instead to vultch? No. The players did that - so it's up to the players to outgrow it or change it or just plain live with it.
If you think this community can solve its own problems, then I think you don't know the AH MA community very well at all.
It's not like I am a shining example either. I just want to have fun. If HT can change some things up and make it more fun, then that is a good thing.
-
Dok, I belive the real answere is it is a combination of both.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Or, look at it this way. Did HT create the MA environment where players are so dead-set against switching countries? No. Did HT create the MA environment where hardly anyone uses the mission system, preferring instead to vultch? No. The players did that - so it's up to the players to outgrow it or change it or just plain live with it.
Dok...
I do know the 'community' of which you speak. Geez but I loved that community. People didn't just care about their squads or countries, they cared about the game as well. Unfortnately, as these things grow, that sort of community becomes harder to maintain.
Funny thing is, the game is really the same as back in the late '80's and early '90's. It's the players that have changed. For me, I see a lot more people looking for instant gratification...at anyone ELSE's expense. Perhaps it's is just a function of age, but, I see too many people with a McDonald's/microwave oven mentality...."give it to me now or I will go some place else".
Oh well, on the upside...it doesn't cost $6 per hour to play anymore :).
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Dok...
I do know the 'community' of which you speak. Geez but I loved that community. People didn't just care about their squads or countries, they cared about the game as well. Unfortnately, as these things grow, that sort of community becomes harder to maintain.
Funny thing is, the game is really the same as back in the late '80's and early '90's. It's the players that have changed. For me, I see a lot more people looking for instant gratification...at anyone ELSE's expense. Perhaps it's is just a function of age, but, I see too many people with a McDonald's/microwave oven mentality...."give it to me now or I will go some place else".
I think it's also somewhat a reflection of our current American culture. You know, expecting The Government to regulate everything and by doing so remove the need to take any responsibility. Geez I'm almost starting to sound like a hippy.
Y'know, I still have 3 big boxes of books on WW2 planes and air combat from my "early days." And not just picture books and data sheets ... memoirs, biographies ... anything to help get inside the heads of the people who were the aces. I've moved 4 times in the last 7 years and those books always are along for the ride even though I rarely play anymore.
-
Originally posted by Shane
pointless?
You forgot the
;)
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
And, as such, you guys have the power to change the odds and style of play in the arena. By recruiting, by getting organized, by doing wacky missions that let your side have fun (as opposed to the boredom of field vultching), by actively teaching your people to fly better so you can meet superior odds and beat them.
DOK,
Your right on all points, but I wanted to pipe in on this one.
When the Rooks where in the slump, This is part of what we did. The other thing was to ask for assistance from other countries (read as whined)
The RJO was already around (in fact it really goes back to AW) since we really like the team work stuff. Ghostdancer used the RJO network to spearheaded a drive to pump up the Rooks. He probably was the one person that really put the most effort into making it more fun for Rooks. Others did thier part, but GD really was key.
Back then I remember the 327th running a huge bomber raid to an enemy HQ, hundreds of B17s before the formations. I dreamed up a Night where we all flew WildCats and Zeros. My personal favorite was something BulletHead and I dreamed up, "Big load" where the RJO flattened all the strat in one country then flattened the other for a reset.
The point is, Everyone can do things to help make the game more fun. Be creative!! More Fun helps to improve turn outs for your country.
Dok, I have a feeling you will remember my squad, but probably not me. :)
-
Originally posted by Grimm
...
Dok, I have a feeling you will remember my squad, but probably not me.
I seem to recall a GRIMM back in old AW daze. My WB days are a blur as scenarios kept me pretty busy.
Funny thing was that when everyone started snickering about "lets see the Rooks win without P51's and La-7's" my first instinct was to resurrect the "Big Yak Attack." And that was the mildest of the evile plans that crossed my mind at the time.
-
Yak attacks are Great fun! Yup, I was Grimm in AW too. Been Grimm since the mid 80s. Maybe you have seen me in BW too.
Iv been thinking, and I can tell your approach is this. Is it numbers balance that is important, or is it balanced gameplay that is? They dont have to be the same thing.
We all want good gameplay and to have a good time.
Iv not been convinced that having balanced number will guarantee that.
BTW, Who woke Soup up! heheheheehe
(good to see him getting involved)
-
I almost forgot to toss this in here...
It is Summer, Lots folks just arent flying as much as they do the rest of the year, this might also skew things
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
I seem to recall a GRIMM back in old AW daze. My WB days are a blur as scenarios kept me pretty busy.
Funny thing was that when everyone started snickering about "lets see the Rooks win without P51's and La-7's" my first instinct was to resurrect the "Big Yak Attack." And that was the mildest of the evile plans that crossed my mind at the time.
Well believe it or not... the YAK is much more formidable in AH than AW...
I think the BIG YAK ATTACK would really be kicker.
-
Originally posted by 4510
Well believe it or not... the YAK is much more formidable in AH than AW...
I think the BIG YAK ATTACK would really be kicker.
Yeah ... I flew it the other night for a few sorties.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Dok, I belive the real answere is it is a combination of both.
If you are saying that the real answer to the imbalance problem is both action by the community and an artificial adjustment such as the current one, I respectfully disagree.
I think it is the responsibility of the players, especially those on the outnumbered side, to work to even things out, and to also make things more fun in the interim. The "leaders" of an outnumbered country should be recruiting their tails off, and should be helping to make the atmosphere in their country so good that people will want to fly there despite being outnumbered. You do it by training, co-operating, and organizing. Now, an outside force CAN help that. This applies to all three countries, as one day soon, the Rooks may have this problem again.
The problems with an outside force attempting to drive players one way or another are evident now. It has made just as many unhappy as it has made happy, and it has made some people somewhat bitter, creating something of a wedge. Further, once an outside force is introduced, the community tends to get lazy and expect the "powers that be" to fix things for them. That is wrong, and it is dangerous to that community, because the outside force can't really support the community nor can it bring them together and bring in new blood. It simply does not give them a reason to do anything, much less a reason to get serious about it. And it is those efforts that tie the community together, and make it grow, and grow stronger.
The outside force artificially adjusting the playing field merely provides a placebo with a short term fake cure, rather than improving the health of the community. Each country has its own community, and those three communities make up the community we have as a whole. The community has changed, much as the rest of society has changed. Only society can fix itself, and only the community in AH can fix itself.
-
I agree with most of your accesment Virgil from a philisophical level.
But consider a few thing.
1. If the community had done what you belive they should HTC would not have changed anything.
2. We have resisted changing any thing for a long time, And out first attempt and providing a country moving force was done only when it became and issue (perk multiplier this was a few years back). This was done to effect other issues as minimly as posible.
3. This is still a buissness, not just a community. Neither can survive with out each.
4. If I belive the country imbalance is making the game less fun, and in the end fun is what creates a bigger player base, and hence more revanue for HTC, dose it not become our responsiblity to ensure it happens?
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
I agree with most of your accesment Virgil from a philisophical level.
But consider a few thing.
1. If the community had done what you belive they should HTC would not have changed anything.
2. We have resisted changing any thing for a long time, And out first attempt and providing a country moving force was done only when it became and issue (perk multiplier this was a few years back). This was done to effect other issues as minimly as posible.
3. This is still a buissness, not just a community. Neither can survive with out each.
4. If I belive the country imbalance is making the game less fun, and in the end fun is what creates a bigger player base, and hence more revanue for HTC, dose it not become our responsiblity to ensure it happens?
HiTech
Here's a suggestion, tell yankee what you want to say and have her type it for you. I don't get what you are saying. Not a jab I really don't get the message.
-
I apologize for the double post, but since the vein of this thread has moved in the same direction as to what I posted.
................
This is the way I see it from my experiences in the last 2+ years ...
Land Grab - win the reset, has been part of this game since I joined and was there before I joined and during this time period, there was never an imbalance in the arena as we see today, except for when the Rooks were in the bucket. With that, I don't believe that the "Land Grab" is the sole variable that has thrown things out of wack.
I still believe that its a comraderie thing ...
When I started (as a Knight), I remember there were some large forces in the arena.
Arabian Knights (Bish), MAW (Knights) and USMC (Knights). I don't ever remember a single squad on the Rooks that had the influence that these squads had. I could be wrong and don't mean to slight any long time Rooks squads as well as any other long time squads in the Bish and Knights. This is just what I remember.
I seemed that the AKs were the driving force for the Bish. Whereever the AKs went, so did the Bish. Same for the MAW and USMC. Whereever the MAW/USMC went, so went the Knights. AKs were the premier base takers for the Bish and the MAW/USMC were the premier base takers for the Knights.
I remember many a clash between the MAW and AKs. Word would get out on country channel that the AKs were attacking field X and MAW would run there to spoil it. I know when the MAW went for a base, the AKs would show up to spoil the party. Back then, bringing home AK scalps was the cats meow.
Now, what happened to these squads and their influence.
I believe that the AKs had a falling out within their ranks. What ever happened to AKNimtz ? ... along with the disgusting beating that they took and still take for creating AKDesert. Between the 2 of those events, it appears that the AKs have kinda faded into the background and since then, the Bish really haven't had the mojo.
The MAW ... well I know for a fact that some of the key people on that squad had real life things to deal with and some got burned out. Since then, the MAW has also drifted into the background and doesn't quite carry the influence that they once had in Knightdom.
The USMC ... don't really know the story there, but USGrim does not seem to play as much as he use to, and I believe that he is/was the driving force for the USMC as 40DogMAW is for the MAW, and he doesn't play as much as he use to either. Don't really know who the driving force for the AKs was, but I will take a stab at it ... AKNimitz ... I don't believe that he plays anymore.
I can speak for the Knights ... when 40Dog or Grim started directing the force/attack, people would jump on board immediately and things would happen. Their overall community respect for these guys was all that was needed to rally the troops.
I once witnessed a night where the Knights were down to 3 bases, on the verge of a reset. Knights couldn't find their butts with both hands. 40Dog logged on and started to direct counter-attacks. Well, in a matter of 3 hours, not only did the Knights fend off the reset, they actually reset the whole arena. It was amazing. Only other person that I saw accomplish this type of turnaround was Grim.
Knights did have something like the RJO ... The MAW, USMC, and FreeBirds (another strong squad) started running ops together and when that happened, it was very hard to stop the Knights.
Then came the RJO ... Rooks were constantly getting a beating and probably the worst beating in the history of AH. They decided to do something about it, and with hard work and cooperation, they overcame and have become the dominate country to date.
The task of creating this RJO and the results is why I believe that the Rooks have the best comraderie in the game. They worked together, and dug themselfs out of a very deep hole. That is what creates very strong bonds between people ... working for a common goal and succeeding.
When the RJO came into play, the driving forces in the Bish and Knights were slowly disappearing into the background and there is not, I believe, at this point, any real driving forces steering the Bish and the Knights.
Why do people want to fly for the Rooks ... cause for the most part, they have fun TOGETHER.
Sorry for being longwinded.
-
Originally posted by hitech
I agree with most of your accesment Virgil from a philisophical level.
But consider a few thing.
1. If the community had done what you belive they should HTC would not have changed anything.
2. We have resisted changing any thing for a long time, And out first attempt and providing a country moving force was done only when it became and issue (perk multiplier this was a few years back). This was done to effect other issues as minimly as posible.
3. This is still a buissness, not just a community. Neither can survive with out each.
4. If I belive the country imbalance is making the game less fun, and in the end fun is what creates a bigger player base, and hence more revanue for HTC, dose it not become our responsiblity to ensure it happens?
HiTech
I understand completely your position as a business. And appreciate that position. As a small business owner I'm well aware of the need for a survival instinct.
You were indeed correct to resist making any change for as long as possible, and to make as small a change as possible.
I also understand that you did what you felt was in the best interest.
All I'm saying is that I'm not at all sure that it will bring about the needed change. I fear that the outside adjustment will be used as a crutch to allow things to limp along as they are. Rather than used as something to prop things up while other efforts for improvement are being made.
As the outside force, you can only do so much, despite actually having control over a lot of the game. As you well know, if you go too far, you do more harm than good.
I've said it elsewhere on the boards, I'll say it here. We've been told the current system will remain in place, with some minor adjustments, for some time to see what happens, I can and will live with that. I have not complained about it since, and I won't.
But I've already seen the problem. Rather than hearing how the Knights and Bishops are recruiting and organizing, most of what is heard from each of those countries is "hah ha ha, you don't have your little uber planes, you can't run, and your horde is nothing without your ponies and lal la's." It looks a lot like the "crabs in a bucket" scenario to me. I saw little or no efforts by the other countries to recruit or organize before, and I'm not seeing any now. All I'm seeing is some of them cheering and giggling about the Rooks getting handicapped when they have numbers. I'm sorry, but I see that as a crutch that keeps those countries from growing stronger, rather than one that helps them make it through a rough time. We'll just have to wait and see what happens. If they do grow and get stronger, you can send me some crow. I've got enough beer to wash it down.
-
To keep this in perspective, didn't your own squad decide to move the biggest team in the midst of all this to? That certainly was not a help, this all got to the point where Hitech had to do something. and here we are.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
I apologize for the double post, but since the vein of this thread has moved in the same direction as to what I posted.
................
This is the way I see it from my experiences in the last 2+ years ...
Land Grab - win the reset, has been part of this game since I joined and was there before I joined and during this time period, there was never an imbalance in the arena as we see today, except for when the Rooks were in the bucket. With that, I don't believe that the "Land Grab" is the sole variable that has thrown things out of wack.
I still believe that its a comraderie thing ...
When I started (as a Knight), I remember there were some large forces in the arena.
Arabian Knights (Bish), MAW (Knights) and USMC (Knights). I don't ever remember a single squad on the Rooks that had the influence that these squads had. I could be wrong and don't mean to slight any long time Rooks squads as well as any other long time squads in the Bish and Knights. This is just what I remember.
I seemed that the AKs were the driving force for the Bish. Whereever the AKs went, so did the Bish. Same for the MAW and USMC. Whereever the MAW/USMC went, so went the Knights. AKs were the premier base takers for the Bish and the MAW/USMC were the premier base takers for the Knights.
I remember many a clash between the MAW and AKs. Word would get out on country channel that the AKs were attacking field X and MAW would run there to spoil it. I know when the MAW went for a base, the AKs would show up to spoil the party. Back then, bringing home AK scalps was the cats meow.
Now, what happened to these squads and their influence.
I believe that the AKs had a falling out within their ranks. What ever happened to AKNimtz ? ... along with the disgusting beating that they took and still take for creating AKDesert. Between the 2 of those events, it appears that the AKs have kinda faded into the background and since then, the Bish really haven't had the mojo.
The MAW ... well I know for a fact that some of the key people on that squad had real life things to deal with and some got burned out. Since then, the MAW has also drifted into the background and doesn't quite carry the influence that they once had in Knightdom.
The USMC ... don't really know the story there, but USGrim does not seem to play as much as he use to, and I believe that he is/was the driving force for the USMC as 40DogMAW is for the MAW, and he doesn't play as much as he use to either. Don't really know who the driving force for the AKs was, but I will take a stab at it ... AKNimitz ... I don't believe that he plays anymore.
I can speak for the Knights ... when 40Dog or Grim started directing the force/attack, people would jump on board immediately and things would happen. Their overall community respect for these guys was all that was needed to rally the troops.
I once witnessed a night where the Knights were down to 3 bases, on the verge of a reset. Knights couldn't find their butts with both hands. 40Dog logged on and started to direct counter-attacks. Well, in a matter of 3 hours, not only did the Knights fend off the reset, they actually reset the whole arena. It was amazing. Only other person that I saw accomplish this type of turnaround was Grim.
Knights did have something like the RJO ... The MAW, USMC, and FreeBirds (another strong squad) started running ops together and when that happened, it was very hard to stop the Knights.
Then came the RJO ... Rooks were constantly getting a beating and probably the worst beating in the history of AH. They decided to do something about it, and with hard work and cooperation, they overcame and have become the dominate country to date.
The task of creating this RJO and the results is why I believe that the Rooks have the best comraderie in the game. They worked together, and dug themselfs out of a very deep hole. That is what creates very strong bonds between people ... working for a common goal and succeeding.
When the RJO came into play, the driving forces in the Bish and Knights were slowly disappearing into the background and there is not, I believe, at this point, any real driving forces steering the Bish and the Knights.
Why do people want to fly for the Rooks ... cause for the most part, they have fun TOGETHER.
Sorry for being longwinded.
Amen. Slapshot has just posted the history that shows what I am saying.
He has shown why Rooks don't want to switch sides.
He has shown why the Rooks have grown.
He has shown why the Bishops and Knights have become weaker.
Just because I fly Rook does not mean I hate the Knights or Bishops, nor does it mean I want them kept down. Quite the contrary. I have friends who fly for both countries. Hell, I even like Shane, despite his big mouth.
But pay heed to the wise words posted here and elsewhere by SlapShot. I've flown with him, and I've flown against him. I've seen him swap sides, and I know he's been flying with the best of all three sides. He's been saying the same thing over and over again about the differences between the countries. He has no agenda, he is telling the truth. He's been telling people whythe disparityin numbers exists, and no one seems to listen, or even want to listen.
Until the problems SlapShot has been trying to get people to see are dealt with the imbalance will continue to exist, and the community will continue to suffer. I don't think there's anything HTC can do if the players don't fix the problem.
-
since i like you so much, too, you can have slapshot's beer.
:D
-
Originally posted by Zanth
To keep this in perspective, didn't your own squad decide to move the biggest team in the midst of all this to? That certainly was not a help, this all got to the point where Hitech had to do something. and here we are.
If you are referring to the 13th TAS .. yes we did move.
The impetus was mine alone. In the last 6 months, the particiapation of the 13th diminished and I found myself lonewolfing alot. I made some very good friends in the Rooks (Morpheus, KillnU, XJ - fellow P-38 flyers) and wanted to wing with them and pick up some P-38 skills at the same time, so I asked permission to move to the Rooks.
We didn't stay there for too long (I think 2 tours) and then we moved to the Bish for 1 tour (at my insistence) and now we have moved back to the Knights and are here to stay for quite some time. Also, the 13th is a small squad and our influence is hardly a drop in the bucket when it comes to effecting the numbers.
This tour is what gave me the real insight as to what I have said.
-
VERY well said Slapshot!
What you said gives someone who does not know, the best perspective posible of how all three countries have evolved.
The game will fix itself. I know this for one reason. The players are the game. There is no magical force involved here which determine what country will be the strongest.
Not to beat a dead horse here but. It is only when the players of the "weaker" country decide to do something about getting beaten will you see things begin to turn around.
With that being said. I am begining to convice myself again that this whole ENY thing, altho isn't a bad idea and is an honest effort to try and make things better, really isnt needed.
All sides have weathered some sort of storm. Its the natural evolution of the game.
-
As they say, quantity is a quality all it's own. Anyway, all this is all pretty redundant, Hitech has already got this in his sights. "Natural evolution" be damned, I'll bet you the creator will straighten it out.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
... cause for the most part, they have fun TOGETHER.
Sorry for being longwinded.
Slapshot IMHO has explained the situation pretty well.
-
Some of the guys on the mailing list I'm on have alluded to the odds the Rooks have fought back from. And hearing the other things that went on over the last couple years does explain the country loyalties a bit more.
Overall I think base capture and strat is a fine metaphor to use for an arena game. It keeps things changing, and you get to use the entire map as opposed to just the "furball fields." But there are some subtle things which make base capture and strat much less of a team effort than it should be - and that probably is hurting things a little. Such as:
- It only takes one lone bomber to pork HQ radar. If it took more, maybe you'd get escorted bomber missions (I stress the "maybe" as its logical, but I can't say for sure if it'd happen).
- Attack bombers aren't needed at all to capture a base. So there's no escort duty, no specialization of task, no coordination - just the "conveyor belt." The closest thing to a speciality I see on a regular basis is Me110's shooting down the city.
- It only takes one plane-load of troops to take a field. Again, this fosters minimalistic tactics - sneaking in a C47 instead of escorting a group of them.
- In general, fields and carrier groups are very easy to knock out for Jabos. Not only is this not realistic, but it makes odds imbalances more visible as the fields themselves are reduced so easily. Adding AAA is not the answer - as that fosters ack-hugging - but it should take more than a flight of P38's to render a field defenseless. Taking a field should require all hangars to be down - and the more hangars that are up, the quicker ack rebuilds itself. This would (I think) cut down on the vultch syndrome - or you'd have to have more people dedicated to strafing AAA. But even that is an improvement.
- Perk points for hitting deep strat targets is not in keeping with the time it takes to get to these targets. There's no real incentive to go after these - alone or en masse. Likewise the perk cost for launching a 163 to stop an HQ attack no way cover the few perks that will be won, assuming the gunners don't wipe out your nice jet ride. So strat ends up being a little-used part of the arena.
Again ... these are subtle little things which I see (as in just my opinion) as disrupting the team-based aspects of the game.
I also have to wonder if a rolling plane set might not help. Perks have effectively removed the most uber planes from the game, so everyone flies the most uber non-perked ride. And if everyone had to start learning all the planes, they may start relying on each other a bit more. No way you can be quite the same lone wolf in a P-40B as you can in a P51D. And no uber-jabos - field capture will be hard in early war.
-DoK
-
Good points DoK, not a fan of rollling plane set though. Lived that once already.
-
Pyro and I this morning were kicking around the idea of making 2 changes.
The way the reset system works is that once a country is down to a set # of air fields the war ends.
Was thinking of raising this number to between 4 or 6, or posibly a % of the original fields.
2nd would then also change field capture (no specifics) but the changes would make it a lot harder to capture a field.
One we didn't discuse but I have been thinking about, is moving towns farther away from the fields. This would promote more fighting and less vulching when trying to capture a field.
On a side note: It is refreshing to have you around again DOK, it is fun for me discusing game design, from a game design view point, VS this is what I want view point.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Pyro and I this morning were kicking around the idea of making 2 changes.
The way the reset system works is that once a country is down to a set # of air fields the war ends.
Was thinking of raising this number to between 4 or 6, or posibly a % of the original fields.
2nd would then also change field capture (no specifics) but the changes would make it a lot harder to capture a field.
One we didn't discuse but I have been thinking about, is moving towns farther away from the fields. This would promote more fighting and less vulching when trying to capture a field.
HiTech
If you move the cities further away, can GVs spawn close to them. Cities unprotected, i.e. a ways from the protecting base, make it eiser for the bad guys to attack it, or so it seems
-
Sounds good, its the last part of the war nobody likes to live in.
-
It seems like the words 'AH community' get thrown around almost as part of an equation. But I think this is a short cut to actually defining what this 'community' is.
Is the community just the people on the boards?
Are the newbies included in this community?
Does it include the younger quakers who don't appreciate ACM?
Is it everyone who plays AH?
I point this out because it will depend on which definition you use of 'community' to help solve whatever problem it is this is being solved.
-
My Definition is 2 parts.
Player social interaction.
Everyone who playes ah.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Pyro and I this morning were kicking around the idea of making 2 changes.
The way the reset system works is that once a country is down to a set # of air fields the war ends.
Was thinking of raising this number to between 4 or 6, or posibly a % of the original fields.
2nd would then also change field capture (no specifics) but the changes would make it a lot harder to capture a field.
One we didn't discuse but I have been thinking about, is moving towns farther away from the fields. This would promote more fighting and less vulching when trying to capture a field.
On a side note: It is refreshing to have you around again DOK, it is fun for me discusing game design, from a game design view point, VS this is what I want view point.
HiTech
Those sound like great gameplay changes. It has always seemed the focus was on 'land-grabbing' and not the acutal fighting. Making the land grabbing portion of the game more difficult, as we saw with the fuel porkage limitation, re-emphasizes the actual combat effort required to take a base.
Zazen
-
Thanks, HT. It's good to be back ... I guess it took me a few years to wipe the memory of Motorsims from my consciousness and feel like talking game design again.
Anyway ... moving towns further away. As it stands, 2 Me110G's can take down a city in under 5 minutes. Moving the city further away only makes this easier. You'd need to harden the buildings a lot for this to make a difference - but if you do that, then there's really no need to move the city.
However ... what if you blurred the line between city and field complex more? Meaning, what if you spread the field out towards the city and put some assets (barracks, fuel and ammo stores, radar tower) in this middle area - and made all these necessary to take down to capture a field. Maybe even put an auxillery air strip for fighters only down there to launch from (instead of the "H" launch point). If the area to vultch gets bigger, it's easier to launch fighters maybe.
Reducing the threshhold for theatre reset is probably a good idea. At least the outnumbered side won't "suffer" as long.
I know a lot of people dislike rolling plane set. It's just a shame that we have 6 years worth of planes and only use about 6 months of it. And the trap of late war planes is that they are so capable on their own. You can do well without a wingman in most of them. Not so in pre-1942 rides - where everyone's level cruising speed is pretty close and you aren't bristling with high-quality cannons. And pre-1942 you'd have to use bombers and dive bombers for field capture - no fighters around capable of carrying 1000 pounders.
The thinking vis-a-vis making field capture harder I think should be more than just raising the difficulty. It should still be "easy" for the team that is willing and able to coordinate and work together. Just increasing the number of C47's needed could change things a lot. But you'd need to balance this by making barracks hard targets requiring a 1000 pounder at least to take them down.
Another thing that I think adds to the vultch situation is the toughness of GV's. You end up with 20 fighters vultching 10 or 12 GV's so often and it just stays that way for a long while - boring for all concerned. I don't think 50 cal's should take out an Ostwind (well ... it should kill the crew ... but anyway). But if certain planes had closer to historic effect on GV's, then you may see more specialization. I'm talking the Sturmi and Hurri IID mainly here. If these planes were more effective at killing GV's, you'd probably see them in action clearing bases. And they need protection from fighters - so again, this would enhance team play and may give people who still haven't mastered air-to-air something they could get good at and contribute with.
-DoK
-
Since there seems to be a need to promote unity and co-operation among players in countries, how about a positive system rather than a restrictive system.
For a country that is outnumbered by "X" percentage:
Extra perks and points are awarded to a player who successfully creates a mission that is filled by players and executed. (promotes leadership, charismatic hard core leaders are needed to make the country grow, and grow stronger)
Extra perks and points for participants of said mission.
(promotes co-operation and participation, help encourage
players to grow together as a team)
Prices of perk planes substantially reduced when used in a mission.
(allows an extra advantage for an outnumbered country to create
and execute successful mission)
Outnumbered countries bases, towns, and strats hardened in proportion to the imbalance.
(allows them the chance to defend easier, and a chance to take the offense because their territory is a little tougher to take)
In this way, the country that is down on numbers gets multiple advantages, hence leveling the playing field somewhat, without handicapping other players and taking some of their fun.
I never wrote the sort of code that AH uses, I only wrote CNC machinery codes, so I do not know how difficult it would be to code.
At least, rather than whine, complain, or criticize, I've made an effort to provide an alternative solution to better the game without punishing anyone.
Make of it what you will.
-
Sound like the current perk modifier rehashed. HT has already stated that perks are not going to fix the problem, they haven't up to now.
Would be all for hardening strats etc, except that how would you know what you need to take them down. I am sure most people like to know that 8000lbs sinks a cv not, I wonder how much it needs with our numbers.
-
I think that the mission system is also terribly under-utilized, and I must confess that I haven't even looked at it myself (as I'm still re-learning the game).
However, having now just looked at the manual page for it, I'd suggest a "quick mission" interface. For instance, make it possible with a few clicks to pull together a mission like: "Prevent A42 from being captured; launch from A43." - or "capture A42, launch from A43." No waypoints, plane specs, etc. - but ADD IN a mission end time for these quick missions.
So if you're on defense, you could pull together a CAP mission from the nearest base quicly, grab a bunch of pilots and launch instead. If you can keep the base from falling for the duration the mission is set for (nothing less than 30 minutes!), then you were successful. Points would need to be awarded to the fallen as well.
With such an interface, you may see people on offense start using the system as well. And with a max time, they need to capture the field within the time frame or they don't get the perk bonus. So none of this endless orbitting of enemy fields.
Put simply, provide a sreamlined mission interface for basic attack/defend profiles suitable for people to quickly be able to take control of the local situation and organize forces. And then provide an incentive to use that system.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Sound like the current perk modifier rehashed. HT has already stated that perks are not going to fix the problem, they haven't up to now.
Would be all for hardening strats etc, except that how would you know what you need to take them down. I am sure most people like to know that 8000lbs sinks a cv not, I wonder how much it needs with our numbers.
It ain't just rehashed. It's reworked to drive things in a different direction entirely. Think about it again. Perks now control usage of planes that throw off the balance, and makes it harder (more expensive) for numerically superior countries to fly them. The proposed change drives a country that is outnumbered to work together, and gives them incentives to do so. The rest of the system stays the same. No extra penalty for having numbers, but advantages given for being outnumbered but organizing a resistance rather than logging or whining.
The current perk system does NOTHING to encourage working together, which is what makes a country grow and the numbers equal out. In my opinion that is why the current system does not work. Or at least produce the currently desired result. That is the reason behind the changes.
A simple percentage notation will deal with the hardness difference. It could be posted under strat.
System: Hardness percentage adjusted for country "X".
Player then looks at the drop down menu on status for countries or bases, and sees country "X" has "Y" % harder strats etc.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
I know a lot of people dislike rolling plane set. It's just a shame that we have 6 years worth of planes and only use about 6 months of it. And the trap of late war planes is that they are so capable on their own. You can do well without a wingman in most of them. Not so in pre-1942 rides - where everyone's level cruising speed is pretty close and you aren't bristling with high-quality cannons. And pre-1942 you'd have to use bombers and dive bombers for field capture - no fighters around capable of carrying 1000 pounders..
IMO the use of late war rides are offset by the fact that your up against other late war rides, wingmen are still a vital part of survival in the MA.
I'd definitely like to see more use of the early war mounts, but without a RPS I just don't see how this could happen. And we all know how bad the whines were in WB over the RPS (i.e. Jet Night)
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Just increasing the number of C47's needed could change things a lot.
I was thinking more along the lines of doing away with C-47s being able to capture a base, after all how many bases were actually captured using Paratroops? Instead require M-3s only. And if needed, move spawn points closer to airfields to keep gameplay interesting.
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Another thing that I think adds to the vultch situation is the toughness of GV's. You end up with 20 fighters vultching 10 or 12 GV's so often and it just stays that way for a long while - boring for all concerned. I don't think 50 cal's should take out an Ostwind (well ... it should kill the crew ... but anyway). But if certain planes had closer to historic effect on GV's, then you may see more specialization. I'm talking the Sturmi and Hurri IID mainly here. If these planes were more effective at killing GV's, you'd probably see them in action clearing bases. And they need protection from fighters - so again, this would enhance team play and may give people who still haven't mastered air-to-air something they could get good at and contribute with.
Couldn't agree more.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
I think that the mission system is also terribly under-utilized, and I must confess that I haven't even looked at it myself (as I'm still re-learning the game).
However, having now just looked at the manual page for it, I'd suggest a "quick mission" interface. For instance, make it possible with a few clicks to pull together a mission like: "Prevent A42 from being captured; launch from A43." - or "capture A42, launch from A43." No waypoints, plane specs, etc. - but ADD IN a mission end time for these quick missions.
So if you're on defense, you could pull together a CAP mission from the nearest base quicly, grab a bunch of pilots and launch instead. If you can keep the base from falling for the duration the mission is set for (nothing less than 30 minutes!), then you were successful. Points would need to be awarded to the fallen as well.
With such an interface, you may see people on offense start using the system as well. And with a max time, they need to capture the field within the time frame or they don't get the perk bonus. So none of this endless orbitting of enemy fields.
Put simply, provide a sreamlined mission interface for basic attack/defend profiles suitable for people to quickly be able to take control of the local situation and organize forces. And then provide an incentive to use that system.
Or let the game create a list of missions for you to join, base D, base capture, etc.
-
Also knowing ahead of time the layout is an advantage to the attacker and maybe too much information?
Should we know before we reach destination that field A32 is airfield type Large and there are are "X" numnber of target "B" located at position "Y" etc etc. ?
Is it possible to randomize the field layouts or contents somewhat? (edit: how about randomize stratigic target hardness within some guideline. )
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
I think that the mission system is also terribly under-utilized, and I must confess that I haven't even looked at it myself (as I'm still re-learning the game).
However, having now just looked at the manual page for it, I'd suggest a "quick mission" interface. For instance, make it possible with a few clicks to pull together a mission like: "Prevent A42 from being captured; launch from A43." - or "capture A42, launch from A43." No waypoints, plane specs, etc. - but ADD IN a mission end time for these quick missions.
So if you're on defense, you could pull together a CAP mission from the nearest base quicly, grab a bunch of pilots and launch instead. If you can keep the base from falling for the duration the mission is set for (nothing less than 30 minutes!), then you were successful. Points would need to be awarded to the fallen as well.
With such an interface, you may see people on offense start using the system as well. And with a max time, they need to capture the field within the time frame or they don't get the perk bonus. So none of this endless orbitting of enemy fields.
Put simply, provide a sreamlined mission interface for basic attack/defend profiles suitable for people to quickly be able to take control of the local situation and organize forces. And then provide an incentive to use that system.
If I may add to the brilliance of this idea.
Also add an automatic announcement of the mission by the system for that country. Let the system tell the country a mission is available. This will reduce the load on the creator further, and increase his chance of filling a mission and executing it.
Few things discourage people from creating missions and such than hassle, and lack of participants.
Were you to add that AND the incentives in my proposal, there would be every reason to take part in missions, create missions, and work together.
The idea is to make people WANT to fly with you and your country. That is how you increase the player base, level the playing field, and make the game better. That is the solution. You can't force people to switch, you really can't force them to do anything, at least in a game. You have to make them WANT to. Make them want to, and they will be happy to have the chance, and happy to take it. If you build it they will come, for lack of a better phrase. People who are playing for fun will react much better to a positve incentive rather than a negative penalty.
Dok,
Sorry to intrude on your post and hijack it. But thanks for the opportunity to have something great to build on.
-
I like that idea Zanth, it would require players to use recon flights to determine a fields type and layout, which in turn alerts the enemy of a potenial attack. Plus it may put planes like the TA-152 more into play for recon missions.
-
I would love to see more missions come back to AH. Its been quite a while since there has been anyone notable who posted missions on a regular basis which were also successful.
I hope this conversation helps bring back some more missions to the game.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Pyro and I this morning were kicking around the idea of making 2 changes.
The way the reset system works is that once a country is down to a set # of air fields the war ends.
Was thinking of raising this number to between 4 or 6, or posibly a % of the original fields.
2nd would then also change field capture (no specifics) but the changes would make it a lot harder to capture a field.
One we didn't discuse but I have been thinking about, is moving towns farther away from the fields. This would promote more fighting and less vulching when trying to capture a field.
On a side note: It is refreshing to have you around again DOK, it is fun for me discusing game design, from a game design view point, VS this is what I want view point.
HiTech
I understand what you are getting at HiTech, but with the new field designs and larger towns, taking a base is already much more involved than it was in AH1.
Back then, when you got over a base and the fight was gone, you shot up the town. Being that they were much smaller, it wasn't long before the town was down and people were yelling out for a goon. End result is a group of players, (Somtimes large sometimes not) organized or not, could go from base to base and take one after another with ease.
Now, with larger towns and many more buildings if you dont have a fairly large number of players bringing bombs to kill a town it will not go down and the base will not get captured. This is what I have seen anyways since the release of AH2.
Moving the towns further away from a base may give the other players who are rolling from that base get up and fight but it would have to be very far away I think. If a player is intent on vulching another, or not letting that player get any sort of advantage or next to even playing field, he wont.
Altho, on the upside of your ideas, making bases harder to take would posibly promote more missions in the game and lead to a stronger community/country as a whole.
Im torn here now with your ideas. May be good or it may just be not needed.
Can you clarify on just how far you are thinking of moving the towns?
-
5 Mile range.
HiTech
-
"One we didn't discuse but I have been thinking about, is moving towns farther away from the fields. This would promote more fighting and less vulching when trying to capture a field."
sounds like fun, add some mannable guns at the town.
How about a town VH?
-
Originally posted by hitech
5 Mile range.
HiTech
Personally, I think adding distance from base to town will make it easier to capture. Even if you place a spawn point to the middle of the town, one VH killer and a few vulchers at the base leaves the town defenseless to a few heavy bombers or Me110s and a lone goon.
It seems it's always the occasional La7 that survives a vulch pass or three that is able to scream toward the town just in time to kill the goon or at least a few drunks.
FWIW, I like the idea of a GV spawn very close to the towns.
-
Good idea on the guns.
How about a creating a manned 88 AAA gun for use in terrains here and there?
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
...
Dok,
Sorry to intrude on your post and hijack it. But thanks for the opportunity to have something great to build on.
No problem. Despite my reputation for being an ego-maniac (and were that not in some part true I wouldn't get nearly as much accomplished as I do :D ), I only have once concern - that the game gets better for everyone. I really have no ego invested in if an idea gets used or not (though I do like being given credit where it's due).
As for the difference in flying early war vs. late war (from another reply), I disagree about the technological offset. In flight-testing for Rangoon it became very obviouos just how different the early war planes were in the areas of roll rate, acceleration, and firepower to their late-war brethren. It was also quickly evident how similar they all were in level flight speed. Meaning a Zeke is pretty close to as fast as an F4F, and not much slower than a Spit I. So you can't just power away like you do now in a La7 from a Spit IX. You can't snap roll out of trouble like you can now in any Fw190. And you don't have 4 20mm's to shoot people's faces off with. And things happen quite a bit slower, and much more up close and personal.
I do remember "jet night" (aka "Night of 1000 Warps") in the RPS and I avoided it like the plague. But we didn't have perks in WB to tone down the use of jets. An RPS combined with perks for the jets and rare planes (like the C-Hog, Ta152, etc.) could work better. In fact, on "1941 nights" the Fw190A-5 and Spit IX could be perked planes.
-
>>GET A GRIP and ride another plane. I know some of u can't so it's an ideal time to start.... start with the spit 1. After summer hols when the rooks are back to 237 players on a Sunday spit 1's will be rooks limit<<
Hmmm, a typical response to a set of valid concerns about changes which have ocurred, and were not expected. If there was whining to be done, it already occured, and resulted in a move which isn't all that pleasing or effective. ;(
IMO, there could have been a different fix or remedy, such as perking the eny planes with values of 6. Instead, those who have a genuine favorite ride, cannot fly it, or those who usually fly a ride which performa certain things well, do not have that option. This new patch, and move seems to be directed at solving two sets of concerns, and probably won't solve anything ie: numbers, and so called Uber planes. Hell, if ya wanna solve the issue, then why not perk the eny planes when one side has so called advantages of numbers?
The numbers notion is fleeting, and misleading to boot. I fly Rook, and I am telling you true, when we have higher numbers there is barely an advantage; we wind up usually fighting against Bish and Nits at the same time. So, an advantage of say 25 or 30 pilits, or sometimes not even that high, isn't much advantage. So, back to the idea of perking the so called eny planes; why not charge the side with the numbers for the use of them instead of making them available only to the other two or one side with greater numbers?
For myself, it doesn't much matter, I fly F4U's, FW 190s etc mostly, and rarely fly the so called uber plane types. I do however, get a lil po'd when the P-51 is made unavailable; IMO that makes little sense at all.
-
Originally posted by Zanth
Also knowing ahead of time the layout is an advantage to the attacker and maybe too much information?
Should we know before we reach destination that field A32 is airfield type Large and there are are "X" numnber of target "B" located at position "Y" etc etc. ?
Is it possible to randomize the field layouts or contents somewhat? (edit: how about randomize stratigic target hardness within some guideline. )
I don't think that knowing the base layout is too much information as recon photos were used to pinpoint various targets of strategic importance in a city.
What I will say is that with the last changes, bombing certain bases is much easier than it used to be. For example, look at a small field's FH layout. A single formation of B17s can carpet bomb the entire string in one pass and if the pilot has any skill in the bombsight, the odds are most are going down, if not all. This was never possible with the old small base layout.
Medium bases are a little more difficult but only moderately so. A pair of pilots can knock it down in one pass if everyone calibrates correctly.
Honestly, I forget the layout of a large base (haven't hit one in a while) but I remember that in AH1, the layout was a lot tougher and it took a lot of coordination to render fighters unavailable.
I liked the randomness of some of the later maps in AH1 (ie. multiple VH huts, etc.) as they added a little excitement. You knew you were going into a small base (three FH) but the strips and hangers could be in different locations than the last small base you hit.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Overall I think base capture and strat is a fine metaphor to use for an arena game. It keeps things changing, and you get to use the entire map as opposed to just the "furball fields."
- Attack bombers aren't needed at all to capture a base. So there's no escort duty, no specialization of task, no coordination - just the "conveyor belt." The closest thing to a speciality I see on a regular basis is Me110's shooting down the city.
-DoK
DoK,
I dont know how this might fit into the equation, but I wanted to bring you up to speed on my observations of a change in the Bombsite for level bombing.
In the begining of AH we had the good old Laser, put it down the chimeny, bombsite. a single B17 could make a pass or two and pinpoint drop all the FHs at a feild. Nobody really liked the effect it had on game play.
Then HT did a very cool calibratable bomb sight, increased bomb dispersion and made it very difficult to flatten a single target. Carpet bombing became more the norm. Calibration isnt too hard, but It can be tricky. Many Guys didnt want want to spend the time to master the system.
This was when JABO ops because the standard way to disable a feild for capture. Bomber were used less and Late War Allied fighters became the king of capture.
Iv offen wondered if a compromise in the Calibration system wouldnt have some positive effect on gameplay. I think perhaps rather than having to hold the sight on a point for Calibration, Just have an Auto Calibrate button. You would still have to select the alt and if you made course changes and speed alteraltions your calibration would be off. It might be enough of a compromise to make Level bombing more popular and reduce the roll of Jabo ops.
Anyway, Im not sure how this effects your train of thought, but Its my take on what caused Jabos to become the so previlant in feild capture.
-
Yeah ... the A20 and Mosi are no less accurate at bomb delivery than a P38.
The old AW bomb sight was even more comical.
I'll admit I have yet to be able to get the current level bomb site to work for me.
Now, if there was some kind of "attack bombing" sight - even if it was crude - that was only in the cockpit of A20's, B26's, Mosi's, and so on - there'd be some reason to take an attack bomber instead. And that sight was enabled when you picked if you were "bomber" or "attack" or "fighter" in the hangar. So if you want to use a B26 to kill GV's, you get the nice low-alt bomb sight in the cockpit, but no level-bombing sight/bombardier.
But as long as 38's and Hawgs can sewercide themselves on low-level Jabo runs, and still be more effective than an A20 or Mosi, this won't change much.
-
BTW Doc had a proposal to eliminate suicide runs, went over like a lead ballon. It was a delayed kill on the targetes, somthing like 20 secs. Then you had to be still living after the delay for the target to be damaged.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Grimm
I think perhaps rather than having to hold the sight on a point for Calibration, Just have an Auto Calibrate button. You would still have to select the alt and if you made course changes and speed alteraltions your calibration would be off.
This is a good idea - since my stroke I have not been able to do the level bomb sight very welll at all.
-
I have the perfect compromise for the "auto-calibration" idea!
What about instead of using a marker point for at least 2 seconds (current system) you could alternately enter in your drop speed manually? If you're off, you still miss, if you change speed, you still miss, etc.
Just make a command, like ".dropspeed 192" (IAS, not TAS) and that would bypass needing to "mark" a spot on the map while holding a certain key. (Which is really not very reliable for me. I've had bad luck with it, since most of the terrain I fly over before I drop is flat with no points to mark)
So you still have to click the alt, you still have to calibrate, but you can do the speed via command rather than marking a spot out.
Sound nice? I think so.
-
I recall that discussion HiTech. (Very much so as I was hoping for something to come out from it)
http://216.91.192.19/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=71494
IMO a lot of good ideas were proposed all around.
-
Originally posted by hitech
BTW Doc had a proposal to eliminate suicide runs, went over like a lead ballon. It was a delayed kill on the targetes, somthing like 20 secs. Then you had to be still living after the delay for the target to be damaged.
HiTech
Well, I for one have no issue with that solution, I think it is a good one. I guess the pork and auger crowd didn't like it though. It really seems only reasonable when you think about it.
Damn Hitech, how 'bout that, and idea or position of yours I don't question or gripe about. I hope you have yer snow shoes ready! :D
-
Originally posted by Zanth
This is a good idea - since my stroke I have not been able to do the level bomb sight very welll at all.
Damn, hate to here that. Strokes really suck.
-
Originally posted by hitech
BTW Doc had a proposal to eliminate suicide runs, went over like a lead ballon. It was a delayed kill on the targetes, somthing like 20 secs. Then you had to be still living after the delay for the target to be damaged.
Oh ... I can imagine how well that idea was received.
I think the way to look at this isn't "how do I take something away" but "what can I give them instead that's better and will improve gameplay". Now, I will grant you 10000% it's hard to think like that given the barrels of whine you must get a day.
-
Originally posted by milnko
I was thinking more along the lines of doing away with C-47s being able to capture a base, after all how many bases were actually captured using Paratroops? Instead require M-3s only. And if needed, move spawn points closer to airfields to keep gameplay interesting.
If I may...I am not sure that taknig away the ability of the C47 to capture entirely is quite the right aproach. Maybe taking a tip from Day of Defeat and having different sized cities requiring more or less numbers of troop loads to take, say 3 for a small city/field, 5 for a medium city/field, 7 for a large. Then have each form of delivery be worth so many points, sayfor example a load of paratroops are worth 2 points of capture and an M3 worth 4? Seems to me that this could really boost team play as people try to work together to get enough troops into an area to take an objective.
One thing that I have seen more than once is a couple of loads of troops being brought in at the same time and all the credit goes to the guy who dropped first yet the other guy who worked his butt off to get that C47 to that city or field gets nothing out of it.
Something that I am certain I am not sanquine about is the current practice of the C47 piltos landing in out of the way places and sitting on the ground for 20 minutes before taking off and completing the capture. Just how good were the 47s at landing on un prepared ground and then taking off again?
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by Zanth
Also knowing ahead of time the layout is an advantage to the attacker and maybe too much information?
Should we know before we reach destination that field A32 is airfield type Large and there are are "X" numnber of target "B" located at position "Y" etc etc. ?
Is it possible to randomize the field layouts or contents somewhat? (edit: how about randomize stratigic target hardness within some guideline. )
Could this open up an area of strategic recon flights to the game? The more often a side can get a recon flight into and out of an area the more information they get about it and to make teh recon flights worth doing they get decent points and the recon info gets old over time (less info available on the strat map).
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
I think the way to look at this isn't "how do I take something away" but "what can I give them instead that's better and will improve gameplay".
Now, I will grant you 10000% it's hard to think like that given the barrels of whine you must get a day.
The truth, if ever it were written. I love the "barrels of whine", you need to copywrite that one.
I'm with you, I'd rather see a bonus or advantage given to the underdog rather than see anything taken away from anyone. It is just harder, much harder, to satisfy as many people when you take from some and give to others, rather than just giving some a little something extra.
It goes back to a simple truism. If you TAKE something from someone as a penalty, you are almost guaranteed to piss them off, even if it makes another happy. But if you give something extra to the other, without penalizing the first, the chances of both being at least reasonably happy are much greater.
But as you say, it ain't always easy.
-
Really??? I loved it. Just remember the excitement of new plane day!!!!
Originally posted by Zanth
Good points DoK, not a fan of rollling plane set though. Lived that once already.
-
Amen.
Originally posted by Zanth
Sounds good, its the last part of the war nobody likes to live in.
-
Originally posted by Skeksis
If I may...I am not sure that taknig away the ability of the C47 to capture entirely is quite the right aproach. Maybe taking a tip from Day of Defeat and having different sized cities requiring more or less numbers of troop loads to take, say 3 for a small city/field, 5 for a medium city/field, 7 for a large. Then have each form of delivery be worth so many points, sayfor example a load of paratroops are worth 2 points of capture and an M3 worth 4? Seems to me that this could really boost team play as people try to work together to get enough troops into an area to take an objective.
One thing that I have seen more than once is a couple of loads of troops being brought in at the same time and all the credit goes to the guy who dropped first yet the other guy who worked his butt off to get that C47 to that city or field gets nothing out of it.
Something that I am certain I am not sanquine about is the current practice of the C47 piltos landing in out of the way places and sitting on the ground for 20 minutes before taking off and completing the capture. Just how good were the 47s at landing on un prepared ground and then taking off again?
Skeksis
Hey, now THERE is an idea.
The capture itself could be based on numerical levels. And on proximity to reset, and size of the base.
The more outnumbered a country is, the more troops required to take its territorty (I realize of course this is backwards from real life, EXCEPT for the fact that the desperate fight harder).
The larger the base, the more troops required to take it.
The more strats in the area (ie "zone" base), the more troops required to capture the base.
The closer to reset and or the closer to HQ, the more troops it takes to capture a base.
The need for more troops will most certainly cut down on the number of truly offense planes and vehicles by the attacker, since LA 7's don't carry troops, and C-47s don't have guns, rockets, or bombs.
That should slow the steamroller in several ways.
More troop carriers of any kind means not only less fighters, bombers, and JABO's, but also more need to devote fighters to protect those troops. And it will be easier to stop a capture by taking out a single troop carrier, be it plane or GV.
Less capture to some degree, and more fight. Can't be all bad, for sure.
-
I see alot off good ideas that will make a country come together and organize itself.
One thing I really like is the SYSTEM doing the mission announcement. Once a mission is posted have an announcement everyminute untill the last 2 mins where it would announce in a different color (say red) every 30 seconds before it launches.
I had a thought also dealing with base capture, but not sure how hard it would be to implement.
Besides the obvious toughening up of the town and adding distance - would be adding multiple victory points or map rooms.
So If you have a feild layout, there would be the feild, a larger distanced city(with A VH nearby and manned AA) (victory point#1) Now maybe on the other side of the feild you could have your ammo depot or weapon stores. This would be a smaller city, as well as housing some of the "strat" ordinance.(also with a Vehicle spawn, and manned aaa) (victory point #2)
And now on the feild you have a maproom, or coincide this with the control tower. (Victory point #3)
So Lets say country "A" is being attacked - They can use the Cities VH and The ord depot city VH as defense as well as the main VH on the Feild.
Now IF country "B" successfully kills all the buildings in the city and captures the larger town - they can now use GVs to start attack on the smaller city(ord depot) and or feild.
Say if a country captures the "ord depot", then ordinance on the feild would not get resupllied, and eventually run out.
Then for "official capture" You would have to get troops on the feild at the airfeild for the capture of the airbase.
With the distance of the towns, the toughening of the buildings
and increasing the number of troops needed for a capture (say 40 for large city, 20 for ammo depot, and 30 for feild) - I imagine you would see some good action and a good fight.
LOTS for ground vehicles to do, lots for aircraft to do. Would definatly tie the gound war together with air support if there was intense GV fighting all around a 5 mile radius of a base
-
I'd have thought two Me110s could do a pretty good job on a smallish/mediumish town in about 5 to 10 minutes in R/L, unless of course some friendly zoomies showed up to spoil the party.
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Anyway ... moving towns further away. As it stands, 2 Me110G's can take down a city in under 5 minutes. Moving the city further away only makes this easier. You'd need to harden the buildings a lot for this to make a difference - but if you do that, then there's really no need to move the city.
-DoK
-
Provided this thread continues in the current direction , no thread has been more important, or more deserving to take the record for longest thread.
There have been some OUTSTANDING ideas and theories in this thread that are a great sign of the potential of the community.
If the community can take some of this stuff and run with it, with help from HTC, the future is bright indeed.
We could all be very happy, and some putz named Hitech could be rich enough to have his own real warbird.
-
You can do all you want to try to improve the "team" play concept, but if the team players DON'T want to play together, then nothing you do can force them to and you still haven't accomplished anything. You say ... "Well thats their tough luck". Well, we already have a gameplay concept (very simplistic) and disorganization still runs rampant and there is still an imbalance, so making the gameplay concept more complex would hardly solve the problem IMO.
The objective in baseball has been in existence for quite some time, and there is really nothing more that could be done "gameplay"-wise to improve the game.
You can buy all the greatest baseball players in the world to field a team, and if they don't get along or play together correctly, they will never be winners (except for the NY Yankees ... :D).
I still like the idea (Dok/HT) where captured bases (a certain radius from HQ) will have the disabled planes if there is an imbalance.
Now to take that one step further, as the captured bases (front line) moves further out out from HQ, bases that were disabled, which WERE front-line bases now become enabled. The net of it is ... only front-line captured base are disabled. So those that want to take the disabled planes, still can, but further back from the immediate action.
-
What is the record anyway? Been wondering about that for the past couple of days.
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Provided this thread continues in the current direction , no thread has been more important, or more deserving to take the record for longest thread.
There have been some OUTSTANDING ideas and theories in this thread that are a great sign of the potential of the community.
If the community can take some of this stuff and run with it, with help from HTC, the future is bright indeed.
We could all be very happy, and some putz named Hitech could be rich enough to have his own real warbird.
-
Originally posted by Muddie
What is the record anyway? Been wondering about that for the past couple of days.
I think it is 2007, set yesterday in the infamous Voss thread. Hitech got the last word and locked it, yesterday afternoon.
-
Originally posted by Muddie
I'd have thought two Me110s could do a pretty good job on a smallish/mediumish town in about 5 to 10 minutes in R/L, unless of course some friendly zoomies showed up to spoil the party.
More likely to set it ablaze that actually demolish buildings.
We're talking about 2 planes shooting down a village in 5 minutes. Since some of the buildings appear to be multi-level structures, lets assume they are brick and mortar. 20mm cannon will blow some holes in that, but certainly not collapse the structure with only 50 or so rounds.
-
Originally posted by hitech
BTW Doc had a proposal to eliminate suicide runs, went over like a lead ballon. It was a delayed kill on the targetes, somthing like 20 secs. Then you had to be still living after the delay for the target to be damaged.
HiTech
I hate to sound any stupider than I already do but was this really a problem?
:eek:
I thought that the whole point to AH was to survive whatever it was that you were doing.
No, I am not about to go out and start suiciding, trying to get in, get a kill, get out (or some times get in, mix it up and get out) is my goal. I am just astounded that people were using suicide runs to accomplish anything.
Skeksis
-
Originally posted by hitech
BTW Doc had a proposal to eliminate suicide runs, went over like a lead ballon. It was a delayed kill on the targetes, somthing like 20 secs. Then you had to be still living after the delay for the target to be damaged.
HiTech
From a dive bombing fighter perspective, I like it... 20 seconds might be extreme though. I hate watching the dweeb porkers pile straight in behind the 1000lb egg they just dropped.
From a level bomber perspective, I hate it... simply surviving to bomb drop (unless you are a 20K+ bombing fan) is usually tough enough.
How would this apply to killing GVs, etc.?
-
Originally posted by Skeksis
I hate to sound any stupider than I already do but was this really a problem?
:eek:
I thought that the whole point to AH was to survive whatever it was that you were doing.
No, I am not about to go out and start suiciding, trying to get in, get a kill, get out (or some times get in, mix it up and get out) is my goal. I am just astounded that people were using suicide runs to accomplish anything.
Skeksis
Well, even if people didn't gripe there is a problem with this beyond the obvious. And that is that there are already enough people who climb their 51D to 20K with a bomb, make one insane pass on a base to drop it, and then run away at warp 50. Such a rule would further encourage this kind of thing - almost rewards it.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
You can do all you want to try to improve the "team" play concept, but if the team players DON'T want to play together, then nothing you do can force them to and you still haven't accomplished anything. You say ... "Well thats their tough luck". Well, we already have a gameplay concept (very simplistic) and disorganization still runs rampant and there is still an imbalance, so making the gameplay concept more complex would hardly solve the problem IMO.
The objective in baseball has been in existence for quite some time, and there is really nothing more that could be done "gameplay"-wise to improve the game.
You can buy all the greatest baseball players in the world to field a team, and if they don't get along or play together correctly, they will never be winners (except for the NY Yankees ... :D).
I still like the idea (Dok/HT) where captured bases (a certain radius from HQ) will have the disabled planes if there is an imbalance.
Now to take that one step further, as the captured bases (front line) moves further out out from HQ, bases that were disabled, which WERE front-line bases now become enabled. The net of it is ... only front-line captured base are disabled. So those that want to take the disabled planes, still can, but further back from the immediate action.
The idea is not to make it more complex for the player, but actually to make a lot of it simpler, as with Dok's mission suggestion. He was looking at making creation of missions simple and easy, and I was looking at adding incentives for creating them and joining them, so people would WANT to do it.
You are EXACTLY RIGHT, you can't MAKE people do anything they don't WANT to do. Trying to force them to do something they DON'T want to do will only alienate them and force them out completely. You can only give them the incentives to do what you think you want them to do and hope it works and you are correct in going in that direction.
The complexity of the suggestions so far falls mostly on the HTC end, for better or worse. It would unfortunately increase their workload and the complexity of the game itself, but not TOO MUCH for the player, other than the varying degre of hardness of bases and the varying number of troops required for captures. They would have to look at a menu or two to see how difficult their objective is to take.
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Well, even if people didn't gripe there is a problem with this beyond the obvious. And that is that there are already enough people who climb their 51D to 20K with a bomb, make one insane pass on a base to drop it, and then run away at warp 50. Such a rule would further encourage this kind of thing - almost rewards it.
Well, as it is now, they are already rewarded whether they survive or not. Forcing them to survive to score would at least force them to shift their efforts more towards survival, meaning coming in faster and higher, avoiding augering, and getting away. This means there is less focus on accuracy, they have to drop from higher altitudes and faster speeds to assure surviving or the hit does not matter anyway. Might cut down on their success at hitting, even if it does increase their success at surviving and escaping. that might be a better alternative to the current situation.
I do however see your point. It would probably make the high speed high altitude porker a more exclusive and dedicated group, with individuals who are more likely to succeed. It might however, cut down on the use of the tactic as a substitute for any talent or skill at all.
-
Originally posted by Alpo
From a dive bombing fighter perspective, I like it... 20 seconds might be extreme though. I hate watching the dweeb porkers pile straight in behind the 1000lb egg they just dropped.
From a level bomber perspective, I hate it... simply surviving to bomb drop (unless you are a 20K+ bombing fan) is usually tough enough.
How would this apply to killing GVs, etc.?
I would hope that it would not apply to killing GV's other than preventing you from making a kamakaze attack on them. Perhaps the survival time could possibly be different for objects and enemies.
I don't think 20 seconds is too long, but maybe too short.
Regarding the level bomber problem, I think it would, and should, force the level bombers to secure more escorts, and to bomb from more realistic altitudes. I think heavy bombers coming in at 200 feet is a little much, never mind heavy bombers used as dive bombers. I do realize there were special cases of very low level heavy bombers being used but like Ploesti, it had a high cost and limited success. As it should be here. meduim bombers and attack bombers are another matter entirely, but they should still not expect to attack and survive at very low levels with little or no escort.
And the object should always be to survive, at least for long enough to make an interesting fight of it.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
You can do all you want to try to improve the "team" play concept, but if the team players DON'T want to play together, then nothing you do can force them to and you still haven't accomplished anything. You say ... "Well thats their tough luck". Well, we already have a gameplay concept (very simplistic) and disorganization still runs rampant and there is still an imbalance, so making the gameplay concept more complex would hardly solve the problem IMO.
...
True enough.
But remember in baseball you have everyone playing the same "game," you have officials there to make sure no one does stuff they shouldn't, and if the team wins you get very rich. So in our little slice of nirvana, we have to encourage team play more.
An ez-mission console is one idea we bandied about that would simplify things and enhance gameplay. Hell, you could get perks just for setting up a mission and yelling at people not to go 5:1 on the first bogey they see. And that'd help the outnumbered side a TON!
Spreading out airfield layouts and having bigger fields require more troops to capture them doesn't make the "rules" any harder to understand really. It just gets harder to do and requires some thought and cooperation.
Adding in a low-alt bomb sight for attack bombers only doesn't make the game any more complex, it adds a more effective way to attack ground targets - making the current Jabo fetish less appealing. Likewise increasing the lethality of the Sturmi and Hurri IID against armor doesn't add any complexity to the existing game beyond that of making a new specialty available for people to master.
Now ... notice the theme that is consistent here. All these ideas we're agreeing on (more or less) all *add* things - more interesting targets, more air-to-ground functionality, easier to create missions. No one is being "punished" - nothing is being taken away. And we all (more or less) agree that the gameplay and tenor of the MA would improve as a result.
And one more thing ... and this is purely my opinion ... if players are playing like 'tards and doing stuff that you step back and go "booo-ring" ... it's because they're bored. This isn't a knock on the game at all. They've just absorbed as much as they need to be "successful" and have settled into a comfort zone. Even if its dull and repetetive - they get their chuckle out of it. That's human nature.
If you take things away ... and threaten that comfort zone ... well, we all saw how people behaved. But when you add things, ahhhh, that's different - now they're challenged by a new toy, a new feature. I've always maintained that online gamers are the most cunning muthers on the planet - you just have to keep throwing new challenges at them.
(And that's one reason I like RPS ... it gives you 3 or 4 very different feels to the game spread out over a couple weeks. You can't capture fields in 1940 like you can in 1944.)
Again ... that's just my opinion.
-
A consern for level bombers as I remember it was this.
I make a good drop same from 15K and I take down a bunch of toolsheds and stuff, But then about 16 seconds later, I get hit by a Flak shell that does the pilot in. Now the damage done is erased.
Perhaps if it was tied to Altidude and Time. If you died under a 10 second timer, and you are still under 200ft it doesnt count. This would pretty much mean Auger ins and kamakazis.
-
Dok ... I am with ya on all you wrote, I am just playing a little devil's advocate here, but I think that those of us who would embrace these changes, are the minority.
From what I have witnessed over the past 2+ years is that when things become harder (I can use complex too ... right ?) around here, people get real upset too.
The point that I am trying to make is that if the community (as a whole) does not change their attitude and outlook, all the little bonuses created to entice cooperation won't have a positive effect until they do change.
The AH community needs to change ... and I believe that this one action (ENY) and this single thread just may accomplish that ... I am hoping.
I have to say that your participation is the wind on the embers to keep the flame going ... keep it up.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Dok ... I am with ya on all you wrote, I am just playing a little devil's advocate here, but I think that those of us who would embrace these changes, are the minority.
From what I have witnessed over the past 2+ years is that when things become harder (I can use complex too ... right ?) around here, people get real upset too.
The point that I am trying to make is that if the community (as a whole) does not change their attitude and outlook, all the little bonuses created to entice cooperation won't have a positive effect until they do change.
The AH community needs to change ... and I believe that this one action (ENY) and this single thread just may accomplish that ... I am hoping.
I have to say that your participation is the wind on the embers to keep the flame going ... keep it up.
Hey, on the bright side, they complained a lot less when AH II made bases a lot harder to capture than they have when the ENY balance mechanism took their favorite ride.
Meaning, at the very least, if there was a system in place that rewarded improved community function, they would not have the "you took something from me that I paid for and I want it back or I'll quit" reason to whine.
As Dok said, the key is to make the change positive and make them WANT it. That is the very best you can do. If they don't want things to get better, nothing will. At least if you try the positive approach, no one will pay the price for the people who don't care if it gets better.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Dok ... I am with ya on all you wrote, I am just playing a little devil's advocate here, but I think that those of us who would embrace these changes, are the minority.
OK ... I can grasp that ... despite the rampant dweebery I tend to have higher expectations of the rank and file.
So all that means is that changes should be gradually put in place. Some are easy. Start with increase armor penetration for Stumi's and Hurri IID's (just for instance). You announce that in the next patch and odds are pretty good that some people will start popping GV's in 'em (I know I will). The GV fetishists will whine, but the novelty will wear off. But I would predict that field captures would now feature one or two tank-busters in the mix.
And mass-GV attacks will now require ... *gasp* ... fighter cover! Oh no, Mr. Bill! Which can be a nice source of kills on slow-moving attack planes.
So next maybe you implement the EZ-Mission console - to quickly put together TIME-CONSTRAINED field capture (and re-take) and defense missions. Maybe even limit these to allow only 15 people to join any one EZ-Mission. Announce a major perk bonus for people leading, and a smaller one for those participating in, such missions and I would predict that mission use at least increases. Add in the perk discount for missions when outnumbered and I would expect that people would defend in mission packages. Given a choice between trying to up in a Spit while being vultched and likely dying, and flying with a dozen guys from a sector away in dirt cheap C-Hogs with a perk bonus for anything you kill, which makes more sense?
So maybe next you add in the low-level tactical bomb site for A20's, Mosi, B26 (as singles), Avengers, Stukas, and Sturmis. When people read in the patch notes that there's a new tac sight for attack planes which will let them carry heavy ord and get be able to bomb with some accuracy, some (obviously not all) will try it. And they'll discover the fun of attack bombers. Now The Horde has tank-busters and attack bombers mixed in - it is actually *stronger* in ground-to-air than ever before ... but weaker in air-to-air. Meaning the fighters need to spend time protecting the strike ships. Which is what should be happening.
Will everyone change? No. But enough people will gobble up the new features and toys to slowwwwwwwly turn the ship.
Maybe also start to filter in some other host-level changes along the way. Like it needs 3 sticks of troops for a major field, 2 for medium, 1 for minor to capture.
But overall I think we're heading the right way. People always respond better to being given more ... even if they have to work a little harder because of it.
-DoK
Oh ... PS ... Dux is building the SE Asia terrain as we speak ... from Mandalay to Singapore to Saigon. So Rangoon should get announced before month's end.
-
Dok is right, and besides, it could not be done all at once, not even close. Unless you want to wait 6 months for it to happen.
And I still think it would go over far better than what we have, and the effects would last longer and do more good.
Back to some of the truisms you posted earlier SlapShot, if all the ENY based balance mechanism does is somewhat even the numbers for a short period of time, it will not have solved the root of the problem. Like a band aid on a sucking chest wound. At least it won't bleed to death as quick.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
The AH community needs to change ... and I believe that this one action (ENY) and this single thread just may accomplish that ... I am hoping.
Slap, the ENY may or may not change the community. I tend to think that it may just make the game more complicated. And over the last 2 years the game has become a lot more complicated with a lot more work and a lot less fun, at least for me. A lot of people embrace the challenge of the changes, some I have and some I have not, but I think the majority might be happy with less change.
With a more complicated game, there is less time and energy (for me anyway) to fraternize with others, join forces, and plan missions. With the new flight models, new terrain objects, more difficult field takeovers, smaller hit bounding boxes, and new machine requirements, I'm just having a tougher time flying and in general, getting less enjoyment from the game. That may be true with others. And if people are struggling with the game, they may have less of a tendency to pay attention to strategy, planning missions, and cooperating in general.
I think there comes a point when a sim gets so complicated and realistic that just a small number of hardcore pilots continue on. If anyone's ever tried to keep up with Falcon4 and all of the addons and upgrades, they know what I mean. Hardly anyone gets together to play Falcon4 anymore. And Falcon is still a great game, but you need a 6 month full time training program to fly it now.
-
Grimm, IMO a "fix" should not count against those who die or auger after being damaged or shot down on the run. The problem was (is!) intentional suiciders who auger within seconds of releasing. And heavy bombers doing the Stuka thing.
IMO part of the "fix" should effect those who auger or ALT F4 within XXX seconds (I think 5-10 after release is plenty) of dropping thier ordinance.
Along with this were suggestions on limiting the angle for release (heavy bonbers diving), setting an arming altitude/timer so that the simpleton auger-nuts had to release higher (less accurate). Also suggested was an idea for those who augered without damage 30 seconds after release was to limit thier ordinance choices for subsequent runs and/ or lock thier spawning from the base they'd flown thier suicide run from for 10 minutes or more.
Sure this *may* penalise a "newby" but IMO they'll learn to get better much faster. And IMO newbs augering within seconds of release are a small fraction in comparison to those who deliberately perform the suicide-jabo acts.
This however is a different subject altogether from fixing the horde issue. Also the ideas run contrary to Dok's where as it penalises players by removing options instead of offering them something else as an incentive to curb behavior.
-
I been popping a screen shot before I log past few mornings and evenings. System sure seems to be working. (But yeah it's early yet) SO maybe a wait and see attitude is better before making any more adjustments?
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Dok is right, and besides, it could not be done all at once, not even close. Unless you want to wait 6 months for it to happen.
And I still think it would go over far better than what we have, and the effects would last longer and do more good.
Back to some of the truisms you posted earlier SlapShot, if all the ENY based balance mechanism does is somewhat even the numbers for a short period of time, it will not have solved the root of the problem. Like a band aid on a sucking chest wound. At least it won't bleed to death as quick.
Hey .. I am all for the ideas that Dok is bringing forward, but at the same time, I still think the underlying notion of the ENY mechanism is still valid and should not be dismantled. Yes, at this point it is a bandaid over the sucking chest wound, but with some tweaking, I think that it could be more than just a bandaid. It could add to the realism and also foster cooperation.
The idea of adding to the ENY disabler, that only front line bases in enemy territory are effected, isn't really taking away anything it just makes things harder.
Now, if changes are introduced, like the ones that Dok has mentioned, which would require some real devestation in order to capture a base, once the captured front line base (in enemy territory) is completely regened, then all planes are available again. In otherwords, add field regen to ENY disablement.
This would then introduce the need to fly supplies (C-47/M3 groups) into these captured bases to try and get the field healed to get the ENY planes faster. Just like we use to do to get the fuel back up at a captured-porked base.
I think that this would also add to the "realism" factor. Did captured front line bases in enemy territory in WW II automatically have all planes available to them immediately after capture ? ... I don't think so. It took time to rebuild them, after destruction, and then they moved equiptment in.
The ENY disabler, in its raw form, right now, is harsh in my opinion, but it can be built on and really add to the gameplay aspect of AH. We still must remember, that if sides are even, then the ENY disabler is shut off and everything is as it was.
-
Westy,
Nice ideas!
I very seldom fly the high ENY aircraft, so the new patch wont bother me.
I only get bothered when my country's back is up against the wall and all I see are enemy LA7s, N1K2s, and Spits above me. That's when I log off.
There should be no PERKS for a reset. Just the fact that a country got the reset should be reward enough.
Now if perk points could be traded in for ballcaps, shirts, coffee mugs, then it would be worth something to me.
-
Slap, the ENY may or may not change the community.
What I was really getting at was not the actual change itself, but the buzz and dialog that it has generated.
Like Virgil said, this could be one of the single most important threads/dialog that Aces High has ever had to offer.
Hey Capt'n ... what is your in game ID ?
-
And Im a Knight, Who doesn't care effected planes are available or not. But I while perhaps not in as strong terms agree about this new system.
Primarily because I do not think its going to change things much.
While a bit early to say "HA Told ya so"(I'll just bide my time on that one)
It is interesting to note that Rooks with the new system still managed to put up over 200 people on Sunday. The primary reason for their lack of success had more to do with the lack of troop availability then plane type
As for those that switch for the reset perks. I dont know how the perk system works but perhaps any perks you earn should be country specific. That is say your a Knight and have 2,000 perks and you switch to Bish. Those 2,000 perks stay with the knights until you return and any Bish perks you earn stay with the Bish.
Also I think that all new accounts should start off with say 500 perks. That is enough to allow anyone new to the game to give the perk rides a whirl so they can a taste of what they are trying to earn perks for.
Hmm Lets change my above idea a bit. Lets say you have 2,000 perks and switch to Bish.
You should be able to take 500 perks with you. That way you don't get penalized too much for switching.
Of coarse if you switch alot your account of perks for each country will build.
That being said
My Squad is primarily an attack squad. If faced with a lack of these plane choices we would simply choose a different plane that was available.
In fact as often as not we do that anyway.
We manage to routinely completely pork fields using nothing more then FWA5's with a single bomb each so its not like it cant be done. If its more ord you want, Try the FM2. W'e routinely do that also.
If its speed your after go with the Mossie. With a little practice you will find it can be more devastating to a field then the pony or P38. Or the Jug. Or better yet put a package of the two together and you will have one hell of a fearsome and devastating attack force.
And thats one of the reasons I dont think this system is going to work. Eventually people will start thinking again instead of complaining, then you all will get your acts together and figure that out and we are going to be right back where we started.
Not to mention that after a while alot of you are going to be getting pretty good in the damn things. And I personally would rather go up against a good P51D pilot then a Good Mossie pilot Or a horde of ponies over a horde of Mossies any day.
I also do not like the idea of forcing people to change countries.
I know for myself its never gonna happen. I know some find that thinking silly, but to me loyalty means something.
But then again Im not a "me" person I dont fly just for myself but for my country which is just an extended version of my team.
And as the saying goes "there is no "I" in "T-E-A-M"
Also I think the bombers should be exempt from the current system. And being on the receiving end of the horde on MANY occasions It is my honest opinion that the bombers aren't the primary problem, More of a minor inconvenience then anything even at worst.
I also think the 163's based near your HQ should also be exempt.
Even on the hoarding side as they simply lack the fuel mileage to travel very far anyway so to disallow them is pointless.
Originally posted by Pieper
OK guys....Im a rook, but that makes no difference, the new patch is crap. Look at it this way.....most of the times when a country has high numbers its because traitors have switched sides to be part of a reset. It dosent matter if they get the perks for it or not.....seen this too many times. In fact I bet lots of Bish and Knits that started this crap are guilty of it.
So far all I've seen the disabled planes effect is the number of people who say screw it all together and log off.
It hurts squads
Bish...Knits...If you were in an attack squad and had to sit in the tower and wait for your plane of choice to be enabled so you could stop an enemy push........how would you feel?
There is no way Im ever switching sides......although HiTech told me to as a solution on god channel........
I think its alot of BS.....
For Christ sakes! you cant even defend your HQ in a 163.....thought about that yet?
All this is doing is effecting dedicated squads....not the root of the problem....the country swaping furballers
-
As for those that switch for the reset perks. I dont know how the perk system works ...
Originally posted by hitech
You must be in country the same amount of time as the change country setting to recieve perks. It has always been that way. I.E. you have never been able to change sides just before a reset to get perks.
That setting used to be 12 hours it is now 6 hours.
HiTech
I also think the 163's based near your HQ should also be exempt.
Originally posted by hitech
As to the 163 and perk planes the 163 will definetly be excluded and im favoring the idea of all perks to be excluded from the eny system.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Slap, the ENY may or may not change the community.
What I was really getting at was not the actual change itself, but the buzz and dialog that it has generated.
Like Virgil said, this could be one of the single most important threads/dialog that Aces High has ever had to offer.
Hey Capt'n ... what is your in game ID ?
It's in my signature. I'm Savage, formerly Savge in AW. I fly as a Rook with the 327th Steel Talons Fighter Squadron.
-
Originally posted by Swager
Westy,
Nice ideas!
I very seldom fly the high ENY aircraft, so the new patch wont bother me.
I only get bothered when my country's back is up against the wall and all I see are enemy LA7s, N1K2s, and Spits above me. That's when I log off.
There should be no PERKS for a reset. Just the fact that a country got the reset should be reward enough.
Now if perk points could be traded in for ballcaps, shirts, coffee mugs, then it would be worth something to me.
Make sense to me - it worked in Air Warrior, worked in Warbirds, don't know why it wouldn't work here too. Sometimes I am not sure that the perk award doesn't imbalance things all by itself. The focus is better left on the journey (the quality of the fight) than the destination (the reset). When that gets backwards is when the gameplay becomes a mess.
-
originally posted by drediock
But then again Im not a "me" person I dont fly just for myself but for my country which is just an extended version of my team.
And as the saying goes "there is no "I" in "T-E-A-M"
But there is a "me" in "T-E-A-M". so i'm a little confused now.
:D
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Oh ... PS ... Dux is building the SE Asia terrain as we speak ... from Mandalay to Singapore to Saigon. So Rangoon should get announced before month's end.
(hijack)
Ohhhh...this is great news. I was checking out Rangoon on your site a couple days ago. Sounds awesome (as usual).
(/hijack)
-
Originally posted by Westy
The problem was (is!) intentional suiciders who auger within seconds of releasing. And heavy bombers doing the Stuka thing.
IMO part of the "fix" should effect those who auger or ALT F4 within XXX seconds (I think 5-10 after release is plenty) of dropping thier ordinance.
Along with this were suggestions on limiting the angle for release (heavy bombers diving), setting an arming altitude/timer so that the simpleton auger-nuts had to release higher (less accurate).
I like this thought... while I don't think a lot of the kamakazis are intentional, it's a learning curve that can easily be enforced by not rewarding them with destroying the structure and then piling into the ground. The system tracks damage to the plane anyway, if that damage is not greater than a certain percentage and the plane crashes within the time window, no structure damage.
There is already a distance fuse of sorts on bombs... don't recall the distance but anything to get rid of dive bombing Lancasters would be much appreciated! :lol
Originally posted by SlapShot
Now, if changes are introduced, like the ones that Dok has mentioned, which would require some real devestation in order to capture a base, once the captured front line base (in enemy territory) is completely regened, then all planes are available again. In otherwords, add field regen to ENY disablement.
This would then introduce the need to fly supplies (C-47/M3 groups) into these captured bases to try and get the field healed to get the ENY planes faster. Just like we use to do to get the fuel back up at a captured-porked base.
What about changing what the troops actually do when a base is captured. Right now they go into the maproom with their little satchel charges and blow it up... if they were to destroy the base itself (no change to the code or graphics, just kill all of the hangers when maproom is destroyed... would make for some cool simultaneous explosions :D) This forces the "horde" that just grabbed the base to actually land, hit the rearm pad, and take off again in order to move to the next base unless C47s/M3s are on station with supplies to build up the base as SlapShot said. I think it would slow down the flow somewhat giving the defending country a chance at repelling the next strike.
An insightful observation from Drediock
Also I think the bombers should be exempt from the current system. And being on the receiving end of the horde on MANY occasions It is my honest opinion that the bombers aren't the primary problem, More of a minor inconvenience then anything even at worst.
Hmmm... I "may" have said this before ;) YES YES YES... :aok
-
If you provide more bonuses for being in missions, then you don't need the arena reset perks. These two things combined (providing the EZ-Mission interface so it's not "work" to take control of the rabble) could have a dramatic effect.
And I'll add one more "feature" to EZ-Mission ... have a switch that makes it "Squad Only Notification" and auto-informs everyone on your squad channel that the mission is posted. So if your crew is RTB, you can prepare the next sortie while you're landing and everyone can join once inside and then your squad is off on their next mission right away. Non-members may join in, but so what? Squads turn around pretty quick on the ground so odds are it'll be mostly your crew. Have the Squad-Only notification show up as a flag on the mission list, so non-members get the hint they should ask if it's OK to join the mission.
And I agree that players should be given some reasonable perk balance when they open their account. Starting with 0 and seeing all these guys with 1000's is kind of demoralizing. And if you're learning, don't fly much, or just aren't an ace you see the odds of ever getting hundreds of perks as pretty slim. So why play smart?
If the ENY disabler were tied back to perks, that would be a good time to credit everyone with 250 or 500 or whatever.
Having perks exchangable for cash-value items has legal ramifications.
-
Idea one
How bout this?
Once a field is captured, all fields within the ajoining 4 sectors, or whatever on the coastal field, are uncapturable or require more troops for a certain time set? say 1 hour? Seems to me that defense of these fields would in real war aspects would have a higher resistance factor anyway.. this would hamper the roll over affect when the numbers are out of whack..
The plane limit thing didnt bother me so far, I like to try different models anyway, not that I am any good in any 1 plane, last night couldn't take a p51-d, so I tried the p51-b, and got 4 kills my first flight, I landed, let out my breath, laffed and logged, I wasn't gonna ruin that feeling lol
It's just an intardnet game, if you limit yourself to only flying one model, I think you are cheating yourself anyway
my 2 cents
NwBie
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
If you provide more bonuses for being in missions, then you don't need the arena reset perks. These two things combined (providing the EZ-Mission interface so it's not "work" to take control of the rabble) could have a dramatic effect.
And I'll add one more "feature" to EZ-Mission ... have a switch that makes it "Squad Only Notification" and auto-informs everyone on your squad channel that the mission is posted. So if your crew is RTB, you can prepare the next sortie while you're landing and everyone can join once inside and then your squad is off on their next mission right away. Non-members may join in, but so what? Squads turn around pretty quick on the ground so odds are it'll be mostly your crew. Have the Squad-Only notification show up as a flag on the mission list, so non-members get the hint they should ask if it's OK to join the mission.
And I agree that players should be given some reasonable perk balance when they open their account. Starting with 0 and seeing all these guys with 1000's is kind of demoralizing. And if you're learning, don't fly much, or just aren't an ace you see the odds of ever getting hundreds of perks as pretty slim. So why play smart?
If the ENY disabler were tied back to perks, that would be a good time to credit everyone with 250 or 500 or whatever.
Having perks exchangable for cash-value items has legal ramifications.
Granted that perks are the only reward system that we have, but we shouldn't get too perk-happy here. Perks are the balancing agent for the "monster" rides, and this balance needs to be maintained.
Now ... if you want to get perk-happy, then you are walking down the road to assigning perks to every (well almost every) plane in the hanger and then adjusting the monsters accordingly ... nothing wrong with that either, but to some it will go over like the ENY disabler.
Not trying to be a smart-arse here, but I don't think that a newbie would have any clue as to how many perks I have. I don't know how many perks you have and I wouldn't unless you told me what you have, so I don't think that they are that demoralized. For me, starting at 0, only represented a personal challange to me to earn perks.
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Granted that perks are the only reward system that we have, but we shouldn't get too perk-happy here. Perks are the balancing agent for the "monster" rides, and this balance needs to be maintained.
...
And in that same spirit, if we have a rolling plane set where jets were only available from fields near HQ, you wouldn't need perks at all.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
I see interest in this thread already starting to wane. That's too bad, it really is.
I notice we haven't had any response from anyone from HTC in a couple of pages or so. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and hope they are just busy, since Hitech is supposedly making adjustments to the arena today.
...
I think you're misreading things. HT already put in 5 or 6 host-level changes today. You just gotta tune your expectations with HT's MTBC (mean time between coading) frequency.
Also, don't confuse "quick fix" with "band aid." Some seemingly simple modifications can have dramatic long-term effects on gameplay.
I'll use my tank-busting example again. How many times a night do you see 20 cannon-armed fighters circling 10 Osties at a field? The fighters are waiting for someone to launch a plane so they can vultch it. The Osties are waiting for someone to launch a plane so the can shoot whoever comes down to vultch it. No one wants to launch a plane. And save for people arriving on the conveyor belt with bombs, the Osties can pretty much sit there all they want.
Why is this so? Because there's no plane which can reliably kill Osties in the numbers needed to counter the spawn rate. Even a B26 or A20 isn't a sure thing because of the lack of a tactical bomb site - so take a P51 or P38 and maybe get one or two at best before joining the circus at 5K.
If the Hurri IID and Sturmi had their guns armor rating increased - even at the expense of anti-air HE capability - you'd start to see the field capture package have one or two tank busters. Partly because it helps the team, and partly because once you're proficient at low level attacks in it you can get nice multi-kill missions against GV's.
So now the GV syndrome at fields lasts only a few minutes, and that forces people to launch from the next nearest field and reclaim the airspace. What I've noticed currently is that only once the VH is down do people launch from adjacent fields to retake the airspace.
Again - a "quick fix" which could affect gameplay at a much deeper level. And then maybe 6 or 9 months down the road, you can tune the armor piercing value back a little if you want to let GV's have a little more freedom (right now it's nuts because they don't need any fighter cover at all).
-
I am taking this silence from HT in the vein that he just had a requirements session and has left the conference room to go ponder more deeply on the information, and work out in his mind how they would play into the grand scheme of things ... present and future.
As Dok mentioned, he already has taking some actions. All those actions were, I believe, a result of the discussion that we had here in this thread, with the exception of the release of the OZKansas map.
Some of the more complex suggestions made in this thread will require more thought on his part.
-
Sunday night; First sunday with new balance system, had the highest attendance since AHII was released. Don't belive your premiss holds water.
HiTEch
-
Originally posted by hitech
Sunday night; First sunday with new balance system, had the highest attendance since AHII was released. Don't belive your premiss holds water.
If it was a Rook landslide again, then I suspect a lot of people showed up just to make sure that The Horde happened regardless of the ENY.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Sunday night; First sunday with new balance system, had the highest attendance since AHII was released. Don't belive your premiss holds water.
HiTEch
Maybe, maybe not. Yes, attendance was high. That is good. I agree.
The question was, why was attendance higher. Was it because the outnumbered sides felt they had a chance and gameplay was actually better, or was it because of something else.
Anyway, as I've said before, it's your world, the rest of us just pay $15 a month to rent a small piece of it. I'll just withold further comment.
-
Originally posted by hitech
BTW Doc had a proposal to eliminate suicide runs, went over like a lead ballon. It was a delayed kill on the targetes, somthing like 20 secs. Then you had to be still living after the delay for the target to be damaged.
HiTech
One thing that concerns me about the delay kill is that it might look a little lame to have a target blow up 20 seconds after it was hit. But I have a suggestion. Instead of a kill delay, prevent the pilot from upping from the same field if he gets killed withing 20 seconds after drop (or if he augers should this be possible).
The idea is to simulate death to prevent a rinse and repeat, which encourages suiciders. How realistic is that?
-
Originally posted by hitech
Pyro and I this morning were kicking around the idea of making 2 changes.
The way the reset system works is that once a country is down to a set # of air fields the war ends.
Was thinking of raising this number to between 4 or 6, or posibly a % of the original fields.
I have a suggestion here HiTech. When the reset get near, the two top teams start fighting each other over the loser. They'll virtually stop their attacks on the loser until one of them gets enough lead to ensure a win. This can go on all night, leaving the loser to languish without fighting space.
I suggest randomizing the number of bases for reset so neither contender can know when it will take place.
continued by hitech
2nd would then also change field capture (no specifics) but the changes would make it a lot harder to capture a field.
One we didn't discuse but I have been thinking about, is moving towns farther away from the fields. This would promote more fighting and less vulching when trying to capture a field.
HiTech
Some towns are already too far from the field to be easily defended. Some are closer to the enemy spawn point than our VH. Could you consider giving us spawn points at our own towns? And how about placing a couple field guns there.
I suspect if you move the town most vulchers will never see it.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Sunday night; First sunday with new balance system, had the highest attendance since AHII was released. Don't belive your premiss holds water.
HiTEch
ah, jeez, HT, confusing the issue with facts?
:aok
-
Originally posted by DoKGonZo
If it was a Rook landslide again, then I suspect a lot of people showed up just to make sure that The Horde happened regardless of the ENY.
Several possibilities actually exist, and I suspect the truth is somehwere between the two.
It is possible that those who always fly on Sunday night as Rooks only found out when they logged on (I know this to be true) and flew despite their unhappiness.
It is possible that there was another factor that slowed the Rook juggernaut, such as a successful counterattack by Bishops and or Knights that disabled troops or ordinance.
I could go on, as could anyone else.
-
I think the high order bit re: the high number of people is that a game change - even a controversial one - got people interested again. Last nite there was like 460 people when I popped in to check on things - which seemed high for a Thurs nite. All people were talking about was the new skins.
If every 3-5 weeks a new feature, host change, plane, etc. were added I think you'd see a trend towards higher player counts in the week or so after each addition. Just my hunch. In this thread we listed 4 or 5 changes which wouldn't make the game any more complex but which would lead to improvements in MA gameplay.
Beyond that, the mantra I've seen work has always been "more planes, less warps." You look at what players seem to ask for and gripe about most, and those two items seem to pop to the top of the list. The excitement I heard on the radio last night about the skins kind of bears that out.
And speaking of warps ... whats with this D1.5 warp? Didn't that used to be at D3.0? It's making it brutally hard to BnZ. And if you watch a dogfight from a field gun (zoomed), you can actually see planes do 360's in mid-air at the D1.5 point before warping off.
Off topic, I know ... but I do NOT want to start a "warp" thread.
-
Were you in a big furball? It normaly is around 3k, but if you overloaded max near range count, you could see it closer in.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Were you in a big furball? It normaly is around 3k, but if you overloaded max near range count, you could see it closer in.
Not really that big ... maybe a dozen planes around a field. Everyone in the squad has noticed that the 3K warp seems to be happening at 1.5 almost all the time since the .07 patch.
-
There is an enemy bias switch that kicks in at 1.5k, My guess is you had a lot friendlys in side that range, when enemy closed inside of 1.5, he got promoted to the near range update.
HiTech
-
That's probably it ... but it really makes BnZ problematic. If you're coming in at speed a plane jumping significantly from 1.5 to 1.0 can pretty much spoil your shot (unless you want to dump a ton of E to try to track with the warp).
-
Originally posted by hitech
There is an enemy bias switch that kicks in at 1.5k, My guess is you had a lot friendlys in side that range, when enemy closed inside of 1.5, he got promoted to the near range update.
HiTech
Hey, I always wondered about that. Thanks much for the explanation, I appreciate that.
-
Originally posted by hitech
There is an enemy bias switch that kicks in at 1.5k, My guess is you had a lot friendlys in side that range, when enemy closed inside of 1.5, he got promoted to the near range update.
HiTech
That makes sense... I guess the downside is that 1.5k - 2.0k is a significant distance for BnZ'ers, and blips at that range can blow a pass very easily.
Would it be possible to do a traffic analysis and find out how much it would increase server load and bandwidth to push that out to say... 2.5k or 3.0k? That would certainly have an effect on the bandwidth requirements of the clients also.
I don't BnZ much, so I dont' think it would affect me either way... just a thought.
-
Moving the bias range dosnt effect band width at all.
The only trade off is the friendlys move to the far group sooner.
If 1.5 is causes any issues other than asteticly, Id be glad to move it farther away.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Funky
Would it be possible to do a traffic analysis and find out how much it would increase server load and bandwidth to push that out to say... 2.5k or 3.0k?
Yeah I tend to BnZ a fair amount nowadays, since my skills have eroded almopst completely since the ol' WB days a good 8+ years ago. (what the h*ll happened to the time??) Those little 1.5 warps can suck sometimes especially in a furball.
Any chance that one could make updates for enemy planes a priority over the friendlies? I could care less the exact position of DoK or Funky in the fight, but I do care where the guy on their 6 is.
...well more likely the guy is on MY 6, but the argument works both ways...
:)
Supe
-
Originally posted by hitech
Moving the bias range dosnt effect band width at all.
The only trade off is the friendlys move to the far group sooner.
If 1.5 is causes any issues other than asteticly, Id be glad to move it farther away.
HiTech
I think it's just the 1.5'ish blip that can blow high-speed passes when it's severe. I don't generally make BnZ passes on friendlies, so having them pop around a bit at that distance wouldn't be a big deal.
Even having it happen at 2.0 or 2.5 at the most would probably be sufficient. I think a small jump that that range could be corrected for, unless you're in a 262 at 600ias and making a pass on a Zero. :eek:
-
Originally posted by hitech
Moving the bias range dosnt effect band width at all.
The only trade off is the friendlys move to the far group sooner.
If 1.5 is causes any issues other than asteticly, Id be glad to move it farther away.
Yes, please do.
I'll tell you the other place it really has an impact and that is when tracking fast bombers (like B17 groups at 20K). When they warp from 1.5 to 1.0 you're suddenly getting a face-full of .50 cal before you can line up for your own shot.
-
I agree. A good attack, especially on bomber formations, begins around d 2.5. Unfortunately between 2.5 and 1.0 is where it seems like the position update rate and bias changes as well as the skin loading, so it adds up to a busted first attack in many cases. If the situation allows, I've been using a close pass knowing ahead of time that the first attack will be disrupted by a warp or stutter, followed by a reposition and second lethal attack. Moving the update switch out to 2.0 or 2.5 just might help.
I haven't flown since the new skins came out but the system memory pre-load seems to help a lot with the stutter. By themselves the little warps and stutters don't always ruin an attack but when they are sequenced in between 2.0 and 1.0, then it really throws off an attack. Pushing it out might help especially with people connecting with a low latency broadband connection.
The higher quality average connection seems to highlight the transition points to the point where they're now pretty easy to see. This can take away from that all important "suspension of disbelief" that AH has always been known for. I of course have no idea whether just pushing the update transition range out farther, or simply increasing the mandatory minimum bandwidth will be necessary to hide the transitions again, but I implictly trust HiTech to make it all guud :)
Umm... This is my first post in around a year. It's intended to be a positive contribution so please let me know if/when I'm being an idiot.
-
Welp...
I am probably alone in this (not that I mind :)), but, there are some players that really don't care much about "team play". (and yes...the 'some' just might refer to only me :D)
Personally, I work at a job where I am responsible for 7 other people. Organization??? I do it all day...everyday. I really don't care much for "organized" entertainment.
Actually, I have played other games that required teamwork to achieve any success. Well, for a couple of months anyway :).
Bottomline...I'm here for fun and if it ain't fun...I ain't gonna do it :).
-
Originally posted by 4510
Long as they don't cancel their accounts... what does HiTech care?
IF, key word there, IF they do cancel then it might be too late
for him to care.
SCDR