Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Bender on February 22, 2013, 09:41:53 PM
-
I am not a regular poster to this board nor one to just troll to cause strife, but something should be done to fix the side numbers during the North American evenings. All week long the Rook and Knight numbers are super high compared to the Bishop ones. Example I logged in tonight at 10pm EST, the Rooks were at 186, the Knights at 158, and the Bishops at 114. I don't have any answers on how to fix this or why it happens, all I know is that I just looked at it and logged off. I know some are saying I am just whining as I am a Bish, and I should be glad for more targets but it is just too too much, everywhere you go it is just a gangb@#$. Has anything ever been tried to balance sides out? Why are the sides so unbalanced? Just saying I like the game a lot but this just takes the wind out of my sails.
-
I would switch to the low side almost every time. The 12hour side switch rule however, stops me most all of the time.
-
I would switch to the low side almost every time. The 12hour side switch rule however, stops me most all of the time.
Same here. But to be far, this wouldn't have a very large effect, as the majority of players are pretty much 'country' / team loyal.
To the OP: Beyond ENY, which is more than a handicap than something that is going to get players actually switch sides we had at one time an arena entrance restriction - if your team had numbers, you had to wait at the door for some time or switch to the underdog for immediate access.
This test, however, wasn't really successful.
-
I am not a regular poster to this board nor one to just troll to cause strife, but something should be done to fix the side numbers during the North American evenings. All week long the Rook and Knight numbers are super high compared to the Bishop ones. Example I logged in tonight at 10pm EST, the Rooks were at 186, the Knights at 158, and the Bishops at 114. I don't have any answers on how to fix this or why it happens, all I know is that I just looked at it and logged off. I know some are saying I am just whining as I am a Bish, and I should be glad for more targets but it is just too too much, everywhere you go it is just a gangb@#$. Has anything ever been tried to balance sides out? Why are the sides so unbalanced? Just saying I like the game a lot but this just takes the wind out of my sails.
It's not so much the number imbalance, but how those numbers are used. If the numbers were spread out along the fronts then everyone could have some fun. Sure bases would be taken and the front would move, but everyone would be involved and have a chance to play.
I'd like to see some way to restrict the hordes either by making it counter productive to fly in one, and adjust game mechanics so that they couldn't be put together at all. I have always said that before long people are going to log in and do just what you did, just log back off. Do that enough times and you start thinking about saving your $15 a month instead of spending it to log on and right back off.
-
part of me feels bad for you. bc its not fun for you. the other part of me doesnt and thinks the bish are gettin what they deserve. do you log off when the bishop have way more people? seems odd to hear a bishop complaining about a fairness type deal. nothing personal, honest opinion.
-
I would switch to the low side almost every time. The 12hour side switch rule however, stops me most all of the time.
Spy.
:noid
-
part of me feels bad for you. bc its not fun for you. the other part of me doesnt and thinks the bish are gettin what they deserve. do you log off when the bishop have way more people? seems odd to hear a bishop complaining about a fairness type deal. nothing personal, honest opinion.
No I don't log off when the Bish have more people. I am a shift worker so I get every other week to play during the day and for some reason the Bish have a few more on during the day, not the extreme numbers of the night but an advantage none the less. I am not criticizing the players on the bigger side, just the system of making the game even and fun for all. I realize a lot of people, including myself belong to a squad and actually enjoy the freinds they play with. Just hoping that someone had some good ideas to fix this and make it enjoyable for all.
-
I am not a regular poster to this board nor one to just troll to cause strife, but something should be done to fix the side numbers during the North American evenings. All week long the Rook and Knight numbers are super high compared to the Bishop ones. Example I logged in tonight at 10pm EST, the Rooks were at 186, the Knights at 158, and the Bishops at 114.
Apparently most bish have an 8pm bedtime.
check back in the morning after Barney, and before naptime, when the bish are rolling the map with a 30+ player advantage.
-
No I don't log off when the Bish have more people. I am a shift worker so I get every other week to play during the day and for some reason the Bish have a few more on during the day, not the extreme numbers of the night but an advantage none the less. I am not criticizing the players on the bigger side, just the system of making the game even and fun for all. I realize a lot of people, including myself belong to a squad and actually enjoy the freinds they play with.
that would be THEIR reasoning also..
so you have to deal with it..
I play during prime time, and prefer to play for the low # side so I am bish, have been ever since I noticed the discrepancy. If i played more during the day I'd have a problem because of the 12 hour rule..
-
No I don't log off when the Bish have more people. I am a shift worker so I get every other week to play during the day and for some reason the Bish have a few more on during the day, not the extreme numbers of the night but an advantage none the less. I am not criticizing the players on the bigger side, just the system of making the game even and fun for all. I realize a lot of people, including myself belong to a squad and actually enjoy the freinds they play with. Just hoping that someone had some good ideas to fix this and make it enjoyable for all.
So your saying the balance issue isn't a problem when your side has more players, but it IS a problem if your side doesn't.
You do realize that when your side has a numbers advantage that the other side DOESN'T right?
-
So your saying the balance issue isn't a problem when your side has more players, but it IS a problem if your side doesn't.
You do realize that when your side has a numbers advantage that the other side DOESN'T right?
No No, I am not saying that it is right when the Bish have an advantage. I stated that every other week I mostly play during the day and Bish usually have the numbers then. That doesn't make it right, it isn't fair to just run over bases, and gang up on single players. I was only asking if there was or has been a solution to the side balancing. You misconstrued what I was saying. Just wondering if anyone had some good ideas to make the game a little better that's all. Not trolling or whining, life is too short for that nonsense.
-
part of me feels bad for you. bc its not fun for you. the other part of me doesnt and thinks the bish are gettin what they deserve. do you log off when the bishop have way more people? seems odd to hear a bishop complaining about a fairness type deal. nothing personal, honest opinion.
Amen.
Unlike those who suggest they are better because they change sides and everyone else who doesn't like to are inferior, perhaps people don't like the people or atmosphere of different sides. Can't play with the people I want to fly with, I log off and do something else. No side loyalty, friendship loyalty. Please don't start in on that sanctimonious crud anymore, it has been beaten into atoms already.
-
I get the chance to fly day or night at times, recently both. Yep, bish overmanned in the morning and undermanned at night. However I can still find the fights I like. I look for red dar higher thamn green, its not hard to do. The best is complaints about bish being stupid high numbers and I still get mega ganged just because I find high red more fun than high green. But every now and again the rare ma 1v1 comes along and reminds me why I like the game and that I still only play for me and how I choose to no matter who has the gang/horde/pick/bnz needs of their own.
-
No I don't log off when the Bish have more people. I am a shift worker so I get every other week to play during the day and for some reason the Bish have a few more on during the day, not the extreme numbers of the night but an advantage none the less. I am not criticizing the players on the bigger side, just the system of making the game even and fun for all. I realize a lot of people, including myself belong to a squad and actually enjoy the freinds they play with. Just hoping that someone had some good ideas to fix this and make it enjoyable for all.
There is no way to fix it. It is what it is and you just pick how you deal with it. Everybody's pet solution is tailored to their preferences and doesn't work for the entire community.
-
I am not a regular poster to this board nor one to just troll to cause strife, but something should be done to fix the side numbers during the North American evenings. All week long the Rook and Knight numbers are super high compared to the Bishop ones. Example I logged in tonight at 10pm EST, the Rooks were at 186, the Knights at 158, and the Bishops at 114. I don't have any answers on how to fix this or why it happens, all I know is that I just looked at it and logged off. I know some are saying I am just whining as I am a Bish, and I should be glad for more targets but it is just too too much, everywhere you go it is just a gangb@#$. Has anything ever been tried to balance sides out? Why are the sides so unbalanced? Just saying I like the game a lot but this just takes the wind out of my sails.
What's weird, is me and my friends log on and if the side we're on has very low numbers, we're happy as hell. If my side has high numbers, I switch. If the side we're on has low numbers, then it means there are enough red guys for all of us. :aok
-
reduce the 12 hour rule to the 4 hour rule :old:
-
I understand that the imbalance is not easy, or perhaps even possible, to fix, but does anyone have any good theories as to why it occurs? While I've seen all different balances, the most likely for North American evening hours seems to be many Rooks, slightly fewer Knights, and way fewer Bishops. The imbalance goes way beyond what one would expect on random statistical grounds. I'm curious as to why it happens.
-
I'd like to see some way to restrict the hordes either by making it counter productive to fly in one, and adjust game mechanics so that they couldn't be put together at all. I
No, no, no. A thousand times no.
A "horde" is just a tactic. Use tactics to counter it. Put up some fighter sweeps to attack the horde before they hit the base. I have been in what you would call a "horde" when it was counterattacked by a "horde" of defenders. It made for a fun and massive furball. I have also been on the other side, flying with a bunch of defenders to break up an attacking horde. Good times... good times.
-
Bender.
Nice post sir, well thought out and respectful. I feel ya buddy. I too like it the most when sides are relatively even.
For awhile, I hopped from one chess piece to another because if I have a choice I would rather be on the outnumbered side. I settled with Knights and hardly switch anymore. If I do switch, it's to fly with friends. I ended up with Knights because after paying attention I noticed that the hours I fly, Knights are outnumbered most of the time.
Still, sometimes, I am flying against odds that are difficult to manage, or with odds that is difficult to find a fight that isn't me joining in a gangbang.
If I had the option of flying against 2 to 1 odds or with, I would certainly choose against. When overwhelming odds do occur , then I study the map a bit closer. Most of the time there is always a bit of space that will appeal to me and I'll go there. I am however, infinitely patient and don't mind just flying around sometimes waiting for reasonable situations to develop. With practice and study I think you may find that you can anticipate these type of interactions and be in the right place at the right time.
You were mostly lamenting upon being outnumbered, do what I do it it helps, climb higher......... :) :salute
-
I am not a regular poster to this board nor one to just troll to cause strife, but something should be done to fix the side numbers during the North American evenings. All week long the Rook and Knight numbers are super high compared to the Bishop ones. Example I logged in tonight at 10pm EST, the Rooks were at 186, the Knights at 158, and the Bishops at 114. I don't have any answers on how to fix this or why it happens, all I know is that I just looked at it and logged off. I know some are saying I am just whining as I am a Bish, and I should be glad for more targets but it is just too too much, everywhere you go it is just a gangb@#$. Has anything ever been tried to balance sides out? Why are the sides so unbalanced? Just saying I like the game a lot but this just takes the wind out of my sails.
First, balanced sides doesnt mean more fun. Being on the side with the low numbers, means more fun, sometimes.
Second, those player counts you mentioned mean little to nothing. If you switched to the highest population country, you could just as easily find that most of the team are sitting in tanks spawn camping, afk or doing something that you don't care to participate in anyway. I've done it and been stuck waiting to be allowed to switch sides again. It sucks.
I personally don't care how the numbers are spread as long as there are fights, but I do think that this game would be more fun if the only way to get into the air was when auto launched sorties of say 20 planes per side happened every 4 minutes directly across from an enemy field where they launched 20.
I would also like to take this opportunity to say I'm proud of my little girl Fugitima, she is finally looking for suggestions instead of just complaining. They grow up so fast. :cry
-
First, balanced sides doesnt mean more fun. Being on the side with the low numbers, means more fun, sometimes.
Second, those player counts you mentioned mean little to nothing. If you switched to the highest population country, you could just as easily find that most of the team are sitting in tanks spawn camping, afk or doing something that you don't care to participate in anyway. I've done it and been stuck waiting to be allowed to switch sides again. It sucks.
I personally don't care how the numbers are spread as long as there are fights, but I do think that this game would be more fun if the only way to get into the air was when auto launched sorties of say 20 planes per side happened every 4 minutes directly across from an enemy field where they launched 20.
I would also like to take this opportunity to say I'm proud of my little girl Fugitima, she is finally looking for suggestions instead of just complaining. They grow up so fast. :cry
and once you get a new paper route and can pony up the money for a subscription, maybe I'll take you off the "ignore" list. Hopefully by then your opinions might become relevant.
No, no, no. A thousand times no.
A "horde" is just a tactic. Use tactics to counter it. Put up some fighter sweeps to attack the horde before they hit the base. I have been in what you would call a "horde" when it was counterattacked by a "horde" of defenders. It made for a fun and massive furball. I have also been on the other side, flying with a bunch of defenders to break up an attacking horde. Good times... good times.
There is no counter to the horde. I don't know about everyone else, but personally I don't have time to just cruise around either killing ords or troops at enemy bases, nor do I have time to cruise around and look for a 25 vs 1.
-
There is no counter to the horde. I don't know about everyone else, but personally I don't have time to just cruise around either killing ords or troops at enemy bases, nor do I have time to cruise around and look for a 25 vs 1.
Fug, you're right, it is difficult if not impossible to counter the horde when you are grossly outnumbered. I am not therefore trying to win aginst that horde, I am just trying to kill a few of them which is very likely, Yeah alot of the time it isn't much of a fight but that's also true throughout the MA no matter the odds.
If I kill 4 or 5 guys and then RTB and land them but they still get the base I consider it a personal win. Off I go to defend the next base and then the next untill the map is lost and off I go to defend a new base on the new map.
"Off I go into the wild blue yonder.....flying high, into the sky....."
-
It's not so much the number imbalance, but how those numbers are used. If the numbers were spread out along the fronts then everyone could have some fun. Sure bases would be taken and the front would move, but everyone would be involved and have a chance to play.
I'd like to see some way to restrict the hordes either by making it counter productive to fly in one, and adjust game mechanics so that they couldn't be put together at all. I have always said that before long people are going to log in and do just what you did, just log back off. Do that enough times and you start thinking about saving your $15 a month instead of spending it to log on and right back off.
I've been saying the same thing for years.
The easy solution would be to limit the number of planes that can originate from any single base at a given time. This would add some realism to the game as no air field has the resources to support an unlimited number of aircraft IRL in either fuel nor ordinance.
It would also add to the challenge and realistically so of mission planning requiring more thought and coordination. You would still have horded bases. but they would take longer to develop and coordinate.
It would also spread the mob.
Course if I had my way I would limit the amount or type of ordinance and possibly even aircraft you could take from specific sized fields. This would add a bit more strategical thinking to the game. No doing it this way made sense when one team could be reduced to one or two bases. But thats no longer a reason now as the map is reset well before it reaches that point
-
you guys ever notice how most players on fly against the horde and not with it?
semp
-
IMO, what needs to happen:
Change the available fuel % based on porking. Reduce minimum to 50%. If necessary, back it down to 25%.
Implement sector ENY. Dictates radar visibility. If more than X players enter the same sector, darbar and dot dar alts are lowered to 0ft. No more stealth hordes.
Change arena ENY kick-in levels. Should follow a parabolic curve to be more lenient at low numbers, and so strict at higher numbers that some people will actually feel sorry for the horde.
-
:noid
-
Side balancing was appalling when implemented last time :old:
If you think there are too many swap over to the other side, its your choice don't force it on me :old:
You will forcing me to have facebook next and Itunes :old:
-
reduce the 12 hour rule to the 4 hour rule :old:
Thats complete nonsense Dolby and you know it :old:
-
It's not non-sense.... 4 hours would only fair.
-
Gibberish!
-
IMO, what needs to happen:
Change the available fuel % based on porking. Reduce minimum to 50%. If necessary, back it down to 25%.
No, it was terrible when they could do this The side with the numbers would have pork team kamakasi fuel at all the front line base and then you spent half the night running supplies to only see them knock it back down before you were finished. And with 2x burn on it would be ridiculous.
Implement sector ENY. Dictates radar visibility. If more than X players enter the same sector, darbar and dot dar alts are lowered to 0ft. No more stealth hordes.
I like this, it follows with my "make it counter productive to horde" ideas.
Change arena ENY kick-in levels. Should follow a parabolic curve to be more lenient at low numbers, and so strict at higher numbers that some people will actually feel sorry for the horde.
I think the low number ENY is ok and it should get more restrictive as the total population goes up. So yes use the curve, but don't ease up on it, make it more punishing. I want to see the horde forced to fly P40s, 109E4's and stukas.
-
Gibberish!
I see your Gibberish and call Tommy Rot!
-
Yes they are all cads and scoundrels :rofl
and wrong uns to suggest such idiotic complaints :old:
Lets have capped arenas whereby you cannot get into to fly with your squad while we are at it :old:
These people have short memories :rofl
-
No, it was terrible when they could do this The side with the numbers would have pork team kamakasi fuel at all the front line base and then you spent half the night running supplies to only see them knock it back down before you were finished. And with 2x burn on it would be ridiculous.
any ideas how to limit offensive capacity of the horde through player action? I'd rather have a way to let the players make an impact.
I think the low number ENY is ok and it should get more restrictive as the total population goes up. So yes use the curve, but don't ease up on it, make it more punishing. I want to see the horde forced to fly P40s, 109E4's and stukas.
I don't know. Especially in the EW and MW arenas, a few people can greatly affect ENY. Not fair to have a group of 4 forced to fly ENY 40 because one side only has 2 people on.
But at higher numbers, I agree. If there isn't at least one "BS, I'm canceling my account!" thread, and no fewer than 3 tards crying in their basement, its not strict enough.
-
Yes they are all cads and scoundrels :rofl
and wrong uns to suggest such idiotic complaints :old:
Lets have capped arenas whereby you cannot get into to fly with your squad while we are at it :old:
These people have short memories :rofl
Not sure who you're responding to, but I don't recall anyone saying anything about capping the arena. That was a failed experiment and capping bases is NOTHING like it.
You'd still be in the same arena with your squad. If part of your squad is at a base that is maxed out, and you ask them to join you at another base where you can fly together, if they say yes then you have a good squad. If they say no, perhaps they're trying to tell you something.
-
Not sure who you're responding to, but I don't recall anyone saying anything about capping the arena. That was a failed experiment
I think HTC will disagree ;)
Of course, that doesn't mean that I liked it.... :old:
-
I think HTC will disagree ;)
Of course, that doesn't mean that I liked it.... :old:
Then why did they change back?
If you're going to repeat the excuse that was used at the time, don't bother.
The arena splitting ended shortly after I played last. The MA population was usually somewhere between 5 and 6 hundred at peak times. And that was the best it got on a regular basis that I recall around that time. Most of the day it was 400 or less. Yet they still split the arena into groups as small as 100/100.
Anywhere between 100/100 and 200/200 was the norm and it didn't exceed this average until peak hours.
The point is, I am willing to bet that the peak now is probably around 400 judging by a few hints I've seen that the population has declined, yet you don't have a split arena. Why is that? Why was it necessary to split anything over 200 before, yet it's not now?
-
any ideas how to limit offensive capacity of the horde through player action? I'd rather have a way to let the players make an impact.
Oh the players could fix this with ease. If the "leaders" of these missions spread them out it would take care of the issue. The problem is they believe the "win/capture" is the be all and end all of a mission. Most look at the numbers available and say "I can't lose with twice as many people in the mission than I need!". The challenge, the fight, the team work needed to compensate for lower numbers just don't figure in.
-
Then why did they change back?
If you're going to repeat the excuse that was used at the time, don't bother.
Sorry that I will still bother. :)
The players numbers to sustain the split went down. And this is not a result of the split either, as after the Arena Split was implemented in late 2006, the player numbers actually soared to reach their all time high in 2008. Only 2 years later the numbers dropped down significantly and AH went back to single LW arena in 2011.
-
Oh the players could fix this with ease. If the "leaders" of these missions spread them out it would take care of the issue. The problem is they believe the "win/capture" is the be all and end all of a mission. Most look at the numbers available and say "I can't lose with twice as many people in the mission than I need!". The challenge, the fight, the team work needed to compensate for lower numbers just don't figure in.
Yes, this is the best description of the problem out there. Let us keep our laser-like focus on changing the mentality of 2000 people, without changing the rules of the game.
-
they will never do anything to limit the offensive capacity of the horde :old:
most people that play AH care only about 'winning the war', and would say that winning by overwhelming your opponents with numerical superiority is both a perfectly valid and a perfectly realistic tactic
Fugitive you always talk about the number of customers that HTC would lose if the game was made to look better and therefore required a better computer to run - do you not think that HTC would lose just as many, if not more, if they suddenly made it much more difficult/impossible for the hundreds of really bad players to achieve anything by taking away the offensive capacity of the horde? ;o
-
The players numbers to sustain the split went down.
As I said, and since you didn't refute my guess about the current average, the numbers didn't change that much. It may have been a big hit to the company, but as far as the arenas go, not a huge change. They don't split up 400 people now, yet they did during the split. I'm not going to spell it out any further.
And this is not a result of the split either, as after the Arena Split was implemented in late 2006, the player numbers actually soared to reach their all time high in 2008. Only 2 years later the numbers dropped down significantly and AH went back to single LW arena in 2011.
I never assumed it was because of the split. Unlike SOME people, I don't associate a massive success to one single event without enough evidence to support that conclusion. If I were to do that, I would have to assume that the drop in numbers was due to going back to single MA.
horse hockey.
Sorry that I will still bother. :)
Don't be. Just thought I'd save you the trouble. :D
-
As I said, and since you didn't refute my guess about the current average, the numbers didn't change that much. It may have been a big hit to the company, but as far as the arenas go, not a huge change. They don't split up 400 people now, yet they did during the split. I'm not going to spell it out any further.
You might unferestimate how much more players we did have online for about 1.5 to 2 years after the Arena Split.
After the split we had 800+ online in both LW arenas at the peak for quite some time. I rember that quite well (and made a few notes, as you might expect from me ;) ) That's about 400 per arena, as we have now.
(I also remember HT stating on the BBS that 'last night' there had been more than 1000 players online. I might be able to dig that up again)
As much as I hated (and still do) the Arena Caps, after the arenas split AH saw the fastest grow ever in it's history.
If I were to do that, I would have to assume that the drop in numbers was due to going back to single MA.
As far as I can see, the numbers are relatively stable since going to single LW
-
Oh the players could fix this with ease. If the "leaders" of these missions spread them out it would take care of the issue. The problem is they believe the "win/capture" is the be all and end all of a mission. Most look at the numbers available and say "I can't lose with twice as many people in the mission than I need!". The challenge, the fight, the team work needed to compensate for lower numbers just don't figure in.
No, I meant players as in the defenders. Any way you can think of to give them a chance at stopping the horde, or at least slowing it down?
-
You might unferestimate how much more players we did have online for about 1.5 to 2 years after the Arena Split.
After the split we had 800+ online in both LW arenas at the peak for quite some time. I rember that quite well (and made a few notes, as you might expect from me ;) ) That's about 400 per arena, as we have now.
(I also remember HT stating on the BBS that 'last night' there had been more than 1000 players online. I might be able to dig that up again)
As far as I can see, the numbers are relatively stable since going to single LW
I'm not underestimating anything, although I never saw 1600 on as it sounds like you're suggesting. That would be cool to see, but I was comparing current average (400?) to the average at the time I left (500-600).
And one more time, someone apparently believes they can attribute the huge increase to the split arenas. I am falling all over myself trying to understand why a number junky like you buys into that.
Common sense would suggest that they split the arena's in the first place because the population was ALREADY GROWING and leading to what I am told were "cesspool" conditions which of course you don't have now that numbers are low. :rolleyes:
MAYBE the huge growth in the game reflected the lightning like advancements and plummeting PC prices during the decade. I'll put my money on this as being the reason.
MAYBE the cesspool conditions that were attributed to too large of a population were actually just the result of a sudden expansion and the "self policing" that is such a biblical principle around here, didn't have time to compensate before a kneejerk fix was applied.
MAYBE if the real problems with the game were addressed that massive influx of people would still be around. For example, the fact that two weeks is insufficient for anyone but the hardest core, ww2 aviation junkies. Or the failed efforts to police the group. etc, etc.
-
I'm not underestimating anything, although I never saw 1600 on as it sounds like you're suggesting.
No, I'm not. ;)
-
No, I'm not. ;)
Then, I do remember just a couple of occasions seeing over 700 on. I was thrilled at the thought of all the fights to be had. Which is why the split disgusted me so much.
-
Common sense would suggest that they split the arena's in the first place because the population was ALREADY GROWING and leading to what I am told were "cesspool" conditions which of course you don't have now that numbers are low. :rolleyes:p. etc, etc.
Well, the "cesspool" claim was always made by players, I never saw any such being made by HTC.
And yes, numbers were growing before the split, but after the split this growth rapidly increased. That's what I saw (and still can see) from the numbers available. And only because of that I have no reason fundamentally doubt HTC's statement that after the split the share of players actually subscribing after their two weeks went up significantly. The numbers do nothing but support it.
And when you change one element (Arena setup) and suddenly have a higher rate of trials willing to start paying, it seems to be a success. No matter how much it sucked to me individually ;)
Rember, I fought against the caps as long as they were there. Towards the end of the original 2 LW setup, I canceled my account because I could not longer justify paying to stand in front LWO 150/100 LWB 20/150 at my own prime time.
-
Well, the "cesspool" claim was always made by players, I never saw any such being made by HTC.
And yes, numbers were growing before the split, but after the split this growth rapidly increased. That's what I saw (and still can see) from the numbers available. And only because of that I have no reason fundamentally doubt HTC's statement that after the split the share of players actually subscribing after their two weeks went up significantly. The numbers do nothing but support it.
And when you change one element (Arena setup) and suddenly have a higher rate of trials willing to start paying, it seems to be a success. No matter how much it sucked to me individually ;)
Rember, I fought against the caps as long as they were there. Towards the end of the original 2 LW setup, I canceled my account because I could not longer justify paying to stand in front LWO 150/100 LWB 20/150 at my own prime time.
I was making a general comment, not pointing fingers or questioning your stance. You already stated that you were not in support of them. I'm questioning how you can say that the numbers support the assumption that the split had anything to do with the growth. Without question they do not. They had a ONE TIME increase in subscriptions that coincided with split arenas and you agreed they were already growing. That is called coincidence until proven again and again.
People weren't joining in droves when the pre growth averages were in the 500 hundred range, how can you say the split was driving growth when the peak during the split was 500/500 or more? It makes no sense.
PC ownership and high speed internet sales hit a gold strike proportion during those years. Don't you think that is the most likely the cause of such an incredible jump?
-
People weren't joining in droves when the pre growth averages were in the 500 hundred range, how can you say the split was driving growth when the peak during the split was 500/500 or more? It makes no sense.
I read that several times, but still don't understand what you are saying. :(
PC ownership and high speed internet sales hit a gold strike proportion during those years. Don't you think that is the most likely the cause of such an incredible jump?
Of course I think there are many more reasons to it. As well as reasons for the decline.
My main point was not that the Arena Split was a golden thing. I was basically arguing (and may have failed to point that out in my later posts) that it was not a "failed" experiment in HT's eyes. After the split happened numbers went up faster and reach an all time high, and only several years after it the numbers fell off.
That doesn't prove the amount of positive impact on AH (from a strict HTC point of view), but IMHO it shows that it was not a "fail" in that regard and had no direct negative effect (again on the game as general, not for every player individually)
-
Too many people in one arena makes it very hard for new players to join the community. The text buffer flows so fast and is so cluttered that, even without pranks and insults, it becomes a serious barrier to participation and hence an issue to player retention.
That would be my guess at least.
-
Two many players make it hard for new players?
The game is hard to pick up for the first time what ever the arena settings are.
The Horde is nothing, move to another base and don't participate in dealing with them.
Losing a base is nothing, If Jokers Jokers come in at 21k in P51s I come in at 25k in my Typhoon and have a awesome time trying to find Joker :)
I have a star now so i am fantastic :old:
-
I read that several times, but still don't understand what you are saying. :(
Of course I think there are many more reasons to it. As well as reasons for the decline.
My main point was not that the Arena Split was a golden thing. I was basically arguing (and may have failed to point that out in my later posts) that it was not a "failed" experiment in HT's eyes. After the split happened numbers went up faster and reach an all time high, and only several years after it the numbers fell off.
That doesn't prove the amount of positive impact on AH (from a strict HTC point of view), but IMHO it shows that it was not a "fail" in that regard and had no direct negative effect (again on the game as general, not for every player individually)
But it did have a direct negative effect. Some of us missed out on several good years of playing in a 1000 player arena! :furious Not to mention the ridiculous arena changes and all of the other complaints I know you remember.
You pointed it out just fine and I already knew Ht's take on it.
This is a dead horse and I am only stating it this last time to perhaps clarify.
Pre growth during 2003/4?
MA peak = 500 +/-
Growth starts prior to split and is ongoing.
MA peak = 800? +/-
Split occurs while Hitech is standing next to his tv antenna. Nielson ratings hit the roof and subscriptions increase.
MA peak = 500/500 +/-
Why didn't they split into three arenas if the split had such a dramatic effect then they would have had more growth right?
-
I have been a paying subcriber under various game IDs since July of '07 and I very well remember a 20-30 min wait to get in either LWA a few years ago. Sometimes only to be booted after being in-flight for about 10-15 min due to excessive #s. Then maybe hit the TA or the DA for a bit til I could hopefully get in to the arena my squaddies were in. Now a pilot can fly LWA any time day or night, no problem. As far as "cess pool", that claim has been made, in my experience, mostly by those with little to no ACM and no desire to get w/ a trainer so they get PO'd and quit. :salute
-
Too many people in one arena makes it very hard for new players to join the community. The text buffer flows so fast and is so cluttered that, even without pranks and insults, it becomes a serious barrier to participation and hence an issue to player retention.
That would be my guess at least.
Then they could have split the communications up instead of the people :rolleyes:
As often happens, there is no use some idiots stinking up 200 when they are on complete opposites of the map. 200 could have been divided up in more manageable zones like range is.
-
Then they could have split the communications up instead of the people :rolleyes:
As often happens, there is no use some idiots stinking up 200 when they are on complete opposites of the map. 200 could have been divided up in more manageable zones like range is.
There are reasons for the global communication though.
-
But it did have a direct negative effect. Some of us missed out on several good years of playing in a 1000 player arena! :furious Not to mention the ridiculous arena changes and all of the other complaints I know you remember.
That's why I explicitely stated "not individually". :) Changes may suck and even severly impact some individuals ability to have fun (almost all major changes cause a number of ppl to quit because of it) while still having an overall positive effect on HTC's business. One more example was the revamp of the GV modeling - many individual complains, including claims "you are driving away all GV guys" while the GV usage immediately went up.
Why didn't they split into three arenas if the split had such a dramatic effect then they would have had more growth right?
Actually they did split it into four arenas - EW. MW, and 2xLW. :)
And yes, they actually expected (or hoped for) all arenas seeing a lot of use, and that squads would select certain arenas to make them "their home"
Now THAT didn't work out at all, when LWO became the "place to be" ;)
And why only 2 LW and not 3? They might have reasoned that there's both a "too much" as well as "too little". Unfortunately for you and me our opinion on how many players in one arena is fun and HTC's opinion on that difffered... a lot.
-
Actually they did split it into four arenas - EW. MW, and 2xLW. :)
You know what I meant. I can tell by the toejam eating grin.
Unfortunately for you and me our opinion on how many players in one arena is fun and HTC's opinion on that difffered... a lot.
I hate it when you're right.
There are reasons for the global communication though.
None that would change the game if the open channel was restricted to half or thirds of the map instead of the whole map. You should be able to throw a compliment or a grenade at the guy on the other side of the front line, not the other side of the world.
-
None that would change the game if the open channel was restricted to half or thirds of the map instead of the whole map. You should be able to throw a compliment or a grenade at the guy on the other side of the front line, not the other side of the world.
And talking with your countrymates?
-
they will never do anything to limit the offensive capacity of the horde :old:
most people that play AH care only about 'winning the war', and would say that winning by overwhelming your opponents with numerical superiority is both a perfectly valid and a perfectly realistic tactic
Fugitive you always talk about the number of customers that HTC would lose if the game was made to look better and therefore required a better computer to run - do you not think that HTC would lose just as many, if not more, if they suddenly made it much more difficult/impossible for the hundreds of really bad players to achieve anything by taking away the offensive capacity of the horde? ;o
I don't always talk about losing people to better graphics, I am just repeating what has been said and what would be logically true. HTC does a great job at making it so a wide variety of computers can run the game. If they didn't how many "laptops" do you think would just up and leave? Players can adapt, even when they have no extra money to spend. Making it harder isn't going to stop them, but it will force them into looking for other ways to do the same thing.
No, I meant players as in the defenders. Any way you can think of to give them a chance at stopping the horde, or at least slowing it down?
It's not worth their wile to defend in most cases. NOE's are spotted just in time to either up there and get vulched a bunch until all the hangers are down, or to up for the next field over to only get there just in time for their ACK to open up on you as you spot the goon that you now realize has already dropped.
If a mission comes in with alt... rare, but it does happen :neener: You can try to up and get high enough to defend, but your never going to get the numbers together quick enough. So you end up at a reasonable alt with 5-10 vs 1 depending on the size of the force hitting you. You get that one attack period, because even should you kill 5 and run like a little girl to land your kills the base is captured long before you can get back.
How to make it worth wile to defend? I don't know whats "possible", but use what people are after now. Name in lights, perks. Say the Bish are stopped from taking bases from the Rooks for an hour. Arena message "SYSTEM MESSAGE: Rooks hold off thieving Bishops!! Perk Points Awarded!" and give everyone on the rooks 10 perks. Acknowledgement and perks, just like winning the war. Not as many, but do it 4 hours running and you get the same as winning the war. Maybe hold both front for an hour you get 20.
Your never going to be able to get it down to "individual" awards because I don't think it would be easy to track that "So-and-so" defend A22 against an attack and is awarded X amount of perks. It would be nice, but getting a team award seems to work for the "attack" side of things, maybe it could work on the defense side of things too.