Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: TequilaChaser on February 03, 2008, 07:48:08 AM
-
I tryed to do a search for anything in regards to this subject.but after being in Aces High since there was what 5 to 8 planes total when I 1st played it in 99?( memory is that bad really ).....I know one thing to be certian..Aces High, like Warbirds, like Air Warrior, like Fighter Ace or any other flight sim...still has its seperated groups within the overall community............and always will have this type of seperation on what people want.......
It would be nice to see HTC come up with a plan to provide a few more opportunitys similar to the following:
- A less intense realism Arena, where it is easier than we currently have, where new flyers or players just wanting a "game", and want to play without going thru an intense learning curve
- A more intense Full Tilt realism Arena, where it is even more advanced than we currently have, where only the truely dedicated to learn the most come to, and try to excel or improve their abilitys
- Seperated Theatre of Operations: European theatre ( no pacific plane sets perhaps )
- Pacific theatre of Operations - improve the design of maps/terrains to include more naval battles and island hoping campaigns
- Axis vs Allied Arena -(we already have this, and AvsA staff have strived to make it better, hope they succeed )
- a true FighterTown Arena ( both arcade type & Advanced/entensed Ful Realism Arenas )
- do away with the DA, or improve on it / or pick some public Arena Police, toinsure quality fights
- The SEA and the TA do not need any major improvements, they serve their purpose greatly
we have Skinners, Terrain/map builders, Scenario designers, movie / art makers, historians, you name it, their are many individual groups of people within Aces High.........I truely believe Aces High would accel even more if they were to offer such arenas for the player base, and people here would enjoy the game that much more........with the divided arenas, people would not have the trouble of trying to get in to certian arenas as well during peak times. I know ( least I think I do, that HTC might look at it as dividing the community, but I look at it as offering each player type more opportunities or avenues of game play, the only dividing would be of the way people want to play, but as a Community as a whole, we all would still be the Aces high Community, we would just have small little townships within - wait : Aces High as a "City" with individual small little community or townships )
we already have a few of these already - we have AvsA arena, we have Early war arena, Midwar Arena, LAteWar arena, and KOTH........and snapshots, the AHERL (racing ), we have FSO and we have scenarios........
this approach would just take it to a higher level and offer more to everyone......
~SALUTE~
-
I don't think this would help that much. You would split the arena population more than it is now. You'd end up with small groups milkrunning bases all the time, and everyone complaining about not having any one to fight.
-
Dang TC..
You on some strong meds or what?
-
Originally posted by The Fugitive
I don't think this would help that much. You would split the arena population more than it is now. You'd end up with small groups milkrunning bases all the time, and everyone complaining about not having any one to fight.
Actually, I think it's a good idea. if done over time as part of an overhauling plan.
we have a large community right now, It's already split into smaller groups, we only hear from the ones that use the boards, which is a group in and of itself. The BBS group may be a small percentage of the whole and may reflect a sample opinion of the entire community. But I don't think it does accurately as for the most part I see the same voices I have seen here since I started playing. And the population has grown alot.
i think more options is the way to go, in time you will see how things shake out and arenas can be changed agian, groups will form, unform, and change, change isn't bad, the lack of change is what causes problems.
Just my .02 Don
And don't forget about "CT" which will be out in 2 weeks:D
-
Out of the five regular combat arenas only LW arena gets decent numbers.
To subdivide further wouldn't do any good.
When Combat Tour goes live. Forget it. Even the LW arena will suffer population loss.
Subdivide the subscribers down to 800 different style arenas with one person in each. Where will you be then? Shadow boxing?
-
Originally posted by Blooz
Out of the five regular combat arenas only LW arena gets decent numbers.
To subdivide further wouldn't do any good.
When Combat Tour goes live. Forget it. Even the LW arena will suffer population loss.
Subdivide the subscribers down to 800 different style arenas with one person in each. Where will you be then? Shadow boxing?
you not thinking with open mind, Blooz
we have more than just "800" subscribers, we are well over 6,000+
when CT goes live, I doubt the hit will be of any large size, CT from my understanding is for a different type of player, this game has many who come here, find the learning curve "TOO HARD" and never stay any length of time....
some people who played in them other sims, never stuck around for Aces High, this would offer them an opportunity to possibly come back......
you would also, perhaps, see less whines.....
I never said 800 seperate arenas I said offer more opportunities of differing gameplay...and simply gave a few examples of what might could be done......
geez, some of you are so NEGATIVE.......
but we all are intitled to our own thoughts and opinions
~SALUTE~
( I got your PM, Don, will shoot you an email soonas possible )
-
In AW we had something like this. We had a relaxed realism Europe and Pacific arenas. Then u also had the Full Realism Pacific and europe arenas. We also had a WW1 era along with a Korean arenas. Still think that was the best setup of all the Flight Sims I have played online.
-
My one curiousity would be to see the numbers if there was one arena labeled "Air Combat", where ACM would be the focus, and another labeled "Campaign", or something similar that made it clear the emphasis was on land grab and base capture.
I wonder what the split would be like?
While I agree that there are small groups of people within the game with like interests, the main groups seem to involve either the ACM crowd or the Land Grab crowd, with the corresponding friction being between the two over which is the 'better' style.
-
I don't know, it's got some merits. I don't think it would be all that great without robust plane sets, which won't happen while they're still dicking with CT, but it could work, I think.
Does anyone think the overall situation with the community is much better than it was 2 years ago? I don't, and I don't see the harm in trying some new ideas. It seems that a lot of people aren't going to remain enthusiastic about a game that never changes, while the NBT remains in development indefinitely.
The new customers, for the most part, don't seem to be hardcore simgeeks from AW and WB anymore- they're a bunch of kids who have grown to expect change, expansion, and new titles coming out constantly. They're not going to stick around here for years like the rest of us. Something's got to keep them coming in, and it's not going to be a complete and total lack of updates or expansions, or a refusal to impliment new ideas and concepts. That may have worked in the past, but I don't think that's going to let them compete with the MMRPGs and console games anymore.
-
In AW, we had Europe planesets and Pacific planesets for that specific arena. IE. Pacific arena had only Pacific era planes used in that area in WWII and same goes for Europe based plaesets in Europe arena.
O and we didn't have near the planesets we have here so I think it would be much better represented now more then in AW.
-
Funny how the notion that if an arena has low numbers then it isn't working.
Some peoples trash is others treasure.
-
I'd really like to see HTC take something like the early war arena. Do something totally different with it for a tour or 2. Just to see what would happen.
Could be a early/mid war setup with Raf/USA planes enabled for one country, Axis rides for a 2nd, and Russian planes for the 3rd country.
Could be a short icon range no field capture close fields dogfighting arena for a tour or 2.
Or heaven forbid, give us a Bombers heaven for a tour, with limited bases for fighters to go hunting, lots & lots bomber bases, and targets to work over.
A couple of hours to pick a terrain, setup planes and options available, just might rejuvenate a lot of guys to fly again. To explore new options, new techniques.
Anyone ever really considered what it would take to set up a primo GV only arena? No planes allowed? Or perhaps no bombers/ord available?
So planes would take a back seat to GV vs GV action?
Something perhaps a bit more long term than the AvA, perhaps not quite as hard realism, settings wise.
And TC made some very good points also.
What would it really cost?
-
Originally posted by AKDogg
In AW we had something like this. We had a relaxed realism Europe and Pacific arenas. Then u also had the Full Realism Pacific and europe arenas. We also had a WW1 era along with a Korean arenas. Still think that was the best setup of all the Flight Sims I have played online.
The trouble with relaxed realism was when you went to full realism you kept stalling and crashing. After several times you got frustrated and just stayed in the relaxed arena. At least I did. Therefore, I would not want to see a "Relaxed Aces High Arena". A person can spend some time in the TA if he/she so desires. If they elect to jump into a combat arena, can't fly their aircraft, and get creamed it was their choice. Mario Brothers version is not needed.
-
How about an arena to experiment with different ideas like these, europe, pacific, limited plane sets, two countrys, it could be used as a test bed for ideas B4 they go to MA's.
as far as arenas go, id like to see these,
WWI
early
mid
late
europe
pacific
and maybe korea, altho jets don't float my boat. SE,AVA, DA, and TA maybe even a ground war arena. And as I have said alot of late, H2H with high enough of a player limit to accomidate two squads. i think there are plenty of good ideas out there, i like the late war arenas, but i think an unlimited plane set is what draws the dweebie behavior.
Just my .02
-
Originally posted by yanksfan
How about an arena to experiment with different ideas like these, europe, pacific, limited plane sets, two countrys, it could be used as a test bed for ideas B4 they go to MA's.
as far as arenas go, id like to see these,
WWI
early
mid
late
europe
pacific
and maybe korea, altho jets don't float my boat. SE,AVA, DA, and TA maybe even a ground war arena. And as I have said alot of late, H2H with high enough of a player limit to accomidate two squads. i think there are plenty of good ideas out there, i like the late war arenas, but i think an unlimited plane set is what draws the dweebie behavior.
Just my .02
WWI...
FFFFFFFK YEAH W00000000T
Bi-planes would be the shyte!!
Sowrdfish here I come :D
-
I truly doubt splitting arenas further would improve anything. Already now a lot of people put aside their most favored setups and instead choose those where most players can be found. This occurs especially outside of the US prime time.
I'd much rather see EW and MW combined into one arena in order to achieve more decent numbers at all times.
In any case, various kinds of play can co-exist at same arena. That makes it slightly different every night. Otherwise it would soon become the same old same old.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
My one curiousity would be to see the numbers if there was one arena labeled "Air Combat", where ACM would be the focus, and another labeled "Campaign", or something similar that made it clear the emphasis was on land grab and base capture.
I wonder what the split would be like?
While I agree that there are small groups of people within the game with like interests, the main groups seem to involve either the ACM crowd or the Land Grab crowd, with the corresponding friction being between the two over which is the 'better' style.
I'm curious to see that too, Dan. I first went into the AvA to try the new setup, not knowing what it's about, and found out that it was popular, and getting some people in there, even in primetime. But the way the scenario's set up in there, the novel thing about it is the different way the war is fought. The strat system has become more important, with bombing of strat's now set up as a point system per side. It's really a lot more novel, requiring more from each side than a simple NOE sneak mission, or a huge, unstoppable horde.
_____________________________ ___________________________
I don't know, it's got some merits. I don't think it would be all that great without robust plane sets, which won't happen while they're still dicking with CT, but it could work, I think.
Does anyone think the overall situation with the community is much better than it was 2 years ago? I don't, and I don't see the harm in trying some new ideas. It seems that a lot of people aren't going to remain enthusiastic about a game that never changes, while the NBT remains in development indefinitely.
The new customers, for the most part, don't seem to be hardcore simgeeks from AW and WB anymore- they're a bunch of kids who have grown to expect change, expansion, and new titles coming out constantly. They're not going to stick around here for years like the rest of us. Something's got to keep them coming in, and it's not going to be a complete and total lack of updates or expansions, or a refusal to impliment new ideas and concepts. That may have worked in the past, but I don't think that's going to let them compete with the MMRPGs and console games anymore.
_____________________________ ___________________________
I really couldn't agree more, Hubs. It is a new Generation. I wonder how long these guys' stay active in flight sims.
Plus, I also agree that we need to fill the planeset. The EW, MW, and LW split is a good idea, except that only the LW has a sufficient planeset-and that, by also including the EW and MW set's in them. MW has some variety, but it could use a little more fleshing out. The real deficient one in AH, in my opinion, is the EW. There were many A/C flying in the 1939-late '41 to early '42 period than what we have in the game now. And many are planes' that CAN be found in other sims, Like Targetware, or IL-2. We have alot of the most important rides, to be sure, but not even all of those.
There's still plenty that can be done with AH, to be sure. Not even counting CT, We could simply wait on new A/C for quite a while.
-
Originally posted by yanksfan
How about an arena to experiment with different ideas like these, europe, pacific, limited plane sets, two countrys, it could be used as a test bed for ideas B4 they go to MA's.
as far as arenas go, id like to see these,
WWI
early
mid
late
europe
pacific
and maybe korea, altho jets don't float my boat. SE,AVA, DA, and TA maybe even a ground war arena. And as I have said alot of late, H2H with high enough of a player limit to accomidate two squads. i think there are plenty of good ideas out there, i like the late war arenas, but i think an unlimited plane set is what draws the dweebie behavior.
Just my .02
That would be an idea, Yanks, but like myself and others' have stated, We don't really have the planes' for it.
I would not mind a WWI or a Korean arena myself. That might be quite a bit of fun. But we just have too incomplete a planeset for it.
Personally, if HTC came out tomorrow and announced that he was canning CT, that it was just going to be wrote off, in order to work on research for FM's and other coading for the game, He would recieve all my support. I origanally came here to fly this, not against some kind of AI, or for a little rank button next to my name.
-
I think an Additional "Fuller Realism" arena would work in drawing a reasonably sized contingent.
I do not believe that ACM only arenas will work they do not now via the duelling arena or indeed in such areas as "fighter towns". Of course they have their exponents but they cannot maintain sufficient numbers we see this because they (in practice) do not do so.
However we see now that there are such "auto" functions that may be turned off to make to make stuff a little more realistic.
No more auto take off, level, speed, angle. No more auto combat trim. No auto flaps.
Further there are a range of arena settings that could be set for greater realism.
A fuller realism terrain would have other considerations.
Some examples
More troops to capture
1:1 scale
Then additionally some game variations may be added.
Some examples
No icon ranges
No rearm pads
Engine damage with prolonged over temp running.
No snap POV
No F3 views
Basically a more challenging environment for us to play in.
-
1:1 terrain and no more auto level, so that you can't go AFK while you travel 30mins to the combat zone?
Truly a "challenge" but hardly a game worth playing.
Same for no icons - unless you want to simulate a basically blind WWII pilot.
;)
-
Originally posted by TequilaChaser
I tryed to do a search for anything in regards to this subject.but after being in Aces High since there was what 5 to 8 planes total when I 1st played it in 99?( memory is that bad really ).....I know one thing to be certian..Aces High, like Warbirds, like Air Warrior, like Fighter Ace or any other flight sim...still has its seperated groups within the overall community............and always will have this type of seperation on what people want.......
It would be nice to see HTC come up with a plan to provide a few more opportunitys similar to the following:
- A less intense realism Arena, where it is easier than we currently have, where new flyers or players just wanting a "game", and want to play without going thru an intense learning curve
- A more intense Full Tilt realism Arena, where it is even more advanced than we currently have, where only the truely dedicated to learn the most come to, and try to excel or improve their abilitys
- Seperated Theatre of Operations: European theatre ( no pacific plane sets perhaps )
- Pacific theatre of Operations - improve the design of maps/terrains to include more naval battles and island hoping campaigns
- Axis vs Allied Arena -(we already have this, and AvsA staff have strived to make it better, hope they succeed )
- a true FighterTown Arena ( both arcade type & Advanced/entensed Ful Realism Arenas )
- do away with the DA, or improve on it / or pick some public Arena Police, toinsure quality fights
- The SEA and the TA do not need any major improvements, they serve their purpose greatly
we have Skinners, Terrain/map builders, Scenario designers, movie / art makers, historians, you name it, their are many individual groups of people within Aces High.........I truely believe Aces High would accel even more if they were to offer such arenas for the player base, and people here would enjoy the game that much more........with the divided arenas, people would not have the trouble of trying to get in to certian arenas as well during peak times. I know ( least I think I do, that HTC might look at it as dividing the community, but I look at it as offering each player type more opportunities or avenues of game play, the only dividing would be of the way people want to play, but as a Community as a whole, we all would still be the Aces high Community, we would just have small little townships within - wait : Aces High as a "City" with individual small little community or townships )
we already have a few of these already - we have AvsA arena, we have Early war arena, Midwar Arena, LAteWar arena, and KOTH........and snapshots, the AHERL (racing ), we have FSO and we have scenarios........
this approach would just take it to a higher level and offer more to everyone......
~SALUTE~ [/B]
i like the idea of splitting tha europena and pacific arenas............other than that.......on the surface, a relaxed realism arena(like AW used to have)
is a good idea...but then ya get pilots in there that eventually come to the full realism arenas, and pretty much have to start all over again....so that may not be too good of an idea......the da......well..it's a good source of amusement on 200..and some do manage to find good duals in there.......
just my 2 cents......
<>
-
I really liked the AvA first round. The bases were close together. No town to destroy. To caputure only required ack down at the airbase. Troops were dropped at the airbase.
Overall the map was rather small compared to the MA maps. This made it much easier to get into a fight. No ords were required to make a capture....only shooting the ack down. IT was constan dog fighting fun.
To me this setup is perfect for a "fighter" ACM map. You still need a strategic component or it's just a furball. And that is what taking the bases did. It allows dogfighting but still has some overall strategy by taking enemy air bases to deny them access to other areas.
To win you take all the bases or perhaps something like 80% of them. I don't see any need for a map to go on for days to make a win. When one side wins the map just resets and we go at it again. It would be nice to have several if not many of these "small" maps. Se each new round is different.
With an arena like this we get to do primarily dog fighting and still have missions with some strategy involved. We have base defense and base taking. But it is based on an "air superiority" strategy vs a land grab.
Currently the DA furball area is serving the pure dog fight group but it is being ruined by MA style of play were no one respects a 1 v1 no matter how many players are there. Or they just want to fly 190's - Typh's and pick the gangbang on the deck. Or fly around looking for a 1v1 or 1v2 and then drop in and pick them while they are engaged. IT's just not that fun in there anymore.
But having dog fighting "areana" where some stragegic play is required by taking only airbases would do very nicely I think. Again, it should be designed for a quick win.
Perhaps a "Flag capture" type of map would be really fun. Much like you have in the first person shooter games. It would require one side to move there flag across the map by taking airbases. Once they reach the other sides HQ or perhaps called the "flag base" that side would win and the map resets. Each side moves thier flag toward the others flag base. To bump an enemy flag back, the other side takes the base with the enemys flag. Then the enemys flag goes back to the base it came from.
So the object here is defend the flag carrying plane and escort it along. Can you imagine the intense dog fighting and strategy play this kind of areana would make? Man oh Man.....finding the flag plane...defending it against enemy fighters...figuring out where their flag plane is...reacting to a fluid constant type of strategy play based on pure dog fighting skills. You know this would be great fun.
I can see the posts now...."we already have that now in the MA". No we don't. The MA is "Major offensive" map involving GV's, bombers, and hundreds of bases.
I am suggesting a "dog fighting" style of play using a single strategic objective as motivation to "win" as a country. Too add something other than "individual fighter score". And to make this happen faster. One should get to play 5 , 6 or more maps in a few hours in this kind of arena.
What do you think?
-
2 Open plane set arenas undermine all the other arenas, and the idea of smaller 'neighborhoods' plain and simple. People will go where all the choices are. Been saying that for over a year...
Originally posted by Murdr 12-14-2006
Im begining to wonder if leaving the orange and blue effectively as the old MA might need to go by the wayside. As long as there are multiple open plane sets, I dont think people will settle on a favorite, instead they will jump in the one with either the most people, or the most squadies. If LW options were instead (pto/eto, or pto/westrnfront/eastern front) there would at least be a reason to think before trying to cram into the fullest arena. Would be nice if the arenas would become 'neighborhoods' with regulars in it rather than 2 MA's where the only preference is who and how many are in which one tonight.
Just thinking out loud and remembering the flavor of the old AW ETO1, ETO2, and BIGPAC arenas...Dont mind me.
-
I think thru all of this a few of the things you have to keep in mind, as far as a "Good Fight" goes are:
What does the virtual pilot have to loose or gain?
There is nothing at risk here, certainly not your life, like a real fighter pilot, the craft you fly is replaceable and in limitless supply, there is no penalty for looseing a fight. No risk no reward. No guts no glory.
So making an arena "lifelike" is not possible. Realistic, is a mind set. I am a big beleiver in"you begin to get what you expect".
This game is a mindset the attitudes we display as indivduals become the overideing group dynamic, the "community" is such that the "Banter" on 200 is the risk and reward, as well as the BBs, positive and negative feedback is the reward for our actions in the game, so as the attitude of the community disintagrates so does game play.
Good news, the opposite is also true, Good will and kind words, or at least respectful words will go a long way to undermind dweeberie, the problem comes from getting a buy in from the mass's, when the attitude changes to the positive so will the game play.
So long as the cry's of dweeb this and tard that go on, The game will be played to accumulate points and kills by any means nessasary rather then actually learning the art of the fight.
This kinda rambled on a bit, but i think you get my point.:D
-
Yanks ive got to teach you to be more terse with your typing :)
#S#
Banshee7 :aok
-
I want an arena with a large open field, covered in flowers big enough so as to enable us to all park our flower covered VW buses and sing revolution and peace songs.
:rolleyes:
-
I wasn't there, so I can't say from first hand, but I seem to remember being told that Wild Bill's insistence on relaxing the realism was big part of why HT and Pyro split off and started their own company. Way back when I was a new guy, I did email HT about this and that with one of the concerns being just how stinkin steep the learning curve was -- and revealingly, HT answered that with a very definite, very clear "there will be no compromising the flight model."
So I just don't see relaxed realism happening.
-
As I remember from AW's relaxed realism arena there were very few people flying in that arena. Usually people would fly there when they first came on but within a week or so they were in the main areas.
-
Originally posted by Vipper65
As I remember from AW's relaxed realism arena there were very few people flying in that arena. Usually people would fly there when they first came on but within a week or so they were in the main areas.
You're thinking of the new players arena, I believe. The RR arenas were overflowing.
I stepped into RR perhaps twice over my five years in AW. While most of us FR people expected to find that RR was populated by masses of low-brow maladroits, it turned out that it was just an entirely different game, flown in an entirely different way. (The RR-to-FR cross-overs expected to find a bunch of stuck-up ninnies, and were also surprised.) The only mutual contact the two groups had was on the BBS, and generally those discussions were marked by "we're better than you" attitudes. FR and RR remained mildly hostile to each other always.
So: Count me in the column voting against different levels of flight model.
- oldman
-
Originally posted by Oldman731
You're thinking of the new players arena, I believe. The RR arenas were overflowing.
I stepped into RR perhaps twice over my five years in AW. While most of us FR people expected to find that RR was populated by masses of low-brow maladroits, it turned out that it was just an entirely different game, flown in an entirely different way. (The RR-to-FR cross-overs expected to find a bunch of stuck-up ninnies, and were also surprised.) The only mutual contact the two groups had was on the BBS, and generally those discussions were marked by "we're better than you" attitudes. FR and RR remained mildly hostile to each other always.
So: Count me in the column voting against different levels of flight model.
- oldman
I stand........errrrr sit corrected. I was thinking of the new players arena.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
I wasn't there, so I can't say from first hand, but I seem to remember being told that Wild Bill's insistence on relaxing the realism was big part of why HT and Pyro split off and started their own company. Way back when I was a new guy, I did email HT about this and that with one of the concerns being just how stinkin steep the learning curve was -- and revealingly, HT answered that with a very definite, very clear "there will be no compromising the flight model."
So I just don't see relaxed realism happening.
What you mention was one of the symptoms of the problem. HT has been consistent in his refusal to consider a relaxed realism product in the past. However, at this point in time, it just might be something that he might consider revisiting. The worst thing that could happen is that he would tell you, "NO!! YOU ARE A handsomehunk!!!!".....no...wait...that's what he would tell me. :)
-
Instead of a relaxed arena, I'd rather see a training arena that the new people would have to pass certain criteria before they could move on to the Mains.
Successfully pilot their craft through an obstacle course ( both a plane and a GV), level bomb a target with at least 50% damage on a run, dive bomb a target with a single hit, go to a "radio room" and tune a system channel to send a "coded message". It doesn't have to be brain surgery, but at least cover the basics enough that when they hit the Mains they have a general idea of how to get around.
-
...not a bad idea - Americas Army has required training to play online, and further training required to play as elite forces (its not easy either.) I always liked that idea, and it tends to weed out the RTFM questions as you have to read it to pass training.
-
Have to ask though --
Under the current system, people are FREE to play the way they like. There is absolutely nothing stopping a squad from being "LW Orange Only," or from doing anything else that folks have talked about here. However, they have generally chosen NOT to do those things, in droves.
Are these proposals just sophisticated variants of "play the way I think you should?" (Not trying to be a jerk, just being devil's advocate.)
-
Originally posted by Simaril
There is absolutely nothing stopping a squad from being "LW Orange Only,"
Really? Not even a "Late War Orange Arena: 190/120" ? ;)
-
Oops, got me. :lol Keep forgetting how different things can be for you off peak folks.