Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Blue Mako on March 30, 2005, 05:35:47 PM
-
Mitsu's departure has got me thinking: What's ruining the gameplay for so many vets? I myself took a 18 month sabbatical and am finding it hard to get back into a groove in AH2. Why is that? Am I (and the other vets) like Chicken Little, running around saying the sky is falling?
IMO there are two basic problems with AH MA gameplay as it stands at the moment.
(1) No fear of virtual death
(2) Horde warrior mentality
I'd like to see two changes made to correct this:
(a) Spread the fields further apart again. Having fields less than a sector away from each other promotes nothing but take off, spray and pray, die, rinse-and-repeat gameplay at zero feet altitude all the time. Not everyone in the game wants a deathmatch insta-spawn furball all the time.
(b) Set a time limit for respawning in fighters or bombers (not for gvs or goonie birds). Even a 1 minute delay between returning to the tower (after death/capture/ditch not a successful rtb) and taking off would make most players a bit more careful about rtb'ing. This would remove a lot of the kamikaze mentality.
Anyways, that's my suggestion for making the MA a little more vet friendly. There are some of us who'd like to see a return to the science of air combat, not just the science of spit/nik/la7 point-the-canopy-at-them-and-pull furballing. Maybe TOD will make some of these changes but I'd rather see the MA get back to a more reasonable place to fly and fight. We are flying virtual models of WW2 aircraft after all, not Crimson Skies fantasy fighters. Why make the MA a complete fantasy?
Flame away.
:cool:
-
I think you hit the age old question...."the good old days" are always better somehow. I burned out on AW (AOL)...so I went to "Big Week" AW then on to the next AWIII...in 99 came here during open beta...bet I've quit 5 or 6 times since 99.
From my perspective the problem has always been the growing scale of the game. In effect its becoming more and more lifelike...and less like the "knights of the skys" I "grew up" with.
This last trip thru I've focused on mid war stuff flying the -1 hog Ki-61 etc....
Now I think I'm going back to the begining...I stopped flying spits in 1995....and april will be the return of the barbiefire. I used to be a decent T&B/dual type...I've become a more proficient "killing machine" but lost a bit of that pure furball capability.
Back to the future.....:aok
-
I think just as many of the vets would state that the problem now a days is the fact that everyone flies 20k, BnZ's and as soon as you get to a CoE position they tuck tail and run. Not saying you're wrong or I am, I think it's just peoples veiw points. Lately it seems to me, 80% of the aircraft I've ran into are either 190's or La7's. If they do engage, it's only with more alt and only to BnZ. When they lose adv., they run. I feel they are afraid to lose their virtual plane. Once again, I don't believe either of us is wrong or right, just different playing styles. I do agree with your horde mentallity 100%. It's getting pretty bad. What's worse, recently when 1 horde hits another, it leaves and goes to an empty feild??? I also wouldn't be against your time penalty, although there's to many furballers out there that would find this unexceptable. I think it's been discussed before and pretty much got shot down.
-
I, on the other hand, I'm having the most fun time in AH since the first year of final release in 2000.
-
I've been finding that the personalities in the game are a big contributor to my not having fun on the scale we had in Air Warrior. I'd like to make a few points.
We had one map in Air Warrior which reflected the particular theater of battle in which you wanted to play. They were fairly realistic in their layout, though fictional enough in their layout to be effective for virutal gameplay. Nobody ever complained about "give us another map" and so forth. The AW maps were not small, but they were not HUGE like Trinity or AKdesert.
I liked having airfield names. Numbering them is very efficient and easy across the board, but I just liked having field names as opposed to numbers.
The ability to have more than one gunner was a HUGE fun and exciting draw. The "Deathstar" was a way for several members of the same squadron to have "intercom" and have a blast while gunning one single gun point of a B-17. With the gross overwhelming of bombers when attacking a base, this cannot really be accomplished simply because you need all those guns converging to cut apart the often many attacking airplanes at once. I cannot recall ever really being "gangbanged" while in cruise or over the target to the point of being absolutely overhwelmed with airplanes. Nowhere did you have 6-10 airplanes attacking that one B-17.
The overall lack of "Channel 1" (Now 200) attitude of smack talk which is not in good spirits and confrontation. I remember we [~U.S.M.C.~] had a legendary rivalry with the MAWs of C land. We "hated" each other and constantly sought out each others squadrons to fight. We did not really hate them, we respected them as great opponents who made the game fun. Even in the heat of battle against our biggest rival, a "bingo" or "winchester" call was honored and the fight was knocked off.
were aplenty.
Sadly, 95%-99% of what makes AW and AH different animals was the people. Very little if anything can be done to bring the things that made me love spending time in the game because the big deal isn't the software. Sure I'd like to see the field spaced farther apart, the ability to have more than one gunner (I'd like to have this more than anything!) and a return to the good 'ol days. But I don't think they'll be back. At least there are the fond memories.
-
I beleive that TOD will solve many of the issues with the MA and overal gameplay.
1)There isnt much (pronounced there ain none) "fear of death". I have the time of my life flying the 262 because I have to be REAL CARFUL, I only gots 450 perkies ya know.
2)The overal cohesion of each team is so volitile that some times its amazing how well everyone works together, but more often then not, its a FlusterCuck.
3)I see the same 5 planes all dang day and night
4)Even if there is a mission, there is no real reward for accomplishing that mission.
TODs structured missions, rewards/rank system will solve all of this. AND as if that isnt good enough, the MA will be here to play around in. I only see one HUGE drawback, and that is that most team players will spend lots of time in TOD, and the MA will become an exponential of its pre-existing flaws listed above.
-
since ma is designed to be fun for many skill levels and interests i think some GAME MODIFIERS would be a great way of stirring things up.
wouldnt it be fun to have a MOTD that would say what modifiers were on for the said map?
eny is a game modifier to stirr things up when it gets stagnant. and helps level the playing field. tho i dont think it should be on all the time to keep the idea fresh.
what about some more? say " planes are limited to early war for this game" {the game being a map reset} some have suggested that ma2 be set for this tho that doesnt seem necasary and splits the player base up.
"planes are limited to country specific plane sets for this game"
"axis vs allies set up"
the modifers can still be fantastical in nature and not scenarios like ct already offers but some limitations and game play elements that can be turned off and on for each game would make it alot funner.
there are alot of different posibilities that could really stir things up, the endless ffa setting we have now gets old fast.
as blue said hopefully tod will save the day. all i know is some veriety will make things alot better for ma.
-
Originally posted by Blue Mako
Mitsu's departure has got me thinking: What's ruining the gameplay for so many vets? I myself took a 18 month sabbatical and am finding it hard to get back into a groove in AH2. Why is that? Am I (and the other vets) like Chicken Little, running around saying the sky is falling?
IMO there are two basic problems with AH MA gameplay as it stands at the moment.
(1) No fear of virtual death True
(2) Horde warrior mentality True
I'd like to see two changes made to correct this:
(a) Spread the fields further apart again. Wrong Having fields less than a sector away from each other promotes nothing but take off, spray and pray, die, rinse-and-repeat gameplay at zero feet altitude all the time. Not everyone in the game wants a deathmatch insta-spawn furball all the time.
If you don't want to furball and would rather spend your time climbing, drop back a field or two and have at it.
(b) Set a time limit for respawning in fighters or bombers (not for gvs or goonie birds). Wrong Even a 1 minute delay between returning to the tower (after death/capture/ditch not a successful rtb) and taking off would make most players a bit more careful about rtb'ing. This would remove a lot of the kamikaze mentality.
A "time limit" would kill the game, or should I say ALOT more people would leave.
Anyways, that's my suggestion for making the MA a little more vet friendly. There are some of us who'd like to see a return to the science of air combat, not just the science of spit/nik/la7 point-the-canopy-at-them-and-pull furballing. Maybe TOD will make some of these changes but I'd rather see the MA get back to a more reasonable place to fly and fight. We are flying virtual models of WW2 aircraft after all, not Crimson Skies fantasy fighters. Why make the MA a complete fantasy?
Try the CT, I've heard it's "quite a reasonable place to fly and fight". Also hope you enjoy TOD!
Flame away.
:cool:
Just MHO. ;)
-
Dipstick, thx for the reply. Allow me to expand a little on where you think I've gone wrong with my suggestions.
(a) Yes, I can spend time climbing and enter the fight higher if I take off a couple of fields back. But how about everyone else? All the fight is on the deck because no-one else is bothering to do anything except level off at 2000' and head straight to the field they can already see after they take off from their own. If I kill them, I don't have time to regain E, they just replane and are back in the fight in a few seconds. Rinse-spin-repeat.
Oh and I'm not opposed to furballing, I just want to see a few changes to make it a higher skillset required than the current culture demands. How many people bother to learn ACM currently? Only the minority IMO. I'm just trying to think of ways that trend can be reversed.
(b) Many, many, many online games have a time interval between dieing and respawning. This does not limit the popularity of any of them. This would prevent vulching (can't vulch if the vulchee doesn't up), prevent the pork and auger technique (who wants to auger and then wait before upping). It will also encourage more realistic engagements (gotta think "can I make it home still or I'll have to wait a little while to reup"). Most of all it will prevent the guy I just killed reupping instantly and returning to the fight while I'm still trying to shoot down his teammate. Yes this will lower the number of kills you can rack up quickly but how many pilots in WW2 got to respawn after being shot down? This isn't a request for total realism, just a tip of the hat towards it.
JUST SAY "NO" TO QUAKE HIGH!
:cool:
-
Originally posted by Blue Mako
Dipstick, thx for the reply. Allow me to expand a little on where you think I've gone wrong with my suggestions.
(a) Yes, I can spend time climbing and enter the fight higher if I take off a couple of fields back. But how about everyone else? All the fight is on the deck Maybe because the rest of us don't care to waste time climbing. You are asking everybody to fly your way because you 'apparently' are having a hard time finding targets at 20k+. Sorry but the game has evolved into a "fun" game now (Thank God). Come on down grab a turner and join in! because no-one else is bothering to do anything except level off at 2000' and head straight to the field they can already see after they take off from their own. If I kill them, I don't have time to regain E, they just replane and are back in the fight in a few seconds. Rinse-spin-repeat.
Oh and I'm not opposed to furballing Yes you are., I just want to see a few changes to make it a higher skillset LOL required than the current culture demands. How many people bother to learn ACM currently? 95% of the furballers I know could write a book on ACM. Only the minority IMO. That's because you are at 20k+ looking for some noob to pick. I'm just trying to think of ways that trend can be reversed.
(b) Many, many, many online games have a time interval between dieing and respawning. This does not limit the popularity of any of them. You have no way of proving this statement. This would prevent vulching (can't vulch if the vulchee doesn't up), prevent the pork and auger technique (who wants to auger and then wait before upping). Nothing will ever "prevent" these. It will also encourage more realistic engagements (gotta think "can I make it home still or I'll have to wait a little while to reup"). Most of all it will prevent the guy I just killed reupping instantly and returning to the fight while I'm still trying to shoot down his teammate. Yes this will lower the number of kills you can rack up quickly but how many pilots in WW2 got to respawn after being shot down? This isn't a request for total realism, just a tip of the hat towards it.
JUST SAY "NO" TO QUAKE HIGH!
:cool:
Just MHO. ;)
-
Dipstick you have your opinion but please don't tell me what my opinion is. Nowhere have I said that I want to be at 20k picking off newbies. This is not meant to be a "furballers vs the world" thread. I'm after a better balance for all camps and a way of promoting a more realistic game. The latest maps are a product of the furballers whining that it took them too long to get to the fight. Some people want to be able to land after a fight. Some people want to have a decent 1v1. Still others want to blow up toolsheds. Balancing all of these into a single game is probably well nigh impossible but at the moment the only people pleased seems to be the furballers IMO.
I've played hours and hours of BF1942, Counter Strike, Joint Ops, Raven Shield etc and to me CS was the best. It was also the game that had 1 life per round and then you had to wait before you could respawn. And guess what? It is the most popular online FPS so far. At the moment AH is just like playing a conquest game on BF1942 or Joint Ops. Fly around at tree top height and just frag as many ppl as possible. Respawn and do it all again. Alternatively, if you can't get frags, just run away from everybody and capture the undefended base. I'd like to have an AH where you can get a break from the deathmatch/conquest cycle. In an ideal world it may be possible but...
In essence, what I'm looking for is "The Good Fight" (TM).
To me that can't exist in a world where your opponent has zero incentive to fly well, or even to survive and where any dogfight has a lifespan of about 30 seconds before a load of cons from the base just 10 miles away from yours come over to cherry pick the engaged sucker. Call that a furball, call it bad SA, whatever, I just call it a horde mentality.
Leviathan's "Spits and N1Ks" movie is a great example of this to me. Loads and loads of newbies with no idea plowing into the fight over and over at low alt with no E, only to be smacked down by a group of vets, over and over. Lev and the others have good SA and are very good at shooting. The others in the film are just baby seals. Is it satisfying to club them? You bet. Is it a test of your abilities, I don't think so.
Maybe to the furballers getting a lot of easy kills in a big FFA is "TGF" but I'd much rather see some good ACM on both sides and a close won fight, win or lose, is the most satisfying any day.
Anyways, you have your opinion, I have mine. Just don't try to tell me what my opinion is, I work that one out for myself thankyou.
mako
A member of the coalition against Quake High.
-
Sorry if the truth hurts but that's life.
I have great fights quite often. Otherwise I would and will cancel my account. I love running into Stang or Vudak and many others. That is what keeps me coming back. We have some GREAT fights lasting 2-3 mins or longer. When my pulse is pounding and palms sweating after one good t-n-b fight I know why I stay. It's these fights that make the game 'worthwhile' to me. That and the fun of flying with guys I like and are who like minded.
If you fly for a week at under 8k and don't find any "Good Fights" (TM) noone will fault you for leaving. I know I would.
-
I have a possible cause to the changes in the populous of the game. It is simply the availablility of cheap bandwidth, and the growing popularity of online gaming that has come with it.
Now the population of AH has definitely increased beyond an original group of hardcore enthusiasts.
-
Why is it everytime someone immediately says "your just opposed to furballing"? I'm curious but who are you to claim you know anything about how someone thinks and what they are a opposed to in the first place?
A book on virtual ACM I'm sure with virtual aircraft modeling in mind and keeping in mind it's only a virtual death. Because it's only a virtual death their tactics can have as many flaws as they'd like because there is nothing at stake. I'm just curious but what documents have they written and what credible agency has blessed these documents? Oh I forgot your talking about "virtual" ACM and virtual deaths which means little to nothing since it's now the "fun" game that we can thank God for.
Why is it always "looking for a newb to pick"? If that were the case then there are plenty of them on the deck playing the quake version of Aces High. Better yet there are places in which you can just vulch a field and pick both newbs and vets.
Since you want to make this into a "astronaut" "dweeb" picking debate what makes a furballer stand out? Is it because they are involved in a gaggle engagement where there are so many contacts that it's easy to get lost in the crowd? Or is it because they are relying on the inexperienced flyers in the gaggle engagement to get their kills to make them feel almighty? Or is it because everyone is in the tightest turning aircraft with the biggest guns spraying at anything that's red and happens to fly in front of them?
Again back to saying you know best. I'm just curious you say nothing will prevent the augering porking dweebs or the vulchers? Is that purely on your extensive background knowledge of the players and their thought process? Are you an doctor? Or did the fact that punishment for wreckless behaviour can be a deterent? Or did the fact that the lethality of AAA can be increased which will extremely limit the amount of vulching occuring on a daily basis?
I would have figured with having so many friends that have extensive knowledge in devising and implementing ACM and tactical doctrines coupled with your medical background this would have been easy problem for you to solve.
-
So one second your ribbing Mako because with your extensive medical background you can establish he's having a hard time finding fights at 20k and he's now wanting people to fight "his" way.
Maybe because the rest of us don't care to waste time climbing. You are asking everybody to fly your way because you 'apparently' are having a hard time finding targets at 20k+.
Then you turn around and again use your medical background to deteremine that if he can't find a "good" fight by your definition below your predetermined altitude that no one would fault him for quiting because you would do the same yourself. Is that because people wouldn't be fighting "your way" and "you" wouldnt' be happy with it?
If you fly for a week at under 8k and don't find any "Good Fights" (TM) noone will fault you for leaving. I know I would.
Hypocrite?
-
LOL. Cobra you are such a putz I'm not even going to reply to your usual drivel. Knew you would show up here though. You are so predictable. ;)
-
Yep and your still a hypcrite so I guess we are even. Ribbing someone because they prefer something one way and then turning around saying if people didn't fly your way you'd quit.
Thanks for the lesson though "Doc". When your friends write that book let me know I'd like to purchase a copy.
-
Like I said...
-
Thought you weren't going to reply? Or are you being two-faced again? Saying one thing then doing another?
-
I don't know... I just really think that this game is online quake. I think there is a compromise between realism and gameplay, and I tend to like it. They make the planes fly pretty realistic, the terrain somewhat is, but to get enjoyment I want to reup when I die and have back at it. Realistically, St. Peter would be helping me remove the hispano lead from my prettythang to make heaven a better experience.
Noone wants to wait to reup. Only game I can think of that makes you wait to respawn is counterstrike, and that has a 5 min. timelimit, or you have to wait till your team dies. I just don't think that would fly here.
Nothing against any of you posting here, thats just the way I see it, I'm with Nath and Dipstick on this one, I love the furballs. =)
-
I've always viewed this as a typical 'overgrown' problem Mako.
Back in the old days, everything was smaller and less complicated. People didn't really contend for captures and resets. Many of the MA people knew each other well, even personally, and were close friends. Less people, less objectives, less different tastes.. etc etc.. Now, the MA is bustling. Many new people are here, and these people play the game to win. The collective objective of the old vets was to have fun, but the objective of the relative new players is to win the game.
Like humble said, everything resembles 'real War' more closely now. People are fiercely competitive, even antagonistic, between countries. We've got our own set of 'nationalism' in the MA, between the Rooks, Knits, and Bish. The collective effort towards 'Total War' is viewed as the most desirable way to win the game(as it would be in real life). Don't even give them a chance to up - destroy them while they are on the ground. Concentration of forces is better than spreading apart, and the invincible 'horde' will win the day.
However, while these aspects resemble the real war, other aspects do not. The basic structure of the MA remains unchanged for a very long time now. In the real war, people didn't have such a free choice as to fly whenever they want, whatever they want, and do whatever they want. This kind of freedom is no doubt important, but the problem is that it also includes the "freedom to destroy the gaming experience totally".
Yep, freedom to destroy the gaming experience totally. Don't even give them a chance to up. Since people hate losing, or fierce battles, all of the great 'hordes' on the map avoid each other. Each horde avoids the other horde, and goes hitting near-empty/undefended areas of the map. What we get is a huge AND localized "milkrun" problem all over the map.
A large enemy force approaches an area. Some people scramble and call for assitance, but are ignored. Not surprising - meeting huge force with a huge force of our own is often risky and not very profittable.
The resulting 'fuball' could be fun, but it's always more fun to be in a "winning furball", where you would meet enemy planes and eventually shoot all of them down with relative ease thanks to your numbers, rather than a "continuous furball"[/u] or a "losing furball"[/u] where you would actually have to work your prettythang off to get real kills.
...
So, there's a lot of people in the 3 countries, but none of them actually meet to fight. Most of the "fights" are against empty bases and town buildings. The horde avoids the horde.
And as long as people are "free" to do whatever they want, they will always take the easier path. They will never challenge a huge force with their own force.
Because, they are free to do so, unlike in real life, where some military force is always required to maintain the lines. People weren't free to just abandon their posts and form huge hordes to go for easy kills.
That's what I call "the freedom to destroy the game."
Everybody is free to do as they choose. So they choose to find an easy fight, or not fight at all.
.......
This is not about the single individual, as some vets argue. It's about the system. The MA is the same. No restrictions, minimal structuring, and everybody is free to do what they want.
In the old days, everybody liked fighting, so they would voluntarily do things that would make the game more fun. Nowadays, everybody likes winning, so they will do whatever they can do to win more fields, even if it means losing all of the fields at the opposite front by totally abandoning them to the enemy horde, who thinks the same way.
AH has outgrown its old strategic/tactical structuring. People need to be given at least some kind of basic strategical/tactical structuring and limitations that is applied forcibly by the system, to help make it a better game where there are actually fights occuring. It needs a new/improved system to promote fights, divide people so both fronts(for each country) are always more or less "populated", and people can't just run away to find an easier fight.
-
ps)
And that's why I proposed the "Airforces" system some time ago. Everything resembles real life more and more in the MA. So, naturally, then the basic structuring would also be needed to resemble real life more.
Each country has two(or three, depending on how the terrain is made) independant Airforces. These airforces are stationed at different parts of the terrain and perform operations independantly. When a certain airforce captures a field, only members of that airforce may use it.
People are not allowed to arbitrarily abandon their Airforce and go to other spots on the map. They must ask for a 'transfer'(which is actually waiting to see if someone at the other airforce wants to swap places with them).
As long as overall MA numbers are equal for three countries, there will always be simular numbers of enemies at the opposite side of the front. You are not allowed to form a huge horde by abandoning your own Airforce where you are stationed at.
Whether or not the two independant Airforces in the same country perform collective operations, is entirely upto the players. If one airforce wants to join the other Airforce to form a horde as seen in current MA, they would have to capture territories on their own, so they would be close to the other airforce in distance.
This system may have some faults, but at least it's a start.
It divides the assets a country has in the MA and structures two firm frontlines, and forces people to work with what they have, to push back the other enemy Airforce who are also stationed at that front and will not move away.
* You will always have an enemy Airforce with its own pilots on the other side of the 'border', who will not leave the area and just let you walk all over the fields for easy milkruns.
* Naturally, A2A suppression would become much harder(since generally equal numbers of pilots of both sides will be stationed at that front ), meaning, more A2A fights.
* Better, more wise use of buffs and GVs are promoted, since if too much people move to GVs or buffs, the air superiority will immediately suffer. The Airforce will be hard pressed to carefully control its relative ratio of GVs, buffs, and fighters.
* If an area which that Airforce is controlling, is strategically nuked, then it will be upto the players there to bring them back up, instead of just go away to different areas and find easy fights.
Other supplementary systems, such as the "HQ"(server) deciding to change to ratio of total pilots between two Airforces, would be needed.. so when a certain front, despite the simular numbers of friend and foe, is losing, it would make up more openings for the pilots so they can transfer to the losing front and help even it out.
-
1. Something to remember about this online gaming niche is that players have a shelf life. It even affects recurring players. Its not always about gameplay.
2. Players have a life cycle. Ive always liked this model:
[Class 1] fluff'n Dweebs:
These "pilots" have no idea how to fly and their first kill is probably one of their teamates. Their first contact with other pilots looks something along the lines of ''''''///@%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%SFA@#%%!@!!. They never stop getting vulched, other players from the other classes always like to see these guys log on. If they dont get some training or help soon they usually lose interest or get pissed off and leave the game alltogether.
[Class 2] Plain old Dweebs:
They have figured out how to get a kill and usually do one of two things; 1. They become a buff "artist" and usually join people as a gunner or decide to milkrun ungaurded bases; 2. They become a poser or a follower and hang around with some of the better pilots picking off the wounded. They usually try to start a squad and then ask everyone they see in HQ to join whether they know them or not.
[Class 3] Vulch/Alt/Gang Dweebs:
These pilots have learned that the easiest way to get a kill is to always have the advantage. To repay their old "buddies" they like to setup the enemy and call it roping. The only real rope they know is to go up and stall, zoom the enemy, go up and stall, and continue that process thinking they are kicking their ass. The ***** tulips and runners fall into this class. They think that the more points they have the better they are. I might also add in AH these are the dedicated HO artists.
3. Alot of gameplay issues are from too many players being entrenched in Class 3. The answer isnt changing the game, its changing the player. Share knowlege, share tips, give training. Otherwise you end up with a game full of runners because that is the only skill they know. Here is the rest of the 'model':
[Class 4] Furballers:
When Class 3 has learned that nobody really respects the way they fly, they usually will fall into this class and prove themselves worthy. They will go into a fight no matter what. This class hates BnZers and would rather die in a 5 on 1 then land 8 kills. They have found the true sence of the word "FURBALL". I respect this class just as much as Class 6.
[Class 5] ACE (Alt Monkey):
This class knows how to manage E and how to use ACM to the point where they are just about unkillable. Any time they die they usually come up with an excuse like "the phone rang". They will never admit they ****ed up. Just a little different then Class 3, they are both point mongers except the ACE cares about his ratio too. This is how they can tell if they are any good, if they have more kills then deaths and more then a 1:1 land/kill ratio.
[Class 6] Vet:
These pilots you will usually find dieing for anyone. They can pork, kill, BnZ, rope, just as long as it gets the job done. They dont care if they die in a buff or in a spit, they are there to have fun with their squadies and teamates. These pilots recognize skill and are usually the most benificial to their country. They like to go up against the pilots from classes 3 4 and 5.
4. Long distance fields dont bolster gameplay. The front lines, especially on the big maps are a dynamic place. If you always have to fly 50 miles to a good fight. Odds are: All your enemies will be gone when you get there; all your friendlies will be gone (which btw is a horde either way); or the fight has completely evaporated to another area sectors away.
-
The good old days didn't happen years ago. These are the good old days. I'm consistently amazed at how much fun I can have year after year in Aces High. It's all about doing things you enjoy, avoiding things you don't, and making the most of the time you spend in the game.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Your the AH Buddha Levi.
Your opinion doesn't count. :D :D
-
Originally posted by DipStick
If you fly for a week at under 8k and don't find any "Good Fights" (TM) noone will fault you for leaving. I know I would.
Except for a few buffs, I can't recall any of my kills this tour being above 8k. Don't think you know how I'm flying because I try to offer an alternative to having hordes of the un-dead baby seals throughout the MA. Your next tactic will probably be to check my stats. Don't bother, the fact that my k/hr is low does not mean I'm an alt-monkey. I fly non-primetime, there's rarely more than 100 online when I am and that number gets lost in the large maps we have now. I don't fly timid and I mix it up on the deck, even though I fly primarily E fighters. I know of what I speak.
To make it clear to all:
I'm pro dogfighting.
I'm pro furballs.
I'm against insta respawn.
I'm against having an enemy field within sight of a friendly one.
Maybe I won't be satisfied until TOD. Who knows, at least I try to offer solutions to what I perceive as a problem. I want to have skilled opponents to fight, not a never ending procession of the living un-dead to blow away with my BFG. I want to play a game that has at least a measure of reality, a game that has consequences for losing as well as winning. Doesn't need to be severe, just enough to encourage development.
As Kweassa noted, the community is now too large to be self regulating, there needs to be some checks and balances in the gameplay to force the baby seals to mature for they will not do it alone.
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
The good old days didn't happen years ago. These are the good old days. I'm consistently amazed at how much fun I can have year after year in Aces High. It's all about doing things you enjoy, avoiding things you don't, and making the most of the time you spend in the game.
-- Todd/Leviathn
Too true Lev.
Unfortunately not everyone gets enjoyment out of the same things and that's what gets borne out by these threads, time after time. My problem is that the current MA setup does not cater to my brand of enjoyment as much as it used to. No real biggy, I'd like that to change but it probably won't. Either I'll adapt, I'll leave, or I'll convert everyone to my way of thinking... ;)
-
I 2nd that Murdr :aok
-
Try my challenge for some fun =)
First one to land 5 kills (in a single run) in all aircraft except those designated a purely bombers wins. No GV kills count, and unlimited rearms are allowed.
The challenge begins April 1st with the new tour, hope you guys try it... May add some fun to your night.
=)
-
pop into this forum once and the same old.
ok lets see a few words to point out obvious problems.
interation channel (IE:200), opposing idealogies, and computer hardware.
It is mainly between those three. All but 1 can't be resolved. (200)
that is just my opinion from my year or 2 of play.
-
Howdy Blue
My first questions would be, are you in a squad and do you fly at the same times that some are on?
I took a serveral-month break from the game and recently came back. I hooked up with some other guys who enjoy flying bombers, 999000 and tatertot. We like strat. If we want to TAKE a field, not pork for the sake of porking, I know that with 3 bombers, we can do some real damage and be instrumental into our side taking a field. For me, that's fun. I enjoy the challenge of getting a bomber to a hot zone, survive some fighters and limp back home.
I joined up with SHawk's squad upon their invite and have been getting more into fighters than Ive ever been before. The guys have had some good advice and every sortie has been fun, if not educational.
Sure, the game, as always, has some real buggy boos, such as the way way generous ditch model and a few others. But things seem to be *improving* to me.
One thing I miss is knowing who most of these guys are and the Ch1 banter. I dont know a lot of the folks Im flying against as they either dont play when I do or they've moved on.
And there are some evenings where every con I engage is a La7 or Spit, always going for the head on at every pass. What can you do, out of 650+ players, I pick the dweeb. Heck, with that streak, you'd think Id pick a winning Powerball ticket! :p
I understand your head scratching, I've wondered it myself.
-
LePaul,
I've been with the 412th FS for the last 3 years or so. As I'm an Aussie there's probably only about a 30% chance I'll be flying at least one member of the squad on any given night. No real problem, used to that. I've lone wolfed most of my AH time.
Just seems to me that the skill level in AH has plummeted in the last couple of years and gameplay as a whole has suffered. Just trying to come up with some ideas to arrest the slide.
-
Originally posted by Murdr
3. Alot of gameplay issues are from too many players being entrenched in Class 3. The answer isnt changing the game, its changing the player. Share knowlege, share tips, give training. Otherwise you end up with a game full of runners because that is the only skill they know.
Amen.
-
Strange, as I was commenting to someone yesterday, that I thought the tone in the arena, and the overall gameplay had improved as of late. I'd credit it to the attitude of the players in there lately. It seems a lot more civil and folks seem to be having fun with the talk and the fights. There doesn't seem to be nearly as much of the trash talk.
The fighter drivers seem to be able to find the fights better, and the tac air drivers are still doing their thing, but less at the expense of the decent air to air fight.
I found myself flying more lately then ever.
Oh well, to each his own :)
Dan/CorkyJr
-
This beat up old horse still has some life in it eh?
-
Hence the need for a 4th country, placed in the middle of the map, like A21 on one of Fester's, made up of all the vets.
Endless carnage and fun on both sides.
-
Wait a minute... for $14.95 per month I can read the BBS and fly online? What a country.
-
3. Alot of gameplay issues are from too many players being entrenched in Class 3. The answer isnt changing the game, its changing the player. Share knowlege, share tips, give training. Otherwise you end up with a game full of runners because that is the only skill they know.
If that was possible, human society would have reached Utopia by now Murdr, instead of develop social and legal systems.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
If that was possible, human society would have reached Utopia by now Murdr, instead of develop social and legal systems.
It still comes down to how each player approaches the game. No one can make me mad, but I can choose to be.
Or I can choose to enjoy the game for what it is, try and present myself as a reasonable and hopefully pleasant adult and with any luck at all, some of that might rub off on folks.
Too many of these threads amount to someone saying that everyone else is responsible for their happiness, and if it doesn't change, they're gonna take their ball and go home.
That just isn't the case unless you let it be that way.
There are way too many folks contributing positively to the game in any number of ways, and I think they far outnumber and outweigh any bad that people think they see in the game.
It still comes down to those moments when the cyber cockpit surrounds you and the engine noise and the rattle of gunfire becomes real as you struggle to survive that dogfight you've found yourself in. When you get sucked in like that, and for that brief moment it feels real, or what you imagine real felt like, all the peripheral BS becomes pointless.
And I still haven't found any other game that lets me have that.
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Guys,
who's gonna "educate" or "pursuade" the others to approach the game with a different manner? The vets? They don't have any authority - this is a free game where everyone is free to do what they like.
The players, will excercise(and are currentyly excercising) their freedom to the fullest, and choose not to fly or fight in any sort of way the "vets" think is fun, and that's the end of it. They fly in the way they can profit the most with their limited skills. They don't care if they get better or not, and no 'vet' is gonna ever pursuade anyone to fly differently.
Why should, or would, any individual in the MA ever change his way of thinking or flying, when his current course of action fits his needs in the current MA perfectly?
Because he doesn't get any better in skill?? He won't learn much if they fly that way? It's the dweebey way of flying? It only shows how much they suck??
--- NEWSFLASH! --- They don't care.
In the deepest irony, the more the vets rant about this, the more they are 'interfering with the freedom' of the MA folk to fly the way they want to.
Who's gonna make them care about how the MA can become a better game? Me? You? Anyone?
...
This isn't some other person's fault, nor is it my own fault. It is everyone's fault, which their only crime is nothing but flying the way they like to, because that's how the MA is made.
And when it's everyone's fault that's ruining the game, then the only thing that can effect everyone, is a change in the system. Change, how the MA is made, and you will change how people fly.
-
Think Kweassa's got his finger on it, personally.
I just stopped having fun... I "beat the game" about 3 years ago.
-
All these ideas sound self-serving to make AH more to the ideal of your perception. I am sure there are plenty of people like it how it is.
I have limited amount of time I can fly, I definately don't want to spend it climbing to 20k...bases further apart or spending time in the tower.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
If that was possible, human society would have reached Utopia by now Murdr, instead of develop social and legal systems.
That extrapolation is just dumb. Did I make an absolute statment? Did I claim to pursuade everyone to play my way? Did I claim I should? Did I claim to present the magic bullet? No. I cited a contributing factor. I guess its neither 'big picture' enough of convoluted enough for to admit to.
The players, will excercise(and are currentyly excercising) their freedom to the fullest, and choose not to fly or fight in any sort of way the "vets" think is fun, and that's the end of it. They fly in the way they can profit the most with their limited skills. They don't care if they get better or not, and no 'vet' is gonna ever pursuade anyone to fly differently.
Some players do care. Some players dont need pursuaded, but just need directions to get where they want to go. Some players will never care. Seperating one group from the other is good for gameplay. I dont know how you could argue otherwise.
And btw, I didnt come in here complaining or ranting. I came with a pragmatic view. Players have a shelf life, regardless of gameplay issues. If gameplay concerns you, here is one way to shift the magnification of a particular problem.
Its fairly innocuous and unrelated to your prior posts. I see no need for your ridicule of the view....other than someone posted a point of view unrelated to yours, *gasp* and other people actually have the gull to agree with it.
-
Did I claim to present the magic bullet?
No Murdr, you didn't. But I KNOW you were on that grassy knoll... and by God, one day I will prove it! Utopian society or not, you're goin down buddy! :D
-
I have limited time. If the maps get any bigger this game will be unplayable for me.
Quote: "I just really think that this game is online quake". Not to pick on the poster, but this game is nothing like quake, or CS, or any other shooter. This game is at least two orders of magnitude more complex than any shooter-type online game. The number of variables you have to keep track of regarding your own plane (V speeds, flaps, landing gear, convergence, etc etc) plus the SA of the air environment are way beyond any of the shooters. You don't spend three hours messing with your controller mappings for Quake.
In any of those games, you can hop in for a half hour if you have time. With AH, if you only have a half hour, your options are pretty limited.
" Many, many, many online games have a time interval between dieing and respawning. This does not limit the popularity of any of them."
Yeah, but those games have a very limited session frame time. The obvious example is Counter Strike. One life per session. You die, you wait until the next one. The difference is that the CS sessions are only 5 minutes long. What can you do in 5 minutes in Aces High? Nothing, unless each country has one CV, and they're all anchored in the same harbor (which, actually, might be enormously entertaining for an evening ...). It works because at most, you only wait 5 minutes. And also note that everybody restarts at the beginning of the next session. Or, let's examine the Call of Duty method, where you can only respawn at set intervals (every 30 to 60 seconds or so, when "reinforcements" arrive). Taking down the hangars enforces this type of penalty on a single field - not sure what the point would be of preventing a defender from upping from another base.
Couple of other quotes:
1. "Because it's only a virtual death their tactics can have as many flaws as they'd like because there is nothing at stake"
2. "If they do engage, it's only with more alt and only to BnZ. When they lose adv., they run. I feel they are afraid to lose their virtual plane"
See, you can't have it both ways. If there is a significant penalty to dying, pilots will become more careful. They will seek to engage with more E, with more Alt, and surprise opponents. In such a system, when faced with a significant tactical disadvantage, if an opportunity presents itself to disengage the Smart Pilot will take it, to live to fight another day. Textbook Shaw.[/I] So the opportunities for kills, and the overall frequency of fights, will decrease in general.
If there is no signifant penalty to dying, you get a lot more fights, because people are less worried (or not at all worried) about losing their "virtual plane". But, oh my god, there's more furballs.
I think the current system with Perk points, which provide a positive incentive[/I] to fight intelligently and land kills, is about the best solution for this.
It's like sex and marriage. Even though the sex may not be what we wish it to be, hey, it's still sex. And the sex that we might wish it to be probably exists only in our minds anyway.
Mobieus
-
Quote: "I just really think that this game is online quake". Not to pick on the poster, but this game is nothing like quake, or CS, or any other shooter. This game is at least two orders of magnitude more complex than any shooter-type online game. The number of variables you have to keep track of regarding your own plane (V speeds, flaps, landing gear, convergence, etc etc) plus the SA of the air environment are way beyond any of the shooters. You don't spend three hours messing with your controller mappings for Quake.
I see where you are going with this, but I tend to disagree. If you approach the game from a higher level, what you really have is a first person shooter with airplanes. That is exactly what this game is. The complexity is added with the airplanes, I agree with that, but the object is a team-based deathmatch, where if you die, you respawn immediately. Only thing that is really different, is that you have a nice little airplane to carry your boomstick-toting quake guy around in. I actually like it this way, if I wanted strategy, I would stick with an RTS.
I'm not disagreeing totally, just adding another perspective to it.
-
Originally posted by crd
Not to pick on the poster, but this game is nothing like quake, or CS, or any other shooter. This game is at least two orders of magnitude more complex than any shooter-type online game. The number of variables you have to keep track of regarding your own plane (V speeds, flaps, landing gear, convergence, etc etc) plus the SA of the air environment are way beyond any of the shooters. You don't spend three hours messing with your controller mappings for Quake.
The gameplay in AH is exactly like an FPS now. The only difference is that our guns have wings attached. The time taken to setup your controls is irrelevant, we still have team deathmatch set to a a background of aviation.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Think Kweassa's got his finger on it, personally.
I agree Urchin, Kweassa has summed it up nicely. Pity no-one else seems to see it too.
-
Originally posted by BigGun
All these ideas sound self-serving to make AH more to the ideal of your perception. I am sure there are plenty of people like it how it is.
I have limited amount of time I can fly, I definately don't want to spend it climbing to 20k...bases further apart or spending time in the tower.
The point is that there are plenty of people who liked it how it used to be as well and would like to see it somewhere between the two.
Balance grasshopper, balance.
-
I think the first thread like this started in Feburary 2000 when the game had been pay to play for 2 months, but it may have been the month befor that.
No one has come up with a way to make others play the way you want them to play. Many of the same people have been trying for 5 years now. It seems people prefer to decide how they want to play and HT makes a good living letting every one decide how they will play. The closest that he has gone is the perk system and the perk mulitplier which are pretty good game mechanics I think.
The game is indeed as good as it ever was. All we need is a sorti rate mechanic to make it perfect!
-
Originally posted by Pongo
I think the first thread like this started in Feburary 2000 when the game had been pay to play for 2 months, but it may have been the month befor that.
Hehe, been seeing posts like this since the mid '90's and days of "10,000 Dweebs" in Air Warrior. It's sorta like deja vue all over again...and again..and again......:).
BTW, anyone that thinks this game and Quake are fundmentally different....is delusional. The perceived problems being discussed here aren't game problems...they are people problems.
-
Originally posted by Blue Mako
I fly non-primetime, there's rarely more than 100 online when I am and that number gets lost in the large maps we have now.
I'm against having an enemy field within sight of a friendly one.
I am sorry but this just doesn't make sense to me.
You say there's only 100 people spread out over a big map when you fly and you want the fields FURTHER apart?
On top of that if you shoot the one guy you find you want him to wait before he can take off?
To me that's completely absurd. I just don't get it, can you explain it?
-
That extrapolation is just dumb. Did I make an absolute statment? Did I claim to pursuade everyone to play my way? Did I claim I should? Did I claim to present the magic bullet? No. I cited a contributing factor. I guess its neither 'big picture' enough of convoluted enough for to admit to.
No Murdr. This, is what you call 'dumb';
"The answer isnt changing the game, its changing the player."
The problem we're facing is the UNCHANGING player. He doesn't want any tips, any education, any training. He wants to fly, and fight (the way he likes) and there's nothing nobody's gonna say about it because it's his freedom to do so.
... and you're saying, "this can be solved if we changed the individual player"
So, how many MA 'individuals' are you planning to personally visit, if you were ever bestowed the power to change the MA as you see fit?
Some players do care. Some players dont need pursuaded, but just need directions to get where they want to go.
And you're gonna give them out?
So how do we change the arena, realistically speaking?
Every 'vet' should somehow find a guy that 'cares, but needs direction', and grab on to him in the MA and start preaching about which is the 'right' direction and which is not?
Or, start a campaign in the MA and organize a huge educational rally or something?
How are you gonna give out the directions to all of the people that need it?
--NEWSFLASH!!--
That's where 'system' kicks in Murdr.
Some players will never care. Seperating one group from the other is good for gameplay. I dont know how you could argue otherwise.
Because both groups are inside the same MA and they don't exactly run around with "I'm a caring/not caring guy" written on their foreheads.
Besides, some people care sometimes, but don't care othertimes. It's not as if they are white people and black people. People shift and change between attitudes everyday.
Whatever solution needs to be found, must effect BOTH of the ever-shifting groups on a substantial level and set a firm new standard, and must do so with great efficiencly.
Otherwise it's not gonna change anything. Just as sending preachers into the MA isn't gonna change anything.
-
Originally posted by DipStick
I am sorry but this just doesn't make sense to me.
You say there's only 100 people spread out over a big map when you fly and you want the fields FURTHER apart?
On top of that if you shoot the one guy you find you want him to wait before he can take off?
To me that's completely absurd. I just don't get it, can you explain it?
What you fail to understand is that I'm not seeking change just for my own sake. Unlike others I'm more concerned with the game as a whole, not just my own experience within it. You may find it hard to believe but I'd rather see an MA that promotes better flying as opposed to quicker fragging.
As I see the game atm, it's biased heavily toward furballing and horde-warring by having closed spaced bases and instant respawn. That is just a restatement of my first post. I'd like to see changes back to the older style MA maps that were smaller and had less bases. These maps tended to promote a different style of play that I feel is better for the majority, not the vocal minority.
Go on making personal attacks and belittling everything being said because it differs from your own opinion. Obviously this is easier for you than trying to see someone else's point of view. In the end, this attitude is what is driving people away from the game, not the attitudes of those trying to promote change...
-
Originally posted by Blue Mako
What you fail to understand is that I'm not seeking change just for my own sake. Unlike others I'm more concerned with the game as a whole, not just my own experience within it. You may find it hard to believe but I'd rather see an MA that promotes better flying as opposed to quicker fragging.
As I see the game atm, it's biased heavily toward furballing and horde-warring by having closed spaced bases and instant respawn. That is just a restatement of my first post. I'd like to see changes back to the older style MA maps that were smaller and had less bases. These maps tended to promote a different style of play that I feel is better for the majority, not the vocal minority.
Go on making personal attacks and belittling everything being said because it differs from your own opinion. Obviously this is easier for you than trying to see someone else's point of view. In the end, this attitude is what is driving people away from the game, not the attitudes of those trying to promote change...
Define "better" flying.
I believe if the 'older style' maps were "better" for the majority HT would still be using them, right?
I WAS trying to understand YOUR point of view. That is why I asked you if you could explain it to me.
-
Im not speaking in the abstract. Last week I had at least 2 hours join time with someone riding along in my fighter, that I never heard of or spoke with before I was approached for some help. During conversation they mentioned managing to land some sorties in a P51 where they could run away from trouble. This player wanted more options than that, and I tried my best to demonstrate them. Also the questions I answered (as best I could) from numerous sources in the past week are too many to count. Somehow this happens without any forehead tatoo's or trainer menu.
I dont claim to be a guru, or a preacher, but Im not too short sighted to see that it yields a better gameplay result than: "read the freaking help file","try alt-f4","go back to the ta and get some 5|
And finally you have quoted the statement you didnt like. Ill be happy to extend and clearify my remarks. Im not inherently aginst "changing the game"/"gameplay systems". In fact your "air forces" thing has some interesting points. We diverge where you pretty much say you want to mold the MA to your liking. While I am fine with cultivating a niche of gameplay that I like, and not overly concerned with what everyone else does with their freedom. Which puts me in agreement with dan/slack/guppy/corky/(whatever new alias there is this week)
-
It's not the game that needs to be fixed, it's the community.
And any attempts to limit the choices of players in game will eventually kill any game. Give the player more options, not less or restrict their options. No offense, but that Air Force idea is rather silly and would end up driving players away rather than attracting new ones or holding current players. Not all the options need to be in game.
You want something that will help impact and improve the quality of the game in AH? There is a really simple answer to that and that's a formal training program, very similiar to what AW and WB had. Give people that option and not the ad hoc system we have in place today and players will go to it. AW and WB has proved that. And it also helped build up the community and strengthen it.
As it stands, AH really doesn't have a community. Sure, we post on these message boards but that's really the extent of it. There is beginning to emerge a community made up of skinners and sound makers but apart from that, the "community" is non-existant.
Anyway, my 2 centavo's worth.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by DipStick
Define "better" flying.
I believe if the 'older style' maps were "better" for the majority HT would still be using them, right?
I WAS trying to understand YOUR point of view. That is why I asked you if you could explain it to me.
I didn't say "better flying", I meant better gameplay. The ability to perform ACM is not dictated by the map you are flying in. The choice whether or not to use ACM can be very directly influenced by the map you are in tho. I personally believe that deliberately placing fields in such a way as to lower transit times between them encourages land grabbing and point-and-click flying style. Why grab alt to attack a base or enter a furball with the intent of surviving? Easier just to stay low and die quickly porking-and-augering or plowing into a mess of cons low-E for one or two wuick kills before dieing. Why? Because you can re-up instantly and be back where you died within a minute or two. Why learn to fly smart? Why learn any ACM? You don't need to as you'll be right back where you started almost instantly.
The shift towards the larger maps has been done as a matter of necessity. However, if IRC the maps doubled in size over night. The Fester map was made with furballing in mind (as Fester is into that style of play) and it seems as if the newer maps have all gone down that route of player creation. There seems to have been little direct intervention by HT on map development recently (I may be wrong here and probably am).
For me, the change to further spaced fields probably wouldn't mean a reduction in the the frequency of finding fights as the number of possible avenues for advance are reduced. Less fields over the same front length = less options for attacking = more people at the same place, right? What I would hope it would accomplish is that people would take the trouble to try and survive a fight longer, or survive the attack on the base. No more dive-pork-auger-rinse-repeat would be a good thing. Or do people suddenly think that the suicide dweebs are a great addition to gameplay? Low altitude carpet/dive bombing by buffs is an enhancement to their gaming experience?
In all honesty Dipstick, would a pause of a minute or less between reups be so frustrating for you that you would cease to play AH? Or would you simply use the time to visit the hangar and change your loadout? Or maybe even think about your last sortie and try to work out how you could avoid dieing next time? That's what gameplay pauses mean to me in other games, would it be so terrible here?
To me, that minute pause in AH would mean the an end to endless vulching, an end to being overrun by cons you'd killed a moment before, an end to many other things I personally find irksome. I think that for others it would mean other positives too...
Anyways, at least it's good to see you're trying to understand the other side.
:cool: mako
-
what about a few perks for landing
would give the Pray and Spray a reason to land
Personally I try to land I find it satisfying to RTB in a b24 with two engines and the left gear out
:aok
-
Originally posted by Blue Mako
For me, the change to further spaced fields probably wouldn't mean a reduction in the the frequency of finding fights as the number of possible avenues for advance are reduced. Less fields over the same front length = less options for attacking = more people at the same place, right? What I would hope it would accomplish is that people would take the trouble to try and survive a fight longer, or survive the attack on the base. No more dive-pork-auger-rinse-repeat would be a good thing. Or do people suddenly think that the suicide dweebs are a great addition to gameplay? Low altitude carpet/dive bombing by buffs is an enhancement to their gaming experience?
You might not wanna believe this but there are actually two ways of looking at an issue and both can be positive. Why would a lessor number of fields change anything? You still have X number of people doing exactly what they want to do. Be it low alt carpet bombing or kamakazi bomb/augers or dogfighting. It's all good. Just because you don't wish to do that doesn't mean you can't go shoot them down. does it? And if there's 50 different fields you can take off from who cares if they happen to be hitting one with suicide attacks? I guess that begs the question..."why is one field so important to you?" Is the game gonna end because some guy decides he wants your field and goes after it? So you can think of it negatively or as a positive. I like to think of it as more targets comng into be kilt. And for me, that's a lot of fun. Maybe you don't? I guess that's why each plays the game for their own reasons. :)
In all honesty Dipstick, would a pause of a minute or less between reups be so frustrating for you that you would cease to play AH? Or would you simply use the time to visit the hangar and change your loadout? Or maybe even think about your last sortie and try to work out how you could avoid dieing next time? That's what gameplay pauses mean to me in other games, would it be so terrible here?
Please explain to me what a pause has to do with game play? Why is pausing going to change someones gameplay? If a guy has a thought in mind that he's just gotta go pork some field and has his loadout and tries and dies and if in his mind he's just gotta get up and do it again that's fine. Right?He already has what he figures is what he needs, right? You forget gaming has changed over the years (hmmm maybe not for some:)) and the Tomb Raider players that died and tried again over and over and over, ad nauseum are now playing here. That happens to be thier gameplay style. I kinda like that fact they like being targets too :).
To me, that minute pause in AH would mean the an end to endless vulching, an end to being overrun by cons you'd killed a moment before, an end to many other things I personally find irksome. I think that for others it would mean other positives too...
Perhaps Im wrong but just about the first thing I ever learned was "never take off from a capped field". Another game went so far as to give you a jeep so you could spawn on the end of the runway and look around before grabbin a plane. Maybe that old lesson has been lost to history with the new folks. Then again, as long as us old phuearts are around maybe we can pass that type of info along. In my mind a person can get vulched for only a small number a reasons; He doesn't care if he dies or not. He wants to defend his field even if he has to die doing it , over and over and over, ad naseum (aka tomb raider fans). He didn't know the field was being vulched (shame on him). He was flying and was having so much fun that he forgot to keep track of his gas and now had no choice but to try and get down on a capped field (shame on him again):).
The positive side is you plan your loadout, get up and shoot the durty bad guys who are trying to take yer field, plan your fuel load accordingly and have and out when your ready to land them kills. Darn, that can be a whole lot of fun while those other tomb raider type fans are just itching to die all over the place for you! :) I mean, what more positive thing can you ask for? It's pure heaven out there!!
________________________
Ren
The Damned
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
It's not the game that needs to be fixed, it's the community.
And any attempts to limit the choices of players in game will eventually kill any game. Give the player more options, not less or restrict their options. No offense, but that Air Force idea is rather silly and would end up driving players away rather than attracting new ones or holding current players. Not all the options need to be in game.
ack-ack
The way I feel about it (and apparently the way Mako feels about it and Kweassa) is that the more options you "give" a player, the more options that will be ignored in favor of the "easiest" option. Example, plane selection... you give a player a choice between (granted, an extreme example) an La-7 and a C-202, and he will choose the La-7 99999 times out of 100000. This is evident by looking at kill statistics built up over 4 years.
Give a player an option between a Scout and an AWP, and he will choose the AWP. Those who have played CS know why. Would CS be more fun with less AWPs and more Scouts? Who knows. I haven't even played CS in like 4 years. But back when I did play, they were almost ubiquitous on some maps after the 4th round or so. You'd have 20 guys running around and 16 AWPs.
Give a player an option between "learning some ACM" so he will eventually be more effective, or putting him in a better plane so he will immediately be more effective, and he will choose the better plane.
Give a player an option between learning how to fight, or flying in a pile of plane attacking buildings, and the MA shows which one he will take.
The "change the individual" approach is fundamentally flawed, in my opinion. It might have worked when the number of people who have enough confidence in themselves to try to engage in "fair" fights outnumbered those who didn't, but the new MA is the new MA. Bring the most '45 planes, bring the highest '45 planes. If you get shot down, reup somewhere else.
I wish the guys who are trying to "train" people the best of luck. I just don't think it'll make any difference in the end at all. For every guy that is dissatisfied with his current effectiveness in a fight, there are 3 others who know if they fly something with cannons, fly with a lot of other people, and make sure to keep away from most 'bad guys', they'll get about 2 kills for every 3 deaths.
And they are happy with it .
At most, those people just want to know how to improve their aim a little so they win their jousts more than 1/2 the time.
-
This is basically a debate between religion and sociology.
If there's a really diabolical place to live, what must you emphasize on?
a) Send a lot of missionaries, preachers, mullahs, and buddhists and teach them the art of self control, and make them think differently. Pray a lot! And it will make the community think differently.
b) Clean up the town, make some new legislations and acts, start some welfare programs, get rid of the pimps and hookers, arrest the drug lords, and send the junkies and alcoholics to a rehab program. It'd be a lot easier for the community to start thinking differently, if the material side of the issue is solved first.
I'm not saying a) is not important. The most ideal thing would be a) and b) working side by side.
But if I am given only one choice, I'd choose b) over a) anyday.
According to certain circumstances, b) may solve the problem on its own.
However, a) never, ever, solves the problem on its own. That's a sociological, historical fact.
So preach on, brothers. Maybe in a million years, the community really would one day get up from their beds and think, "hey.. I've reached the next stage of mental evolution!"
-
Well, but this is also pointless since we are all living in a town owned lock stock and barrel by someone who has a vested interest in keeping the status quo.
Kind of a fun debate though.
-
(a) Spread the fields further apart again. ...
No Thanks , the fields in most of the new maps are to far apart now !
As for deaths and delays ... No thanks, I'm one of the players that plays the game for the furballs, "runnin' flat out in a Spit 5 " down in the weeds ! some 50 percent of my deaths in game , are -self inflicted " and come from hitting trees, tool sheads and crap. To be required to sit around in a tower and wait for some dumb arsed timer to tick away.................. before I could up a new plane and get back in the fight, would really be a drag.
Regards to all .....
CHECKERS
-
Originally posted by Blue Mako
The point is that there are plenty of people who liked it how it used to be as well and would like to see it somewhere between the two.
Balance grasshopper, balance.
I have been around since only tour 9 or so. I personnally don't think the MA has changed that drastically. Not much different now than it used to be IMO. I think what changes more dramatically than the gameplay is people's perception, not the actual game.
As far as balance...there is plenty of room for different styles of flying, playing the game.
-
i agree with urchin and KW on pretty uch everything they have said but do any of u think the=e AGE difference in this game has any effect, and there such a diverse age group in the game ,ive seen 10 yr olds flying and 80 yr olds flying that has to have some over all effect on gameplay?
-
I wish the guys who are trying to "train" people the best of luck. I just don't think it'll make any difference in the end at all.
There is a bigger problem with the training system than having a system for trainees. The trainers in the TA I've found often don't know jack. I was there when an actual argument took place between a trainer and a student. Fortunately I was there from the beginning working on a POH for the 262 and 234 and saw the entire exchange.
Superduperubertrainer entered the arena with trumpets blaring and proclaiming his excellency has entered. Personally, I'd never heard of the guy. I was glad to see some folks were getting into the spirit of training, because I've found myself spending more time in the TA lately than the main becasue of burnout. Anyway, a new player who's numbername still had wet ink on it takes the guy up on his offer. After a relatively unorthodox approach to initial training, the new player winds up landing gear-up on the runway. It is an improvement over a lawn dart...sure. I just happen to be in vox range when it happens. "There you're on the ground." "Ooh your wing fell off, well YOU forgot to put the gear down." so on and so on. The new guy types back "you didn't tell me to put it down." I'm getting a pretty good giggle because this is something that would happen to any new trainer who didn't dumb-down EVERYTHING and I mean everything about what to do. (Have you seen folks ask about flaps, or shifting gears in a GV? "Use Q and W" is the only response) Well our hero starts off on a tyrade about how our number guy should be thanking him for helping him because he didn't have to. I sent him a private asking if he was really asking for thanks, to which he replied in the affirmative. I gave the schpel that as a trainer/instructor you will find it is a thankless job and your feelings come dead last in priorities when it comes to teaching someone how to fly. He seemed accepting to this and understood after we had a chance to type a bit.
It's great that experienced MA players are in the TA and offering to help. The more we can get the better in my opinion. I just think there needs to be a standardized course (Even a little webpage Q&A) for people who want to train. Obviously optional, but highly recommended for them to complete. This way there will be at least one standardized 'thing' for that instructor to fall back on when he's teaching rather than make it up. I find in the day to day world of flight instruction, I fall back on my training 90% of the time when teaching because that's all anybody has to fall back on. Teach the way you were taught and as long as you were taught properly, life is good. Also the students I'm working with don't care and don't particularly need to know every little bit of goofy trivia in my head so it's easy to keep it zipped.
During the course of this post I've had an idea. Why not make either a MS Word or .pdf checklist for trainers. Sort of like a lesson plan, except it gives things to them in the exact order they would use it on a flight.
Engine startup, basic taxiing and takeoff.
Cleaning up the airplane
Maneuvering
Landing
Once someone has figured these things out, cards for Rocketry, bombing, shooting and strafing. Carrier landings. Ect.
Would anyone like to assist in the gathering of knowledge for these? At least if you do something that you find success with, post your "tip" or rule of thumb. It would help out and I'll get to work on these and hopefully have them up in a week or two.
-
Add in some plane factories in the Ma for people to kill. Ya ya, I know - that is what TOD is gonna be about. Personally, I will try TOD, but I don't think it's gonna be all that good. I hope I'm wrong. Anyway, back to the point - if you add some factories in you'l get some high alt missions to kill them and the associated counter attacks. Some of these planes are completely different rides at 25-30K and it's an entirely different game way up there fighting off escorts and killin' buffs. I love it....against real people (not the drones that will be in TOD). Even if TOD is a hit, it would improve the MA to have this stuff.
I don't care how you play the game, do what you like. I just think plane factories would bring some really good "Hate" to the game! (to steal a line from an old AW guy)
BTW, I love furballing on the deck, but killin' a guy at 20K+ is especially satisfying - knowing he invested 10-15 minutes to get there and is pounding his fist on his desk cursing you! (that's some good Hate too)
Magoo
-
Originally posted by Pongo
I think the first thread like this started in Feburary 2000 when the game had been pay to play for 2 months, but it may have been the month befor that.
The first post whining about how others play was posted on 9/25/99--some guy suggesting rules of engagement and complaining about low-level furballs. Interestingly, the first request by a Northern European Guy for the Brewster Buffalo predates the Beta, posted on 7/26/99.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
-
Appreciate the response Mako. I can better understand your point of view now. Even though I still don't agree with it. ;)
Personally I can't see paying $40 mth for cable connection and $16 mth for AH2 to log in and spend ALOT of MY time climbing or sitting in the tower but maybe that's just me.
-
lol..I think Blue Mako..has more tiem to spen din Ah then alot of us..
1) I pay to play this game
2) I HATE Flying more then 5 mile sform my base? Why bother..i just want to fite
I dont liek wasting tiem flying throught virtual air to find a kill..farther bases?!!!,,,lololo
Tiem Delay?....that is crazy
So you cherry pick soem guy..and he ups and gets to you befor eyou grab back to yoru cherry purse perch?...hell no..thats a LIE
Gameplay is just fien..seems very stable to me..
Sounds Like you need TOD..
-
Originally posted by DipStick
Appreciate the response Mako. I can better understand your point of view now. Even though I still don't agree with it. ;)
Personally I can't see paying $40 mth for cable connection and $16 mth for AH2 to log in and spend ALOT of MY time climbing or sitting in the tower but maybe that's just me.
You pay $16? I only pay $10.
-
Just out of curiosity, after seeing Golfer's post...
How do the Trainer Corps select trainers from the players? What are the standards? And are they actually instances of people being kicked out from the Trainer Corps due to lack of competency or bad conduct?
No disrespectful intent towards the hard working Trainers, I'm just purely curious.
-
"You pay $16? I only pay $10"
rotf.
That there's Badger bait for sure. :)
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Just out of curiosity, after seeing Golfer's post...
How do the Trainer Corps select trainers from the players? What are the standards? And are they actually instances of people being kicked out from the Trainer Corps due to lack of competency or bad conduct?
No disrespectful intent towards the hard working Trainers, I'm just purely curious.
strangly enought based on thier percieved ability to be a good trainer.
I was kicked out for abusing trainees, but every single one of those boys became a top stick. If they could make it through my training they were hardend killers. But thats not what was wanted, "pump as many dweebs through as possible" was the order.
-
Originally posted by -ammo-
You pay $16? I only pay $10.
-
:)
-
1) No fear of virtual death
(2) Horde warrior mentality
Both issues have always (apart from beta time) been part of AH. Remember the Lemmings era? And no fear of virtual death is integral part of online game play. If you fiddle around on that concept you scare away customers. ;)
The real problem is making it back after 18 months absent. I've been away for 6 months and finding it hard to get back the rhythm. (especially on the SA part). Also seeing more new faces then old friends. But nevertheless I'm surprised on how many old vets still hanging around.
The only two things I see “wrong” at this moment is:
- The large fields designed for 400+ players where we have an average of maybe 200 players. (yeah I play on Euro time) and there are simply to many fields to defend with 200 or less players. I find it silly to see country players attack 1 undefended field and 2 sectors away the enemy attacking 1 of our undefended fields. It’s senseless. It's beyond gamey.
For me the whole strat is not important anymore. I concentrate on getting fighter kills now. I don't fly bombers, I don't drive GV's.
- The ridicules accuracy of the CV’s 5” AI. I stay away from CV's as much as possible as a result of it. Maybe that is the intention of HTC, I don't know. I got film where I'm flying 300 mph+ maneuvering both in altitude and direction and the fediddleing thing still hits me (almost everytime I get near a CV).
The rest is still the same to me :D
Good luck adapting Blue!!
Dutchie
-
Originally posted by DipStick
Appreciate the response Mako. I can better understand your point of view now. Even though I still don't agree with it. ;) ...
We can agree to disagree.
:cool:
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Just out of curiosity, after seeing Golfer's post...
How do the Trainer Corps select trainers from the players? What are the standards? And are they actually instances of people being kicked out from the Trainer Corps due to lack of competency or bad conduct?
No disrespectful intent towards the hard working Trainers, I'm just purely curious.
I cant comment about now, but way back when before the 1st group of trainers was picked I had a bunch of good sticks say hi...then ask me to duel (obviously we had much lower numbers)...probably fought 4 or 5 sets over a week or so before I got the word I was "in". THe original group was a real good mix (IMO). We had guys who were great at "start up" guys like me who didnt want to spend time with you (but would) till you had some basic ACM...I got alot of folks up to the point where they could reasonably defend and prosocute an attack. Then I'd hand em off to someone else for "final polishing"....of course with DMF (Levi) Citibria (fester) Nash Av8tr (all of whom were more or less regular visitors) and a bunch of others the baby seal got plenty of chances to see if it had teeth yet.
Its not an easy or "glamerous" job...my hats off to all the current trainers for sure <>
-
Originally posted by GreenCloud
lol..I think Blue Mako..has more tiem to spen din Ah then alot of us..
Nope, I'm just looking for a different gameplay experience...