Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: killnu on April 26, 2013, 03:30:57 AM

Title: gameplay
Post by: killnu on April 26, 2013, 03:30:57 AM
has it really gotten to the point where there are less than 25 people on per side...but guys would rather sit in cv guns off the coast of their own base...as they lose the base....to shoot at cons coming in than actually up and fight them?

If that wasnt bad enough, the cv guns hit the fighter plane flying 300+ (400+ in one case) >10k away as it is turning and removes a wing...but cant hit a set of buffs flying directly over it?


 
I can not put my thoughts into words right now...

<whine off>
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: coombz on April 26, 2013, 03:56:32 AM
this isn't a new thing sadly

it's so difficult to get a fight (not a furball...I mean any kind of plane vs plane combat) during low pop hours - which happen to be my prime time - that I only log in and fly at the weekend
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: scott66 on April 26, 2013, 03:59:50 AM
mid or late war?
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Lusche on April 26, 2013, 04:15:18 AM
mid or late war?

Late War, as

has it really gotten to the point where there are less than 25 people on per side...

would not be anything notable in MW.  ;)
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Gixer on April 26, 2013, 05:12:37 AM
has it really gotten to the point where there are less than 25 people on per side..

Been like that for a few years now evenings Aus,NZ timezone.  Take away those in GV's and I doubt there is more than a dozen fighters up per country.


<S>...-Gixer
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Randy1 on April 26, 2013, 06:09:53 AM
Maybe folks have not tried the Seafire.  Cv time is a good change of pace for me. A super turner with canons off a CV is unsuspected sometimes.

I wonder if the difficulty taking off from a CV when it is doing hard turns is a downer for folks?  It happens a lot as they avoid the bombers.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Lusche on April 26, 2013, 06:13:20 AM
I wonder if the difficulty taking off from a CV when it is doing hard turns is a downer for folks? 




No, the thing described in the opening post has nothing to do with that.
It's rather a pure gameplay issue happening when the number of players in the arena is getting too low. The larger the map, the easier this point is being reached
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Slate on April 26, 2013, 07:43:14 AM
    HTC needs some advertising in those time zones perhaps. We in the states enjoyed 350 or so in LW last night.

   Perhaps some advertising in locations often veiwed by those down under ....................

(http://i665.photobucket.com/albums/vv15/d0nwaters/145px-Kangaroo_beer_zpsa93d510e.gif) (http://s665.photobucket.com/user/d0nwaters/media/145px-Kangaroo_beer_zpsa93d510e.gif.html)
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Noir on April 26, 2013, 08:06:07 AM
Or somehow force the players to play in the same area of the map
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Lusche on April 26, 2013, 08:09:30 AM
Or somehow force the players to play in the same area of the map


The "somehow" is the tricky thing  ;)

It actually had been tried in the past, but no working solution came up yet.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: deadstikmac on April 26, 2013, 10:01:49 AM
I find 5v1 every night all night long sir
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: pembquist on April 26, 2013, 10:03:52 AM
Low population triggered air starts? If when numbers got low you had one airspawn that converged like tank town does for gvs I think you would see more fighting.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Lusche on April 26, 2013, 10:23:14 AM
Low population triggered air starts? If when numbers got low you had one airspawn that converged like tank town does for gvs I think you would see more fighting.

Players would still have to chose to use it. Which they possibly won't do that much after the 'new' wears off
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Bruv119 on April 26, 2013, 10:32:22 AM
I think the problem killnu describes are the guys who would rather jump into an 88, soft gun or GV before upping, dare I say it, an aircraft in ACES HIGH!

Myriad of reasons why but my top one would be pure laziness.   :(

Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: ntrudr on April 26, 2013, 10:36:02 AM
It is getting pretty lame. 220 people online and hard to find a fight larger than 2v2.  Maybe we need smaller maps.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Megalodon on April 26, 2013, 10:37:02 AM
Or somehow force the players to play in the same area of the map

 Wont happen the Gv'ers get a free play spot by themselves on almost every map TT, vbase to vbase spawn ..etc.

The Gv'ers have no incentive to join the game they have there own game in the game
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Lusche on April 26, 2013, 10:37:24 AM
It is getting pretty lame. 220 people online and hard to find a fight larger than 2v2.  Maybe we need smaller maps.

Right now we have a smalle map. If you want a map even smaller than that... what will happen in the prime time with 400+? ;)
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Daddkev on April 26, 2013, 11:14:16 AM
 :huh :huh :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl Because I love killing people in the 5" more than anything in the game!  :rock :rock :devil :devil :rock :rock :devil :devil :rock :rock :neener: :neener: :bhead :bhead
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: ink on April 26, 2013, 02:05:13 PM
I find 5v1 every night all night long sir

 :rofl
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: coombz on April 26, 2013, 02:23:08 PM
It is getting pretty lame. 220 people online and hard to find a fight larger than 2v2.  Maybe we need smaller maps.

220 people sounds brilliant to me

usually less than 100 during my 'prime time', and as Bruv says they are all the type to land their plane and jump in an 88mm rather than fight  :(
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: kappa on April 26, 2013, 03:31:34 PM
Right now we have a smalle map. If you want a map even smaller than that... what will happen in the prime time with 400+? ;)

and we are back to narrowing the playing field in proportion to arena population.. I believe it can be done... Someone somewhere could code that.. Hell, its been done in the Battlefield series games for years..
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: bustr on April 26, 2013, 04:35:17 PM
Or at some point like midnight Pacific Coast time all fields in some predetermined ring starting from the edges of the map inward become uncapturable and disabled. Have them all turn gray on every players clipboard map. You won't be able to access the tower but, if you land, your flight, GV run, PT, they will be counted properly while this is in force. The strats will shift forward for the milk runners while the HQ and one uncapturable base to run supplies will be viable. One of the bases for each country in the new zone would become uncapturable. Have the SYSTEM put warnings in the text buffer starting 30min before the change. Then once every 10min until the last 5min when it counts down every 60sec like the map change message after a war win.

Stuff 100 guys into a space the size of the WWI map, 2x it or 3x it, where they can get at each other. At least if someone wanted to get rid of a map, this would be the play date he would make with his friends to stay up late and roll the map. Then the new map would be under the same size limitation if the map was turned before this late night time period was over.

I'm not sure how long this would be in force before the map shifts back to it's full size. No one looses perks and no one gets booted from the map. You get enough warning to know the strats won't be in the same place in 30 minutes for the bomber guys. The viable real estate just shrinks under them to herd everyone closer to each other for a few hours. This happens organically already anytime the two maps with center island TT are in rotation. This process would simply insure everyone was close enough to the TT's to get at them, or center of the other maps.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: deadstikmac on April 26, 2013, 06:06:55 PM
Ink is the only one that got that I think.....

All night as in during peak hours... The OP I think is talking about non peak hours US time zones.

Sometimes early mornings I get on and there is only 30-60 ppl total in all arenas.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Crash Orange on April 26, 2013, 06:10:50 PM
I like that general idea but you'd have a good chance of one country losing everything that's in play other than that one uncapturable base and that being capped by a dozen fighters. Maybe for every playable base that gets captured the closest currently unplayable base of the losing side becomes playable and the furthest playable base of the capturing side becomes unplayable?  That way the playable zone would follow the direction of base captures. But some mechanic to shrink the area of the map when fewer players are on without closing the arena and going to a different map as happened with the off-peak map back when we had split arenas. I hated that map change with a passion.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: killnu on April 26, 2013, 07:49:10 PM
I am in Pearl Harbor, HI.  If I am up playing late (10 pm or so), that is when the numbers are very low.  It is not so much the numbers, but the fact that the ones on do not even try to fight.  I think if the map was smaller (maybe) ...with those small numbers, you could find some incredible fights.  It just doesnt pan out that way though (most times).

Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: bustr on April 26, 2013, 07:53:58 PM
I mentioned a second uncaptureable field in the active area for each country.

You are hedging your bets with the idea of the process following the path of base taking incase you don't like the outcome of the idea. I've been on with 60 players with these enormous maps. A handful GV furballing, and the rest by themselves doing things to other countries properties they could never get away with only a few hours earlier because they can avoid you.

By shrinking the existing active map area down to a scale proportionate to the numbers in the arena. You keep them exposed to the same consequences for actions that their comrades faced during the higher numbers hours. And if some enterprising group decided to make a late night play date to take advantage of the smaller area to dominate the arena. You have a very low a opinion of Hitech or respect for his abilities as this games creator.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: The Fugitive on April 26, 2013, 09:31:41 PM
I am in Pearl Harbor, HI.  If I am up playing late (10 pm or so), that is when the numbers are very low.  It is not so much the numbers, but the fact that the ones on do not even try to fight.  I think if the map was smaller (maybe) ...with those small numbers, you could find some incredible fights.  It just doesnt pan out that way though (most times).



I think this is where the "newer generation" type player is taking the game. In the old days "fighting" was what it was all about. When you had your butt handed to you in a fight, you went looking for that guy to return the favor....or die trying. The same could be said for the base capture side of the "fight" as well. Captures were planned out missions with bombers, fighters, and ground support. Attacks while sometimes NOE were more often than not spotted and this was planned for. You planned to fight for that base and win the capture.

Today's player is more about the quickest, easiest way to win. There is nothing about "fighting" that is quick or easy for most people. Learning to be average in this game can take hundreds of hours of playing time. Todays players don't want to "waste" time learning to fight when it is easier to jump in a gun until everyone is dead of leaves due to boredom and they can continue on with their quick grabs.  It takes far too much time to up time after time only to be killed in the first turn or two, rather than just moving on to another base.

Lastly, there doesn't seem to be much personal "pride" in todays players. Sure you have a few "Joach1m's" "Redbulls" here and there, but for the most part there are very few players that look to excel in this game. Very few players who will put in the time to learn how to fight and fly and PLAY the game other than just following the same old horde around from base to base. Gone are the days when players went back time after time trying to get the guy that just killed him for the 10th time in a row (I don't know how many time kappa got me last week, but it was fun trying to win one!). Gone are the days when Squad XXXX went head to head with Squad ZZZZ half the night over a single base.... and the bragging rights that came with the win.

It's a sorry state, but those fights can still be found now and then. It use to be the norm, now it's that "easter egg" you find now and then that keeps you coming back. Killn, it just may be easier for you to get a transfer to the east coast   :devil 
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: muzik on April 26, 2013, 09:38:08 PM
baaaaaaaaasssee caaaaappps.....

autooooooo launccchhhh soorrrttiiessss.....

player voted objectiiiiives.

Amen

Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: muzik on April 26, 2013, 09:55:51 PM
I think this is where the "newer generation" type player is taking the game

Bah, more of your jiberish.

No one joined this WAR game to deliberately avoid a fight.  :rolleyes:  It just turns out that way because the players arent getting the satisfaction they want the way the game is structured.

Most people are not going to play a game day in, day out for a decade and not get bored with it. Ever occur to anyone that maybe the same old meat and potatoes makes some want to puke if they have to eat it one more time?

I'm just dying to hear someone tell me once again that "HTC has been in business for 12 years, I think they know what they are doing!" They made a great game, but like every other business in the world, there has to be a little change now and then.

The path of least resistance is a natural tendency. An aversion to flying or "fighting" if that is the case, is statistically inevitable as long as the rules of the game allow it. Change the rules, change the game.

Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: The Fugitive on April 27, 2013, 09:25:45 AM
Bah, more of your jiberish.

No one joined this WAR game to deliberately avoid a fight.  :rolleyes:  It just turns out that way because the players arent getting the satisfaction they want the way the game is structured.

Most people are not going to play a game day in, day out for a decade and not get bored with it. Ever occur to anyone that maybe the same old meat and potatoes makes some want to puke if they have to eat it one more time?

I'm just dying to hear someone tell me once again that "HTC has been in business for 12 years, I think they know what they are doing!" They made a great game, but like every other business in the world, there has to be a little change now and then.

The path of least resistance is a natural tendency. An aversion to flying or "fighting" if that is the case, is statistically inevitable as long as the rules of the game allow it. Change the rules, change the game.



Of course they join the game to avoid a fight ( by the way, have you started playing the game yet?), it's called being a survivalist. You can't "die" if your not in a fight.

I have played the game for over a decade and I'm NEVER bored, you know why? HTC has been in business for 12 years, they know what they are doing!  :D They have built and provided a great game with MANY ways to play, using MANY types of planes/vehicles. People get bored due to there own inability to expand their own play.

Sitting in a tank at the same spawn camp day after day would bored many to tears, but is that HTC's fault? Of course not. Could HTC change that by creating a 1 mile "no fire safe zone" around each spawn, sure, but would it be better for game play? Most likely not as it seems a lot of people like to hang around a big spawn area and try to blast each other, look at the new map Greebo made. GV usage is up something like 25% for that map.

Personally I'm glad I don't get to play this game the hundreds of hours a month that some do. I will NEVER become one of the "top aces" in this game, nor will I become the best at anything else that is available. I will always have a challenge in some aspect of this game and have no problem exploring those avenues. That's why I never get bored, and have been around over 10 years. There is nothing wrong with the game, nor does it need to be tweaked by HTC. If anything it's the players that need guidance. They need to know that there are wayyyyy more way to play this game than "the same old thing". Not only would it make game play better, it would help HTC retain more players subscriptions longer.

btw, I cleared my "ignore" list. Don't make me start it back up with your "jiberish"
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: R 105 on April 27, 2013, 10:07:00 AM
Wont happen the Gv'ers get a free play spot by themselves on almost every map TT, vbase to vbase spawn ..etc.

The Gv'ers have no incentive to join the game they have there own game in the game

 I like to GV and wish we had the old tank town back. I have frame rate issues in planes and always like to tank more. I am retired Army with a 19D20 MOS (Cavalry Scout) and I like the GV part of AH. My hole squad left AH for WoT but I still like AH much better. If we had one short GV spawn per map and the old transmission as an option I would be on much more than now. I use to play for hours everyday but now I may be on a few hours a week at most.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: icepac on April 27, 2013, 11:23:03 AM
I was on during peak hours friday night and, even though there were plenty in the arena, not a single green dot was over an enemy field.

Hate the playa.......not the game.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: muzik on April 27, 2013, 03:07:55 PM
btw, I cleared my "ignore" list. Don't make me start it back up with your "jiberish"

Oh please, don't hurt my feelings.

You're out of touch with reality and here is proof...

My hole squad left AH for WoT
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: The Fugitive on April 27, 2013, 04:05:18 PM
Oh please, don't hurt my feelings.

You're out of touch with reality and here is proof...


What "reality" are you yapping about? Something bubbling around in your imagination?  So a few guys left to play WoT big deal. I'd bet half the guys who left to WoT are already back. And those that didn't come back are those players that won't try/play other aspects of the game.

Again, are you playing this game yet?
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: aztec on April 27, 2013, 05:15:48 PM
[I have played the game for over a decade and I'm NEVER bored, you know why? HTC has been in business for 12 years, they know what they are doing!  :D They have built and provided a great game with MANY ways to play, using MANY types of planes/vehicles. People get bored due to there own inability to expand their own play.

 :aok
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: muzik on April 27, 2013, 05:41:49 PM
What "reality" are you yapping about? Something bubbling around in your imagination?  So a few guys left to play WoT big deal. I'd bet half the guys who left to WoT are already back. And those that didn't come back are those players that won't try/play other aspects of the game.

Again, are you playing this game yet?

The reality that they are looking for something different!!!!!!! Do I really have to spell every thing out for you?

Easy enough to find out if half of them came back or not isn't it. What do you say R 105?

And from what I can tell WoT is far more fast paced and FIGHT INTENSIVE than the gv war in AH. Kinda puts a damper on your drivel about everyone wanting to avoid fights doesn't it.

And no I am not playing AH. How does that matter? You are still spouting the same stuff you were 2 years ago, so obviously nothing has changed.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: killnu on April 27, 2013, 06:36:45 PM
muzik, are you talking about fast pace GV war?  Really?  in a game called Aces High....you are concerned about the ground war?! 
avoiding fights...in a  gv?  wow, you seemed to have really missed the mark on my original post....
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Threeup on April 27, 2013, 07:09:40 PM
The game is good and for the most part the players are fine. The frustration for most is the inability for everyone to play the same as me. Joking.

Seriously, most of the complaining is from players frustrated that not everyone will play the way they want. Who cares? If someone wants to sit in an 88mm or an 8" and shoot stuff, it' their business. Ditto for every other activity in game.

Like Coombz (give or take a few hours) my "evening" is prime time "sunrise". Notwithstanding some larger maps, I can still find a fight. Smaller maps from your (GMT-8) 2.00am to 8.00am would "tighten it up" a bit to encourage more direct contact over a smaller area. Smaller maps would be welcome. And as far as opposition at my "evening", most are pretty good. Anyone who plays at USA 05.00 is bound to be dedicated.

In my humble opinion, this is a great sim (it's never a game). My only alterations, if it were in my power, would be some enhancements in cockpit graphics for some planes, some neutering of AI ack ack capabilities, a redefinition of the strange and curious collision model and the ability to use obscene language on 200.

As far as expanding the base, how many guys can you shoot down at once? Better to have 100 people on that know what they are about comparative to that 100 and 700 others that are "wasted space".

Anyway, opinions are like haemorrhoids, every you know what has one. including this one - keep well.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Oldman731 on April 27, 2013, 07:58:57 PM
And no I am not playing AH. How does that matter?


Because you have no vested interest in the game.  You're the dog in the manger.  Why should it matter to you what happens in a game you choose not to play?

Not making fun of you, but I just don't understand why people who don't play the game should care.

- oldman
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: The Fugitive on April 27, 2013, 10:16:07 PM
The reality that they are looking for something different!!!!!!! Do I really have to spell every thing out for you?

I guess you really DO have to spell it out. If they are looking for something different they aren't looking very hard. I can always find something to do in this game.

Quote
Easy enough to find out if half of them came back or not isn't it. What do you say R 105?

I didn't say half of R105 squad came back, I was talking over all. Who knows, R105 might have been in a squad of 5 guys. Ya lets base your assumptions on that!

Quote
And from what I can tell WoT is far more fast paced and FIGHT INTENSIVE than the gv war in AH. Kinda puts a damper on your drivel about everyone wanting to avoid fights doesn't it.

I haven't played WoT, but I have watched a few videos. All I've seen is everyone run strait at each other and just blast away.... COD in armor... THRILLING!  :rolleyes:

Quote
And no I am not playing AH. How does that matter? You are still spouting the same stuff you were 2 years ago, so obviously nothing has changed.

That's like complaining about the local Pro ball team and you don't even watch baseball!  LOL!!! The only thing that has changed in the last two years is, it has gotten worst. Hordes are bigger and more often, more and more people run away from fights and only engage when there is no danger to their plane/tank.

Tonight, I had a 190D jump my pony from a 4k perch. We went through a couple of passes and 2 262's joined the fight making it 3 on me. A couple passes by each and a Tempest joined in and I spotted a 109 4k out. By now I am on top the 190 and even being 4 on me whats he do.... runs to the ack LOL!!

Like I said, if people want something else, all they have to do is get out of the horde, build their own mission, get off their spawn camp, jump in a bomber, learn to fight in a fighter instead of run. You might find yourself enjoying this great game again.... oh wait, you don't play.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: WEZEL on April 28, 2013, 02:32:54 AM
Simple solution....hunt down and kill the red guy's  :joystick:
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Ninthmessiah on April 28, 2013, 04:48:29 AM
Remember in Air Warrior when you couldn't shut down the Fighter Hangers?  :old: Shutting down the hangars just gave the uppers built in damage [I think it was an oil leak].

That would be a game changer...

Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: FLOOB on April 28, 2013, 07:59:10 AM
It's always surprised me that the overwellming majority of AH players are North American. I understand the language barrier may be a reason for so few japanese players, but why do the english speaking countries have such small contingents?
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: muzik on April 28, 2013, 08:20:57 AM
muzik, are you talking about fast pace GV war?  Really?  in a game called Aces High....you are concerned about the ground war?!  

No, I have rarely ever participated in the ground war and have little interest in it in its current configuration but I do believe it is a vital part of the game and it needs improvement.

wow, you seemed to have really missed the mark on my original post....

My comment had nothing to do with your op, it was directed solely at Fugi's comment, but I will comment now that you mention it.

has it really gotten to the point where there are less than 25 people on per side...but guys would rather sit in cv guns off the coast of their own base...as they lose the base....to shoot at cons coming in than actually up and fight them?

I think there are a couple things you and others with this complaint don't get. The recession has hit harder than is immediately evident. People are still struggling to recover from it and lower player count and the lack of fights is the result. Perhaps the majority of the folks that quit to save a few bucks were the ones who participated in the air war more often. It's nothing more than a coincidence that those who stayed seem to favor things other than dogfighting, but it has Fugi thinking everyone is hiding from him.

Fact: the players that are left simply don't care to play the game the way Fugi wants them to PERIOD It is pure INSANITY to say people play war games to avoid fights. They may not want to play like an ADHD 10 year old on Redbull, just so some vet can get his chits and giggles, but they DO NOT pay 15 bucks a month to be a pacifist.  :rolleyes:

Next off, this game has hardly changed in 12 years. those that have played this game and AW or others, most likely spent way more than half of that flying. Maybe they aren't COMPLETELY addicted to the flying aspect any longer.

I knew several guys that have gone through every single aspect of this game extensively until they got bored with them, finally they began running missions in every conceivable way, including NOE raids. Fugi says it's to avoid fights. While technically that is accurate, it's not the whole truth. They were BORED with the same old same old. It became a challenge to see how efficiently they can take bases. It's a cat and mouse game that pisses Fugi off, but it's EXACTLY what he was talking about when he said there are other things to do.

He says there are so many things to do in this game, no one could possibly get bored with it yet if they do anything other than fly fighters to provide him with fights they are losers that must be hiding from his horrifying skills.

So again, all these complaints are simply a matter of some people getting pissed off because others don't play the way they want them to. Even if you can't envision it, is it really that hard to believe that a few game changes could cure this?
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: muzik on April 28, 2013, 08:39:12 AM

Because you have no vested interest in the game.  You're the dog in the manger.  Why should it matter to you what happens in a game you choose not to play?

Not making fun of you, but I just don't understand why people who don't play the game should care.

- oldman

If I had no interest in the game, why would I be posting here? I do care about the game and despite my disagreements with one who will not be named, I do wish Htc success. So much so that I participate in sharing ideas on this forum despite the presence of illiteratogical (a medical condition of the dually afflicted illiterate and illogical weenies) flamers who bash all rational debate.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: The Fugitive on April 28, 2013, 08:53:00 AM
No, I have rarely ever participated in the ground war and have little interest in it in its current configuration but I do believe it is a vital part of the game and it needs improvement.

My comment had nothing to do with your op, it was directed solely at Fugi's comment, but I will comment now that you mention it.

I think there are a couple things you and others with this complaint don't get. The recession has hit harder than is immediately evident. People are still struggling to recover from it and lower player count and the lack of fights is the result. Perhaps the majority of the folks that quit to save a few bucks were the ones who participated in the air war more often. It's nothing more than a coincidence that those who stayed seem to favor things other than dogfighting, but it has Fugi thinking everyone is hiding from him.

Fact: the players that are left simply don't care to play the game the way Fugi wants them to PERIOD It is pure INSANITY to say people play war games to avoid fights. They may not want to play like an ADHD 10 year old on Redbull, just so some vet can get his chits and giggles, but they DO NOT pay 15 bucks a month to be a pacifist.  :rolleyes:

Next off, this game has hardly changed in 12 years. those that have played this game and AW or others, most likely spent way more than half of that flying. Maybe they aren't COMPLETELY addicted to the flying aspect any longer.

I knew several guys that have gone through every single aspect of this game extensively until they got bored with them, finally they began running missions in every conceivable way, including NOE raids. Fugi says it's to avoid fights. While technically that is accurate, it's not the whole truth. They were BORED with the same old same old. It became a challenge to see how efficiently they can take bases. It's a cat and mouse game that pisses Fugi off, but it's EXACTLY what he was talking about when he said there are other things to do.

He says there are so many things to do in this game, no one could possibly get bored with it yet if they do anything other than fly fighters to provide him with fights they are losers that must be hiding from his horrifying skills.

So again, all these complaints are simply a matter of some people getting pissed off because others don't play the way they want them to. Even if you can't envision it, is it really that hard to believe that a few game changes could cure this?


Again with the poor reading comprehension! Do you just "cut and paste" quotes and type drivel?

Find me a post I made that says anything about how people SHOULD play. I suggest that many are missing many aspects of the game play experience, but I do TELL anyone they should play a certain way. I REPORT what I see in the game (something you can't understand as you haven't played for years :rolleyes: ) and what I see is players running in hordes that are bigger and run more often from ALL sides. What I see is players running from fights at the earliest opportunity. What I see are spawn camps becoming bigger. What i SEE are high alt buffs bailing when you close to with-in icon range.

Maybe we are using the wrong word. Maybe "fighting" is miss leading. Maybe we should use "Combat". NOEs are a non-combative move. They are designed to strike fast and accomplish their mission with the least amount of combat. Hordes do the same thing. They roll in with 3 or 4 times the numbers of planes and bombs needed to totally flatten a field and so no combat is necessary, just bombing of objects that can't fight back. Spawn camping is much the same, your popping enemy tanks before they have a chance to shoot back.... or spot you for that matter. Again avoid the possibility of combat.


And "hiding from my horrifying skills"   :rofl  Maybe that is why I don't get bored with the game. I will NEVER have horrifying skills at any part of this game.

Todays player has the same goals as the old time players. It is how we all get there that is different. Todays player drops lots of bombs as fast as they can to capture the base as fast as they can to win the war TODAY! Old time players look to play the game. The journey is more important than the end game of "win the war". The combat that ensues to get to the win is what the old timers are looking for. Todays players look to avoid that as it only slows them down.

Again, please note, I am only posting what I SEE. I am NOT telling anyone how to play the game.  
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: muzik on April 28, 2013, 09:21:16 AM
That's like complaining about the local Pro ball team and you don't even watch baseball!  LOL!!!

I'm guessing you meant to say something more like " that's like trying to talk baseball when you don't know baseball," because what you said doesn't make sense. I'm not the one complaining you are. I'm betting that if I came back tomorrow, the game will be little different from when I left it. I have more than enough time playing the game to make an informed decision even if I have to base some of that on what I see in the forum. PLUS... The complaints you keep repeating go all the way back to AW.

The only thing that has changed in the last two years is, it has gotten worst.

You were making that exact statement 2 years ago as well as saying it's been going down hill since what 2003 or 4? If your hallucination was reality, this game would have gone off the cliff by now don't you think! <--Exclamation because I don't really want you to answer.

Like I said, if people want something else, all they have to do is get out of the horde, build their own mission, get off their spawn camp, jump in a bomber, learn to fight in a fighter instead of run.

Seems if they do any of those things, they're still still hiding from you.  :noid
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: muzik on April 28, 2013, 09:29:59 AM
I am NOT telling anyone how to play the game.  

You claim that the majority does everything they can to avoid a fight. Translation: If they aren't providing me with an opportunity to kill them, they must be avoiding combat. Therefore they are doing it all wrong.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: The Fugitive on April 28, 2013, 09:37:05 AM
You claim that the majority does everything they can to avoid a fight. Translation: If they aren't providing me with an opportunity to kill them, they must be avoiding combat. Therefore they are doing it all wrong.

LOL!!! good try at twisting my words. It's hard to have a intelligent conversation with an idiot. Welcome back to the ignore list!
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Hajo on April 28, 2013, 10:12:12 AM
When this game was first introduced there were two participating MMOG WWII Sim Games that I can recall.  Air Warrior and War Birds.  HTC decided to
build something better.  Better graphics, more accurate flight models, and generally just improve the genre.  They succeded.  We used to have one arena here.
I like many others from Aces High were always on the hunt for something better.  Some of us left Air Warrior before its' demise because of that.  EA was letting
Air warrior wither on the vine and die.  We came for a more realistic venue, simulation of WWII air combat.  In the early going there was nothing but air combat.
And it was fun!  Great fights generally fueled by combat sim veterans who were looking for the fight.  No relaxed realism, just a more realistic fight amongst aircraft.

Aces High grew and did so fast.  More arenas were added.  More vets came to play.  HTC continuosly improved the game with additions of aircraft etc.  More and
better maps then anything in the genre at that time.  Air Combat and the quality of gameplay increased with the additions of the veterans.

The members of the community have changed.  Less and less of what the vets liked to do, and more and more of the X Box generations point and click first person shooter
style of gameplay.  I am NOT criticizing anyones' style of gameplay.  You pay your 15 dollars you play as you wish.  We (please correct me if I am wrong) had more people participating
when the vets style of gameplay was in vogue.  More air to air fights, less ho'ing and running....just basic white knuckled use what your plane gives you fighting.  I don't know
the official numbers of subscribers to the game, but I do notice when I log on the number is generally down.  Some just moved on from the game.  Quite natural you know.
Some vets with many years doing this genre still are involved but spend fewer and fewer hours playing.  Just to darn hard with little time to find good fights.

Some of us who liked to participate in scenarios stopped dong that (such as myself)  Why?  To many peeing contests, whining etc. Insulting the designers and casting aspersions
on those who take their personal time to design an exciting scenario and trying to balance it (this ain't easy). Just to many immature personalities for my taste.

So......it's not the game.  It's the community.  We've had the same weapons to fight with since early Air Warrior.  What has changed?  Gameplay has changed.  Gameplay is dictated by the Community.
The X-Box generation has won out.  The Old Guard is out.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Masherbrum on April 28, 2013, 10:26:01 AM
Bah, more of your jiberish.

No one joined this WAR game to deliberately avoid a fight.  :rolleyes:  It just turns out that way because the players arent getting the satisfaction they want the way the game is structured.

Most people are not going to play a game day in, day out for a decade and not get bored with it. Ever occur to anyone that maybe the same old meat and potatoes makes some want to puke if they have to eat it one more time?

I'm just dying to hear someone tell me once again that "HTC has been in business for 12 years, I think they know what they are doing!" They made a great game, but like every other business in the world, there has to be a little change now and then.

The path of least resistance is a natural tendency. An aversion to flying or "fighting" if that is the case, is statistically inevitable as long as the rules of the game allow it. Change the rules, change the game.



Unlike most who post on here.   Fugi at least walks the walk.   I have lost count of the "I hate hordes",  "you get another plane" and "I play for the fights" types who routinely post that drivel in here only to do exactly the opposite in game.   But why you are trolling this forum when you do not even play, is really pointless.   You do not know how the game play currently is.   But hey, you know it all and do not even play.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Lusche on April 28, 2013, 10:32:01 AM
Even if everything would be exactly the same way it was "back then", you would still have a lot of 'vets' saying "it's just not the same anymore..."


;)
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Bruv119 on April 28, 2013, 10:34:11 AM
it is pretty sad when there are more heated purse fights on the forum than on ch 200. 
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: The Fugitive on April 28, 2013, 10:54:09 AM
Even if everything would be exactly the same way it was "back then", you would still have a lot of 'vets' saying "it's just not the same anymore..."


;)


I see what your saying Lusche... rose colored glasses and all that, but I disagree.

In the old days....


it is pretty sad when there are more heated purse fights on the forum than on ch 200. 

Even this is true. While in the old days we had "trash talking" it was a much more "civilized" than what we have today. There were always those who challenged and taunted other players, but we didn't have as much name calling and foulness as we do today.

As Hajo said, it is the "xbox" gamers who have taken over. In xbox, playstation and all those other game systems most games have an end game. Whether it is a first person shooter, Role play, what ever, there is an end game. If there wasn't no one would need to buy new games! Those types of players now play this game and the end game is win the war. Once they have done that a bunch of times they look to move on to a new game, just as they have been trained to by the game companies.

Old timers play the game for the sake of the game, NOT the end game. The next fight will almost always be different, the next base grab CAN be different everytime depending on "how" you go about the capture/defense. Each GV battle could be sooooooo much move if everyone moved away from the camps. Thats the difference in play styles.

As mentioned, it's there $15 they can play how ever they want. But I'd be lying if I didn't say I missed those days when there were more like minded players on.   
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Lusche on April 28, 2013, 10:57:12 AM

I see what your saying Lusche... rose colored glasses and all that, but I disagree.


More "like that" than 'rose colored glasses' this time :)


Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Karnak on April 28, 2013, 11:23:36 AM
I recall a who lot more than one HO in twenty merges.  I recall many players who specialized in HOs using the F4U-1C and Typhoon.

I do agree the hordes have gotten worse and that running is slightly more common, but I think that has to do with the rise of the speed demon P-51D to dominance instead the fighter Spitfire Mk IX that lead the kills for the first years.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: FTJR on April 28, 2013, 11:38:49 AM
Two nights ago, Friday my time, we had about 20 people furballing off each others  field, people rarely got above 10k and I at least didn't see anyone ho'ing and there was only friendly sparing on 200.
It was really enjoyable. This lasted about 30 mins, then the CV arrived, and the dream was over. :(
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Zacherof on April 28, 2013, 11:53:14 AM
I don't fully recall the discussion I had, but it wasn't just the langauge barrier with japan.something also about the plane along with other things. 

And btw you crazy arse vets, if you sees me on, pm me and I'll gladly give you a fight. Tbm vs pony, sure spit on spit, just as well
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Blammo on April 28, 2013, 10:11:53 PM

In the old days....


 :old: Players used to have to use a hand crank generator and give a pint of blood each time they wanted to play AH for 30 minutes.  But, dawg-gonnit, everything was perfection!  We always fun, people always played well together and no one ever did anything anyone else didn't approve of!

Seriously, this discussion dates back to before I ever registered on the forum.  Which means, nothing has changed!
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: R 105 on April 29, 2013, 09:53:47 AM
I guess you really DO have to spell it out. If they are looking for something different they aren't looking very hard. I can always find something to do in this game.

I didn't say half of R105 squad came back, I was talking over all. Who knows, R105 might have been in a squad of 5 guys. Ya lets base your assumptions on that!

I haven't played WoT, but I have watched a few videos. All I've seen is everyone run strait at each other and just blast away.... COD in armor... THRILLING!  :rolleyes:

That's like complaining about the local Pro ball team and you don't even watch baseball!  LOL!!! The only thing that has changed in the last two years is, it has gotten worst. Hordes are bigger and more often, more and more people run away from fights and only engage when there is no danger to their plane/tank.

Tonight, I had a 190D jump my pony from a 4k perch. We went through a couple of passes and 2 262's joined the fight making it 3 on me. A couple passes by each and a Tempest joined in and I spotted a 109 4k out. By now I am on top the 190 and even being 4 on me whats he do.... runs to the ack LOL!!

Like I said, if people want something else, all they have to do is get out of the horde, build their own mission, get off their spawn camp, jump in a bomber, learn to fight in a fighter instead of run. You might find yourself enjoying this great game again.... oh wait, you don't play.

 I was in a big squad (SOAR) and at one time we had 25 or more guys. About 11 went to WoT and never came back. Two died and most the rest I lost contact with and are not on AH anymore.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Wiley on April 29, 2013, 10:49:51 AM
What the other games provide that this one doesn't is quick, relatively even number, round based action.  You click on an arena, they throw you into it when it has enough numbers, and you do your thing.  A good number of things on the wishlist in here are centered around the idea that's how gameplay should be.

I'm glad AH doesn't do that, because I much prefer a sandbox with more unpredictable stuff going on in it.  The unfortunate thing is, it's a gradually shrinking niche market.

The vast majority want something they can hop into, get a fair fight, and accomplish an objective within around a half hour or so.  Hence why games like WoT do so well.

Wiley.
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: The Fugitive on April 29, 2013, 07:00:01 PM
What the other games provide that this one doesn't is quick, relatively even number, round based action.  You click on an arena, they throw you into it when it has enough numbers, and you do your thing.  A good number of things on the wishlist in here are centered around the idea that's how gameplay should be.

I'm glad AH doesn't do that, because I much prefer a sandbox with more unpredictable stuff going on in it.  The unfortunate thing is, it's a gradually shrinking niche market.

The vast majority want something they can hop into, get a fair fight, and accomplish an objective within around a half hour or so.  Hence why games like WoT do so well.

Wiley.

I agree, the problem is things are getting predictable. I'll log on Saturday at around 2 est and the Bish horde will be rolling along. Slowly if a land map, quickly if a sea map. 3-4 hours later the Bish numbers will drop and in about an hour the Rook numbers will climb to the point that their horde will begin grabbing back the bases lost to the Bish. The Rooks horde will continue for a few hours and then break up as we slide out of prime time and things will settle down.

No imagination. Maybe thats another reason that many players can't fight. They can't imagine how to piece the moves together and so do only a single move over and over  :noid
Title: Re: gameplay
Post by: Zacherof on April 30, 2013, 01:33:18 AM
See cloud of red, up a a few 262's and you shall stop them, although ord porking is geniunly more affective