Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Minotaur on February 07, 2000, 09:31:00 PM
-
HTC;
I would like you to be aware of a scenerio that happened in the arena today.
One team was getting pounded, they only had two bases left. A couple of players from the team who was getting pounded switched to the team who was doing the pounding.
Why? They did it for the sole purpose of forcing an arena reset. Let me say, this was pretty much OK in IMO. I don't find fault in them doing it and actually found it rather amusing. It is in the game, and they played the game. Enough said....
What bothered me about it, was that it was accomplished with the aid of a third person. This (I assume) was a person who normally played for the team who was doing the pounding. This player was relatively new (I assume), and had not changed teams to become part in this scheme.
Well, after the arena was reset and after the jibes and insults died down. The two players switched back to their original team. Leaving this third person, who was pretty much used as a "Patsy", to face the wrath of his/her teamates.
This players comment? "WTF did I do, I was just trying to help out" and "Sorry, but I did not know that would happen". (This was not exactly what was said, but approximates content)
I don't know if this player switched teams or logged off. I felt very badly after that. You can assume that I still do.
Mino
-
Switching sides to force a reset is lame. If you can take a base for one side, you should be able to find a way to take one for your team that's on the down side.
FWIW, the fellow that "helped" was asked several times not to do so and was explained why not. It's not like he didn't know. That said, I didn't razz him for it, maybe he didn't really understand. Although there was lots of insults slung about, very few were at that guy. The other two who switched to force a reset DID get berated and yelled at a bunch... but it goes with the territory. I'm sure they expected it. Still, recruiting other unsuspecting team-players to their cause was rather low of them, but then they kept getting killed trying to do it themselves.
I think it's a dweebish move to switch to force a reset, but it's part of the game. If you are gonna do it, just please do it yourself and don't suck any poor newbie into helping you. There are lots of really dweeby things you can do in these sims, just don't expect to do them and not get some HATE (tm) thrown at you. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Lephturn
The Flying Pigs
-
I'd like to take my time to adress this issue.
Last night was my last night in Aces High. Bishes were getting gang banged as usual, down two bases without dar. Me and another squadmate agreed that it was time to switch sides and get a reset, or else we would be gang banged without radar all night. In no way did we make an aliance with the bishes to allow this to happen, they fought us to the end. I took a bomber up and killed ack at 2, while my squadmate took the goon. Just after I had killed ack, a newbie rook player came on and asked where a goon was needed. "2" I said overt the buffer, and he was on his way. My squadmate got shot down a few times on his way, but low and behold, the newbie makes the drop, the base is captured, and the rooks go back to where they belong. No more gangbanging for the bishes! We have dar back! Yes!
What bothers me is that I was called a spy and a cheater by CaveJ and his friend Lephturn. They requested that nobody help us, told both of us bastidges to f*ck off, and broadcast over the neutral channel that we were spies. We did not cheat in any way. After the reset, they got even more billigerant to us. Childish stuff like Nobody call Mark or (squadmate's) 6 from now on! The profanity and insults continued. I was REALLY dissapointed by this childish attitude, and when I got the subscription prompt next time I logged on, I closed it and went on with life. The beating me and my squadmate took from CavemanJ and Lephturn last night was really poor, and I don't think I'm ready to be part of this community yet. I can't belive that someone can be so immature to treat someone this way, and I'm not going to take any more of it.
For all the Bishes I've flown with, I'd like to say thanks so much for the great times, and thanks Hitech for the free beta which I took part in. I hope some of my ideas lead to a better game, and best of luck to you.
Have fun guys! (Even you CaveJ and Lephturn, Lighten up a LOT!)
------------------
Mark VanZwoll
33rd Strike Group
-
LOL !
So That's where you were...
I get it now...hummmm (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/confused.gif)
------------------
Saw/Saintaw
BISHOP'S FINEST FLYING BRICK
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/funspig.jpg)
DCO 186th Wardogs (Falcon4 Squad)
http://www.wardogs.org/ (http://www.wardogs.org/)
"Firepower Mate, that is what separates the men from the boys..."
[This message has been edited by Saintaw (edited 02-08-2000).]
-
Mark,
Please don't worry about what some people have to say. They are nobody important. They were most likely upset that they could not get their easy vulch kills anymore. A major disregard there.
Any sim pilot worth their sand will do a "6" callout to any countryman, regardless!! (Unless very extreme)
I need to give you what I believe is good advice. Fly Knights! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Damn Ghostrider! This bogey is all over me!!
[This message has been edited by Swager (edited 02-08-2000).]
[This message has been edited by Swager (edited 02-08-2000).]
-
Mark,
I hope you reconsider and sign up. I've enjoyed flying with you and always respected your team approach to saving real estate when I'm on the opposite side. I also like being a part of those raids you have organized in the past!
If you do decide to sign up, I'll fly with you, and even give you 6 calls. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
Member of the Flying Elvis's...AH's most elite parachute team...
-
This was transpiring as I logged on last night and the only problem I had was that because of the 1hr rule the two guys were locked on our channel for a while and there was lots of ...Banter about the respawn. I realize that for the most part they were just responding but it would have been best to just squelch and wait till they could return to Bish land. I would do what they did. As a matter of fact I switched to knight last night to try to aggrivate bish -knight relatations a bit. Only to find out that after my hour I was locked in knight land for 12 hours!!!
man.
I found out that knights talk about wierd things on their channnel...performing oral sex on each other and stuff...we rooks normaly limit such remarks to the sheep....
But I guess it works for their team building..
------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew
-
Woah MarkVZ, I NEVER used language like that. Yes, I disagreed with what you did and let you know it, but I think the word "dweeb" was the word I used most to describe you last night. I don't think Cave was out of line asking the rest of the Rooks not to help you. Your subsequent verbal responses caused much of the resultant fracas. What started out as teasing and spreading a bit of HATE (tm) for fun turned ugly later on, but you will notice I stayed out of that.
You are right, you were not cheating. I said this last night as well and on open channel. I still think it was a very dweebish move though. You CAN do it in the current system, but if you think you can switch sides to force a reset and not take any heat for it on the radio, you are dreaming. There are a bunch of Rooks who worked at destroying infrastructure and taking bases to get in an advantageous position. When you switch sides to force a reset you make it so they can't even shoot you down in response, and that isn't the "right" way to play in my view. Do what you want, but understand that the only avenue left to show dis-approval is the radio buffer, so you will see the results there.
Now I'm not saying I have a hate on for you or anything like that. I hope you stay with the game. BUT, if you are going to do something artificial like switch sides to force a reset, expect to take some heat for it, that's all.
------------------
Lephturn
The Flying Pigs
-
I only have one question: what's wrong with resetting?
Are you saying you want to confine a country to a couple of fields? What is the point? Lord, I hope it isn't to be able to rack some easy kills! Two countries crunching one side down for continuous vultching is far more dweebish than reset IMHO.
Of course, I wasn't there, and don't know what happened (other than what is stated). I do know Mark, and find him to be a great guy (though always an opponent). I won't believe there was anything malicious about his intentions. YMMV.
-
I aggree. I like to get a vulch in too. But a 2 field cage can only be maintained by an alliance between the other two counties. That is worse if extended for more than about an hour in my opinion....
We all hate the feeling when both other counties are ignoring each other and hitting us..
We can all take it for a while cause what goes arround comes arround..
But over about an hour of it wrecks the night I think and I am not against tacktics to try to stop it. I favour the switch sides and creat animosity between the allies tactic but there is no real difference.
It was just the tone last night that got bad.
------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew
-
I did my best to leave all the names out of this disscussion. I should have known better. For those involved, please except my apologies. But, what did I expect?
I don't remember much profaninty, but the jibing and the teasing did go on for a while. But, what did you expect?
My only concern was how the game forced a frustration upon players that provoked a new strategy of game play. This time, by a team cornered with no hope of escape.
This is NOT what the designers intended I am pretty sure, but an unexpected side result. Like I said. I thought it as kind of funny at the time, until the end.
I also felt very badly for newbie player X. I wonder if that person is going "Wow", what a night on AH. Not clearly understanding what the heck happened, because "I was just playing the game?".
Mino
-
I saw what was going on and it was ridiculous. What gives someone the right to decide to keep another country down to one vultched field? What gives someone the right as some self-appointed "Lord of the Game" to tell someone he cant drop troops on a enemy field? And so what if there is a reset???
Damn this kinda crap is dissapointing. So, some new guy works hard to help capture a field. He was trying hard to do what he thought was the right thing to do, help his country secure a victory. And you know what? He was right to do it!
I went private with the guy, told him he did the right thing and he should ignore the two that were giving him a hard time. Anybody doesnt like it, offer to pay his $30 a month, if he accepts, then and maybe only then do you have a right to tell him what to do.
Time to think of the other guys playing this game on all the other countrys. You pound them down, keep them to only one heavily vultched field and they will leave the game. I dont know about anyone else, but I cant help but think this game would be mighty boring without enemy to battle with.
Dago
-
Just don't lump me into "the two that were giving him a hard time". I slung some jibes at MarkVZ and his buddy that switched sides, but I did not say anything to the other Rook fellow that helped them. It isn't that big a deal to me, and I just ignored the conversation once things got too nasty. I managed a 5 or 6 kill sortie in there somewhere, so I was a bit busy a bunch of the time. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I don't have ANY trouble with Rooks taking the last field and causing a reset. If somebody is going to do that however, I do appreciate some warning so I don't get stranded DEEP in enemy territory or on the runway as a field turns during the reset. The only thing I think is "dweeby" IMHO, is switching to the enemy team for the sole purpose of causing a reset. It's not like there were only 5 guys online... I think they could have taken back a base or two with a bit of organization instead of switching sides and forcing the reset so we don't have any way to stop them. (Some of us could have switched... but most don't want to get stuck on the wrong side of the fence afterwards.) FWIW, Cave and I were busy engaging the Knights at F8 when the Biscuits pulled his move. I was between F4 and F8 the entire time, and I know there was a bunch of Nit/Rook action along that whole front. The idea that the Nits and the Rooks ignored each other to beat on the Biscuits is just wrong. Cave and his crew put together an organized strike and pounded the Biscuits into submission, and then moved on. Why the Biscuits didn't just organize a strike of their own, I don't know.
What I can't understand is how somebody could do this and not expect to be given a hard time on the radio. I'm not shocked or even surprised that somebody did this, just surprised at the explosive reaction when they got razzed over it.
Just FYI, I was online on and off all of Monday. For most of the day the Rooks were down to only a few fields and were being beat-on by both the Biscuits and the Nits. I log on after dinner in the evening and see that CaveJ and his crew have worked their butts off and been base-taking and smashing strat. Cave planned to beat down one side, then go beat down the other for a while. When the Rooks switched to beat on somebody else, these folks could have taken some bases back with ease. But instead, they took the easy way out and switched sides to force a reset in a way that our team can't respond to. I spent the whole day flying out of F10 with both Biscuits and Nits all around, but nobody resorted to this move. I can understand them doing it out of frustration, but if they just either didn't say anything or were good-natured about the heat they took for it, there would have been no big problem.
Dago sez: "What gives someone the right to decide to keep another country down to one vultched field? What gives someone the right as some self-appointed "Lord of the Game" to tell someone he cant drop troops on a enemy field? And so what if there is a reset???"
LOL, nobody has the "right", but if ya got big guns, you have the ability. Anybody can take any field they want, I have no problem with that. It's just that the Bishies have the same weapons we have, so the way to stop it is to organize and strike back... you have the same big guns. A reset isn't a big deal... unless you were the guys that did all of that work to gain an advantageous position. In that case, you will obviously take a dim view to somebody un-doing it all by switching countries so you can't even oppose them. I'm not saying it's "wrong" to do it, it's just the dweeby way IMHO. If you do it, expect to take heat from the guys that got the advantage the hard way in the first place.
------------------
Lephturn
The Flying Pigs
-
More power to a country that can run another one off the map- that is one of the purposes of the game. And I can understand Leph's desire for a bit of a warning WRT an impending reset... it isn't fun to get caught far behind the lines low over a field at reset.
Still, I hope it never comes to the nightly routine of crushing one side down to two fields for continuous vultching. Such I believe may have been the case Saturday, with Rooks to the north and Bish to the south of F9, Knights fighting both sides from 3 remaining fields. Hard to say what the intent was for sure, but it seemed the only real attempt was to blind the Knights so the situation could be perpetuated.
What was it Curly said one time? "I'd kill them both, the one guy because he was the enemy, the other for playing with his food too long."
hehe. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Ditto what Kieren said.
As for the rest of this, I think its just another example of the problems of a 3 country arena. One country is always going to be getting gangbanged, and there isn't any real way around that. That people on the gangbanged country feel they have to change sides to force a reset is not a glorious example of how this set up works. It is a measure taken by people who aren't having fun to try to enjoy themselves. I'm still interested to see what happens when we get the free 8 person arenas. What number of people will be interested in staying in the arena while their country is getting ganbanged when they have the option of more fair 8 person dogfights? We'll see.
Later Mark, if you do indeed leave, make sure to check back in down the road.
Gordo
[This message has been edited by Lance (edited 02-08-2000).]
-
Ummm Lance..... your Solution?
2-Countrys: "UnAffiliated" pilots flock to the larger side, one side gets gangbanged.
4-Countrys: The two largest countrys each pick one of the smaller countries and ignore each other, now you have two gangbangs.
I have played 2,3, and 4 country setups, and the 3 country setup is by far the most balanced and fair.
Please somebody, Anybody, if you have an example of a 2 or 4 country setup that works better please share it with us.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
Dicta Verm: "Never give the suckers an even break!" or translated "Never engage without an advantage"
-
DoA. It is tons better with only 2 countries.
-
Kieren, out of curiostiy what is the average number of players in DoA on a typical day. If low (less than 50) then a two country war would work. Especially if the players are of a seriouse nature.
I personally would like HTC to try a two country set up for one week, maybe two, and see hwo it goes.
Forget four.
-Westy
-
DoA started out great, died down because of many reasons (don't want to start a flamewar). My memory seems to suggest we still had 50+ when two-side was implemented, but I could be wrong.
The thing about DoA that was/is great was the community. These were some of the best people I ever flew with, and would love to be there now. And yes, they were very cooperative, and we could do all sorts of fun things. We had races, aerobatics competitions, mini-scenarios... all started by player-generated suggestions. But I digress... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
The point is, would two sides work here? I think it would. Furballers will furball, bomber will bomb, and the hunters will be up there looking for the fight. The front will move back-and-forth. The only difference is that now it would be one front, not two (unless some enterprising bomber group circled behind (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)).
-
Kieren, when I played DOA (and I remember you from there) there were never more than 20 to 25 players, and yes I agree that it did work there.
The only problem is that a small group of highly dedicated players isn't representative of how a MA works and we both know that.
When the there's only 20 people you tend to know each person by name, and its easy to get people to switch for playbalance reasons.
This isn't going to happen in a full scale MA arena type, at least in my opinon.
You have to account for the dweeb factor.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
Dicta Verm: "Never give the suckers an even break!" or translated "Never engage without an advantage"
-
I think that either would be a better solution (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) As to which of the two is better, I'm still undecided. Ideally, HTC would/could have tried 2, 3 and 4 country arena setups in Beta to see what works best here. After flying under all three setups, maybe then some of the 3 country naysayers such as myself would agree with you, Vermillion.
Gordo
-
Well I can see that there is no hurry to activate my account. This kind of childish roadkill is the reason I don't fly in the WB Main arena.
I am surprised you boys were able to develop the bad habits and worse aspects of the game in such a shot period of time.
You should all be ashamed.
-
Gadfly-
I have to ask- and I know I'm supposed to ignore you- what are you hoping to do with such a post? People here are discussing the merits of such behavior. This is how a community decides what is acceptable and what isn't. You come in with an indiscriminate carpet bomb post declaring we should all feel ashamed? Why not post your viewpoint, make your reasoning, and hash it out like an adult?
I'm sure you have a lot of positive things to lend the community; why not type some of those ideas?
-
Lance, please don't take my last post as a personal assault.
Its just that for many of the people here, 2 or 4 sided combat is something they have already tried, over and over again. And the results are the same.
In fact, the guys that run HTC have either flown in, or been involved with companies that run each of the arena types.
They either played AirWarrior (classic 3 Sides), or they ran Warbirds (4 Sides, and the HA 2 Sided Arena).
Don't you think they would have tried those arena types if they weren't already familiar with the dynamics of such an arena?
I guess the reason I am so vehemently against them is that I have experienced the lopsided battles they create, to such a point that I almost quit flying.
If you think a 3 Sided fights create gangbangs, I suggest you go try to fly Gold country in Warbirds (4 country setup). Now I haven't flown there much since beta here started. But there didn't use to be a single night during primetime that either Green or Purp didn't have a greater than 2:1 odds advantage over you. And whichever one you weren't fighting, was over gangbanging Red with a 2:1 odds advantage. Oh and of course they very extremely rarely fought one another.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
Dicta Verm: "Never give the suckers an even break!" or translated "Never engage without an advantage"
-
Gadfly, what are you basing this little rant on? Where you in the arena listening to what went down?
I was, and I can tell you it wasn't 1/2 as bad as it's being made out to be. I was personally accused of saying things I did not say and insulting people I didn't insult.
Yep, things got a bit out of hand for a bit, as one can expect when people get frustrated, but nothing serious. A couple of guys did get some threats of physical violence going for a bit (I was out of the conversation LONG before that), but cooler heads eventually prevailed. When folks get frustrated they tend to yell at each other. It's nothing to be ahamed about, it's just the nature of the human beast.
------------------
Lephturn
The Flying Pigs
-
I didn't, Vermillion (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) You've got your opinion, I've got mine. We probably agree on a whole lot more than we disagree on, we just don't know it.
Granted I don't have the experience in all of the arena formats that you do. I don't think that necessarily invalidates my opinion. Consumer analogy: I own one TV, a Sony. I don't know if Sanyo, or RCA or Curtis Mathis is better. Even so, I know my TV, and I know when its picture is screwed and when its time to start looking for a new one.
I don't like the idea of changing sides. I like flying with the people I've grown accustomed to seeing on the Bishops side. Unfortunately, quite a few of them bail from the arena or switch sides when we get gangbanged, and I am afraid this is going to get worse. I also tend to think the problems with the other arena setups that you outlined are not as bad or less apt to occur than what is a constant problem in the current arena. That problem is that at any moment of the day, one country is getting the crap kicked out of them by two countries.
Beyond all of that, there are plenty of people around here who have posted against 3 sides that played WB, AW or both. It might be a good idea if HTC put up a site poll for debated issues like this and take into account the results when/if they ever sit down to review some of the current game elements.
Gordo
-
Kieren- You are correct, but it just chaps me to see something like this this quick, although I guess it shouldn't be a surprise, since most of the persons here are WB MA flyers. So, here is my reasoning:
First, to rag on someone for switching sides is silly. If HTC did not want that feature, they would limit side switching.
Second, to rag a newbie for anything is not the way to garner new members.
Third, to intentionally not win the war and vultch the last base or two is plain old chickenshit.
Childish behavior ruins the game for all of us, be it cursing on 100, whining incessantly or whatever.
-
Gadfly,
First, HTC does limit side switching. Once you switch you must wait a 1/2 hour or something before you can switch back. That is done to discourage just this sort of behavior. I guess they need to bump it to 24hrs or something like AW uses.
Second, who ragged a newbie? I know that was claimed, but I certainly didn't rag any newbie out. If somebody else did, I missed it. I know Cave was trying to explain to somebody why he was pissed at MarkVZ and his buddy, but that's about it. I didn't here one curse or disparaging remark to or about the newbie in question. It's possible I missed some stuff because I was fighting the Nits at F8 at the time, but this "newbie" (if that is the case at all) certainly didn't get "jumped on" or ragged on by bunch of people. I would have noticed that. It didn't happen. FWIW, I agree, beating on newbies is not a good move. I tend to answer newbie's questions online when I can and help them out to help grow the community.
Third, are we only supposed to beat-down one country before forcing a reset? So if you are a buff crew and you want to dominate the arena, wouldn't you want to take out one country, and then the second before forcing the reset? What's wrong with that? The idea that two sides "ganged up" to hold the bishies to two fields so they could vulch them is just plane false. It's not what happened.
------------------
Lephturn
The Flying Pigs
-
Gadfly-
Now I understand, and I agree! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
The obvious need, is for some sort of reward/recognition for a country to "win the war".
Currently you work you butt off, to take bases and get an advantage, then you win the war and ...... you lose all your hard work.
Maybe something as simple as a stat on the scoring page of "War Wins" thru the tour.
Or there has been talk of "nuetral" bases (heavily defended with ack both high and low level I hope) in the central mountains on the current map. Maybe if you win the war, you get random ownership, of one out of three bases.
Anything to give a team the incentive to go ahead and force the reset.
Right now, realistically why would a country want to give up its hard earned gains?
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
Dicta Verm: "Never give the suckers an even break!" or translated "Never engage without an advantage"
-
The obvious need, is for some sort of reward/recognition for a country to "win the war".
Need to be careful here....depending upon how it was implemented this could just exacerbate the problem. If the "winner" is the country to make the field capture that triggers the reset, once a country is down to 2 or 3 bases it becomes a "race" for the other countries to be the one that triggers it.
This MIGHT work if, on the other hand, the country that "wins" is the one with the most fields captured at the time. In this way, if one country is seriously dominating the two others, it gives the other two reason to attack it.
-Ding
-
I could only go with what was in the posts, since I wasn't there, but realize that it doesn't take much to demoralize a throughly confused newbie.
The best solution for bombers is to hit the strategic targets and deny the enemy resources, not bases.
-
Verm and Dingy I think this is a good idea.
How about a banner on the HTC page with the running country "War Wins" tally? I like Dingy's idea of the country with the most fields being the winner, that evens the thing up.
This would provide some public glory to reward those players who worked their butts off to capture bases. I like it! Good to see some positive ideas coming out of this thread. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Lephturn
The Flying Pigs
-
Good thinking. I like both of those ideas. Bragging rights for a country is always good incentive, some sort of lasting bonus after the reset is as well (whether it is in the form of additional bases on the map or something else). And as Dingy noted, it should be awarded to whatever country has the most bases active upon reset.
Gordo
-
Untill an HA arena is implemented, The main will be used for whatever an individual decides to do.
If I choose to bounce between sides, I will do so. Same goes for vulching, shooting at bailed pilots, and all other dweebishness.
HTC has enabled, or allowed, certain features for use in the arena. Ragging someone out for using such features has gotta be one of the most ignorant attitudes a person can take. What gives anyone the right, to tell a person what they should be doing in an unstructured and open arena.
Some may call it "Gaming the Game", but is this not what it is? a game?
I really believe that some are taking themselves too seriously, and attach too much importance to how they feel the game MUST be played.
Ping (who himself is tired of being told how to play the game.)
-
I like that idea Lance.
I was mentioning how cool it would be to have a base in the center of the mountain area among the hills. Wouldn't it be cool if the side that "won the war" got control of this single base at the reset?
It may not be reasonable to do, but it's an interesting idea.
------------------
Lephturn
The Flying Pigs
-
Hi markVZ,
hope u do the 180° move and come back soon to AH. It's just a game and i know u as a pretty nice member of AH . Loved all your deepstrikes in enemy teritory and your calls for the 47....
In the night we're talking about i remember that i personally disliked ure move to rooksside (and i feld pretty good while blasting ure 26 out of the skies over f2),but i respected it as one way to play the game.
Don't think 2 much about a few people who attacked u way 2 harsh, there a lot of others who allways like 2 fly with u :-)
blitz out
-
Yep, the base in the center of the map would be real snifty. It'd set up all sorts of nice king of the hill battles. But I can't take credit for it going to whoever won the war, Vermillion was the first to suggest that.
Gordo
-
Just like to add myself to the list saying Mark please don't go. I've always noticed you up there flying Bishops trying to gain fields and get some strategic operations going. It always helps to have someone organizing the troops as long as they aren't to insistent about it. It's also good if it can be different people on different nights. I've always thought you were a great teammate to have and have tried to help in the cause when you were trying to organize things by defending bases. I know sometimes people get pretty steamed up in the arena enough to make you wonder how they could be so immature at their age. It is only a game after all (oops sorry, I'll take that back before I get flamed (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)). I find it's best just to shrug things off when people get this way and not take it personally. It's really more their problem than yours. They apparently have some issues if they can get upset about a simple game (oops, sorry again (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)). The squelch command works very well too. You can please some of the people some of the time... I'll be glad to fly with you any day bud.
To Lephturn and the others I mean no insult. I wasn't there and don't know what happened. Apparently it was enough to upset Mark quite a bit though. To CaveJ, I don't know what part you had in this but if you were ragging on Mark excessively then I am dissappointed in you because I know you know how it feels and I stood up for you on that occasion, and I know your a good guy most of the time(I'll fly with you any day as well, and I'll definetly look you up if I'm ever in your neck of the woods. Btw you still haven't come over for some fighter pointers).
In any case I think we all need to learn how to shake things off and act like grownups around here. Name calling and excessive arguing are definetly uncool. Please stick around Mark, in the world of AH you are an officer and a gentleman.
-
I can say that I was perilously close to switching sides to cause a reset last night-
We were having people logging on for the Scenario. Only problem was, Rooks owned 2/3's of the map. No way a Scenario can happen that way.
I had been on earlier in the day, and Knights had 3 fields and 6 flyers, agains 16 Rooks and 16 Bishops. You can guess what was happening. I had to leave, but announced on open I hoped the Rooks would have the class to reset, as Knights had no numbers to defend. The response? "We might, or we might just hold it like this for a week."
Now, I could care less about the "then", because I had my mind on the "later". When I logged in later to see the situation still the same, well... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif) I could see we weren't going to get to start the Scenario on time, if at all. Yes, I was about to switch sides to help effect what apparently was not going to happen, and would have if necessary.
Lord, I hate the 3-side map. As a result, I won't think twice about switching sides to end a farce dominance by the large side wanting to rule the world. The only other option would be to log in disgust. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
The shame of the current set-up is that what could have been a much better Scenario was disrupted negatively for the Allies. Yes, the LW did very well, but I have to wonder what might have happened had we grabbed a bit more alt first? Had the LW not had the headstart due to our delay? Had there not already been "shadows" lurking in our territory even before we were airborne?
All because we want to "own the map".
[This message has been edited by Kieren (edited 02-11-2000).]
-
Kieren I remember telling you that we were tryin to push the reset for the scenario last night, and it wasn't a maybe we will, maybe we won't either statement. Those started when the nits decided they wanted to fight and not let us push the reset. We started going for the reset around 7-7.30pm est last night, and dinnae get it until about 9pm est.
-
Cave-
I haven't mentioned any names, nor will I. The events I described occurred over the course of the day, with my request to the Rooks to reset coming at 5:45 PM. That is when I received the "maybe we will, maybe we won't". When I came back at 8:30, it was an obvious "won't". Rooks owned at least 2/3 to 3/4 of the map by then. Seems like a reset could have been effected by then, certainly, if that had been the goal.
The original post in this thread discusses the virtues of switching sides to get a reset. Yesterday, to me anyway, displays a perfect reason to do so. It also showed me once again why 3-side is bad. That 16 pilots can dominate the arena against 6-8 defenders is no surprise; spread all 16 guys to different fields and you will mathematically have to take fields in 2-3 quick trips. Tell me how I might be wrong there?
To be fair, the Bishops were taking fields too. Still, it is obvious there wasn't as much a push to end it as to see how many fields could be acquired. Even that I don't mind, but an event that was scheduled for a week was marred. That does bother me.
We need an HA, or we need a 2-side war. Otherwise any future player-generated event is in danger of being upset.
Cave, you have an event set for next Sunday. How are you going to feel if the Rooks own 3 fields at the start? How successful a bomber raid do you think you'll stage? What if the enemies are on you before you get any alt? You may or may not mind, but I'll tell you this; your formation will never reach the target if that happens.
I don't wish that on you. I will fly bombers with you, escort, whatever, because I want these events to succeed. I want people who work hard to set them up have a fair chance of pulling it off.
Understand, my argument isn't against winning the war, ganging up on the weak side, any of that. It's that desire to grind the other sides down and hold them there at the expense of all else that I dislike. And, under the current arena, it is an all too simple thing to accomplish.
-
Originally posted by Lephturn:
Switching sides to force a reset is lame. If you can take a base for one side, you should be able to find a way to take one for your team that's on the down side.
:O I am disappointed in you Laphturn. If I didn't know better, I'd swear you been once too many times around the track. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
I support what Mino did 105%! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) Why? Because there was danged little cooperation on the Bish side at the time. Who wants to cooperate when the only fields they have are all pounded and vulchfeasts abound for the enemy? That's also why I am against three sided wars. Too danged easy for the other two ta gang up and rape the third.
Now I said my piece, where's my payolla, Mino? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
------------------
O.E. 'Tern' Dillon
"Live to Fly! Fly to Fight! Fight to Live!"
-
Originally posted by Kieren:
Cave-
I haven't mentioned any names, nor will I. The events I described occurred over the course of the day, with my request to the Rooks to reset coming at 5:45 PM. That is when I received the "maybe we will, maybe we won't". When I came back at 8:30, it was an obvious "won't". Rooks owned at least 2/3 to 3/4 of the map by then. Seems like a reset could have been effected by then, certainly, if that had been the goal.
As I said, we started pushing for the reset around 7.30est, so the arena would be fresh for the event. There were a few knights who put up a resistence were prepared for, because we thought just about everyone would welcome a reset, especially with the planned event. We finally got it with Cobra practically screaming on the world channel for the knights at 24 to let us have it so the map would reset.
Cave, you have an event set for next Sunday. How are you going to feel if the Rooks own 3 fields at the start? How successful a bomber raid do you think you'll stage? What if the enemies are on you before you get any alt? You may or may not mind, but I'll tell you this; your formation will never reach the target if that happens.
I wouldna be very happy, but I damn sure wouldna be launching to try and stop either the bishops or knights from reseting the arena. I sit in the tower nice and warm and tell all other rooks to let them capture the field and reset the arena.
-
Cave, let's end this.
I never intended this to be a personal attack on anyone, and if you have interpreted it that way, I'm sorry.
I am discussing what I perceive to be a problem with the current set-up. Like it or not, in the above situation let's consider a few "what if's":
What if, as I hypothesized, the Rooks get closed to 3 fields just prior to your event? You say you'll wait for a reset. What if the opposing team has no intention of resetting? You'll be cooling your heels a long time as people pop in and ask "when's the scenario start?" over-and-over. Now, will you change sides to get the reset yourself? If so, you are stuck because of the 12-hour limit. Your other choice is to try to quickly take a couple fields so you Scenario might be able to launch. At least this way you get to lead your formation and help with the coordination as you had planned all week. What if guys who cleared their schedule for a short time for your Scenario have to Alt-F4 10 minutes into the mission because their time is up, due to the delayed start? What if the whole business upset the timetable to the point that your mission is a fiasco from the beginning?
Bear in mind this is not merely hypothesis, but in large part precisely what occurred. If you say that the Rooks were trying for a reset, I have to take your word for it. It sure didn't appear that way from my side.
Again, back to Minotaur's original point. Is it dishonorable to change sides to cause reset? Absolutely not. Do I think the 3-sided war is a bad idea? Yes. Do I wish we had an HA? Absolutely. Do I blame this whole situation on you? No way. Don't read it that way. But surely you can see the truth in what I am saying.
Again, I hope like heck your event goes better than Rojo/Cobra's, because it ruins the fun for a lot of people. It will be much harder to get buff pilots next time, because not many will be willing to be such easy pickings. I'm sorry too that your group didn't cross over and help bomb, as we could have used you. Again, country loyalty/desires take precedence over the event (this from one of your squaddie's remarks on the BBS). Without cooperation these events are doomed to failure, and people will stop trying to set them up. Then we all lose. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)