Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Randy1 on May 22, 2014, 01:14:35 PM
-
In Lusche's wish and in past threads, the two country approach keeps coming up as an alternative to the current three country setup.
Outside of the technical issues, why would two countries be a bad idea? I assume someone with a good deal of past experience might be able to say how we got to the three country system we have now.
Seems to me two countries is the way to go but I don't have the wherewithal to be sure that is the way to go.
-
If the perceived hoarding now is bad, imagine the fun getting railroaded with only one option of attack.
-
It's great fun to fight against a horde. I don't see a problem with more action. Aces high matchmaking, just like everything else, is user created. Less choice means more action.
-
Well, you wouldn't have to worry about seeing that big juicy bardar and not being able to do anything about it because it's not on your country's front. Even if one side did horde up and start facerolling maps, I can't see how it would be much different than what happens now.
Wiley.
-
HiTech tried all combinations through warbirds to aces high. He found that 3 sides works best for keeping things more even and playability. I read that some place on the boards. On my phone or I'd look it up.
-
Two for Tuesdays.
Give it a rip.
-
Two for Tuesdays.
Give it a rip.
Good compromise
-
New motto: "Two for Tuesdays!" I give it a solid +1
A week or so ago about 40 of us ended up in the WW1 arena during a map change. The fight lasted 15 minutes or so. What was interesting is the sideswitching rapidly resulted in almost everyone one two sides, with great fights. Cleary AH is seeing a dip in the number of sticks. Going to two sides, and of course the oft discussed 12-hour rule could result in better fights.
As for AH having tried everything....I remember when they would have one Late War arena then sharply at 5PM they would close that and open two, smaller latewar arenas. When that happend 100-150 would promptly log off. It basically dumped the fight. AH changed that, kept the one arena open full-time, which is where we are at now.
Let's give two sides a try on night a week for a few hours and see what happens. Likely it would require some randomization on which chess piece you get the first time, and they may need to change the side switch rule to allow a more dynamic, organic adjustment to imbalance....
Let's see what happens!
-
So which country gets to rage quit Tuesday?
-
So which country gets to rage quit Tuesday?
Someone posted a good idea on this several weeks ago: two new country names such as Eagles and Falcons, etc. so no existing country feels jilted.
-
I feel like auto balancing would be needed then. Resides, nothing good about side loyalty, and this would just increase that.
-
...nothing good about side loyalty, and this would just increase that.
Side loyalty creates a sense of teamwork. Many players like teamwork at both the squad and country levels.
-
. . . side loyalty, and this would just increase that.
Side Loyalty when there is a choice between sides is a part of one's profile I would think. The percent of people who share that type of profile is probably fairly constant. Meaning, in very course terms, you either are a loyalest or not. I don't think two countries would effect the number of side loyal people.
-
What terrains would you use?
-
See rule #4
-
Side loyalty creates a sense of teamwork. Many players like teamwork at both the squad and country levels.
you can have teamwork without being chesspiece loyal.
chesspiece loyalty in this game is especially silly as all 3 sides are essentially identical.
-
Someone posted a good idea on this several weeks ago: two new country names such as Eagles and Falcons, etc. so no existing country feels jilted.
The teams could be US vs THEM.
What terrains would you use?
Lots of good 2 country terrains are already made.
Two for Tuesdays.
Give it a rip.
+1
-
What terrains would you use?
As mentioned above there are already good two sided maps used in FSO and Special Events, but also some of the large MA maps could be used. Their size might offset any slight lack of perfect balance at the beginning of the war. If Hitech set their mind to it I'm sure they could work out a fun solution.
-
The teams could be US vs THEM.
Lots of good 2 country terrains are already made.
+1
As mentioned above there are already good two sided maps used in FSO and Special Events, but also some of the large MA maps could be used. Their size might offset any slight lack of perfect balance at the beginning of the war. If Hitech set their mind to it I'm sure they could work out a fun solution.
A lot of great maps are not designed for balanced MA base capture gameplay. Current MA maps are 3 sided.
-
Chess piece loyalty makes life easier for larger squads that want to fly together. I see no issue with trying a 2 country day for a while. Heck, just something new usually spurs some activity. I don't see chess pieces being an issue for our squad, if Knits weren't one of the countries we would just choose one thats available and all fly that.
What map is no big deal to me. If it has a bases close enough to fly to and fight and somewhere to fight with GVs, I'm good.
I would guess that with the new terrain work being done, modifying existing terrains for an experiment might not be on the green light list even if HTC does think the idea has merit, which they may not.
-
There is two Countries!! AvA at one time back, Squads and lots Players were in there every night. Then 4 or 5 Persons changed Set-Up. Every One gone. Too bad it's Sad.
-
Upcoming Scenario has 2 countries. Balanced event, hordes will be met with opposing hordes.
Looking forward to everyone who posted advocating 2 sides to join up :rock
-
It...the time it takes....orbit the sun.
Lmao! :rofl :rock :cheers: :aok
-
I feel like auto balancing would be needed then. Resides, nothing good about side loyalty, and this would just increase that.
I'm sure there was something mentioned that might make side balancing a little easier for a two sided game......I'm sure someone has mentioned it before....just can't remember...... :old:
-
you'all would not be talkin about "TITANIC TUESDAY" would you?????????????????????????????????
-
Upcoming Scenario has 2 countries. Balanced event, hordes will be met with opposing hordes.
Looking forward to everyone who posted advocating 2 sides to join up :rock
<chuckle>
-
Upcoming Scenario has 2 countries. Balanced event, hordes will be met with opposing hordes.
Looking forward to everyone who posted advocating 2 sides to join up :rock
Sure thing. I love being told when, where, what and how I should fly. :aok
-
you'all would not be talkin about "TITANIC TUESDAY" would you?????????????????????????????????
Was by far my favorite night to play, but I think it was still 3 sides.
-
One night a week Titanic Tuesday style, two sides and unlimited side switching would work. But, only once a week.
As soon as it became the MA norm, 7 days a week. Human nature (we area always very bad kids gentlemen) would wring every bad thing possible out of it. Once a week the novelty factor would have us looking forward to the 24 hours of difference. ENY would have to be a ball buster to help everyone remember to side balance frequently instead of try to always be on the "winning" side of the kester whuppin.
The map would have to be some giant version of the TT and furball island mentality. Since side switching at will is greifing missions and other well laid plans to screw people for the sake of screwing people.
-
Sure thing. I love being told when, where, what and how I should fly.
Shoot, this entire forum would shut down if those conversations never happened :rofl
-
One night a week Titanic Tuesday style, two sides and unlimited side switching would work. But, only once a week.
As soon as it became the MA norm, 7 days a week. Human nature (we area always very bad kids gentlemen) would wring every bad thing possible out of it. Once a week the novelty factor would have us looking forward to the 24 hours of difference. ENY would have to be a ball buster to help everyone remember to side balance frequently instead of try to always be on the "winning" side of the kester whuppin.
The map would have to be some giant version of the TT and furball island mentality. Since side switching at will is greifing missions and other well laid plans to screw people for the sake of screwing people.
Very interested in the 2 side Tuesday idea.
+1, can't hurt to try, sometimes things do change, other times not so much. At least if HTC tries it and it fails, then they can officially post on the BBS and the main page that they did it, so no more whines. But, if it does work, then we get what we want.. more fights! :rock
-
I already tried 2 counties and also 4 counties. So why must I try again?
Hitech
-
I already tried 2 counties and also 4 counties. So why must I try again?
Hitech
You see circumstances change. What didn't work yesterday may work today and vice versa.
-
I already tried 2 counties and also 4 counties. So why must I try again?
Hitech
Was population comparable at the time? My hunch it was quite a bit higher.
Wiley.
-
You see circumstances change. What didn't work yesterday may work today and vice versa.
:aok
-
You see circumstances change. What didn't work yesterday may work today and vice versa.
curios about which circumstances changed. you need to be specific.
semp
-
As mentioned above there are already good two sided maps used in FSO and Special Events
Ranger and the other mapmakers can (and will) correct me, but AvA terrains, while beautiful and functional, will not reset in the same manner as MA terrains reset when there's a "win."
Might be able to fix that, but so far as I know that would require HTC reprogramming.
- oldman
-
So which country gets to rage quit Tuesday?
Everyone defaults to Kings and Queens, no, that aint gunna work.
-
It is not going to happen.
Hitech
-
It is not going to happen.
Hitech
What if we wind up down to only two players like Warbirds?
(Just kidding!)
Two-sided map isn't a panacea, obviously. But can't we just shrink the maps when the player numbers are lower? It seems rather ridiculous to have twice as many bases as players.
-
Any time 2 to 32 players are looking for a fight they can set up a custom arena with no icons, crosswind landing, night time, free for all, air spawns etc. on any terrain they want to use. The only thing they won't have is MA score.
-
Was population comparable at the time? My hunch it was quite a bit higher.
Wiley.
yes--back then we had way more people
-
Any time 2 to 32 players are looking for a fight they can set up a custom arena with no icons, crosswind landing, night time, free for all, air spawns etc. on any terrain they want to use. The only thing they won't have is MA score.
Errr... would love to... yet>
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,361085.msg4816619.html#new (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,361085.msg4816619.html#new)
-
Errr... would love to... yet>
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,361085.msg4816619.html#new (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,361085.msg4816619.html#new)
or fly the AvA...
-
:rofl
-
Horseapples! Da 'mishunz' exist to landgrab or toolshed while avoiding combat with other humans like the plague. Anytime a 262 or a Tempest appears over a mishun the game is being done a favor. The poor misguided souls who get shot out of their 110 or buff are also being done a favor, they now have the chance to up and head towards a red bar instead of avoiding it.
-
Every Tuesday night the AVA does Staff squad night. its 2 sided.... bring a squad or 2 or 3 or more.... see how it works out! MA's have 3 sides, the AVA, the SEA and the FSO have 2 sides, give it a whirl! take your pick!!
-
Horseapples! Da 'mishunz' exist to landgrab or toolshed while avoiding combat with other humans like the plague.
And what if it is? It then becomes the mission of the opposing team to find the mission and defend against. That is part of the fun.
Besides which, I have seen missions that were set up specifically to draw players into a dogfight.
-
Errr... would love to... yet>
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,361085.msg4816619.html#new (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,361085.msg4816619.html#new)
I had trouble a couple of weeks ago but I was able to make and join an arena after that and I've seen other custom arenas since so it doesn't appear to affect everybody.
Edit: I just made a custom arena, no problems.
-
I already tried 2 counties and also 4 counties. So why must I try again?
Hitech
I figured there was a good reason but I was really interested in what the advantage of the three country system is compared to a two country.
-
I've come to the realization that what I actually want by supporting this wish is for there to be more of a chance of opposing action for me to work against. Number of countries doesn't matter, I just want to be able to get in on whatever action is available rather than watching a red bardar on the other front from across the map.
Wiley.
-
A mission designed to draw opposition cannot be harmed by the spiez the paranoiacs grouse about. Otherwise, if someone wishes to say that super-secret sneak missions are part of warfare, I will say so are spies, and I say may the cartoon gods bless them.
-
I already tried 2 counties and also 4 counties. So why must I try again?
Hitech
:aok
-
I already tried 2 counties and also 4 counties. So why must I try again?
Hitech
Because things have obviously changed.
"I already tried landing off the ILS and couldn't see the approach lights at minimums. Why must I try again?" Because the RVR has gone up. You can get in now. American and Delta just made it and they said they had the runway at 500 feet. (Or you can head to your alternate if you so choose. Whichever is safer.)
-
I've come to the realization that what I actually want by supporting this wish is for there to be more of a chance of opposing action for me to work against. Number of countries doesn't matter, I just want to be able to get in on whatever action is available rather than watching a red bardar on the other front from across the map.
Wiley.
I am with you on this one. Chasing Dar Bars is boring.
Shrink the map in relation to player numbers and leave it three sided then. I am guessing three sides dampens the volatility of the battles. Only reasoning I can think of. But the maps are way too big.
-
ok hitech said no---so thread needs to stop here, not 23 pages later
-
I am guessing three sides dampens the volatility of the battles. Only reasoning I can think of. But the maps are way too big.
On small maps three countries often produce three sided battles near the 3-borders point. Those are fun! You get twice the number of targets and it is funny to see one red guy shooting the other red guy off your 6 :)
Target rich environment for all 3 sides!
-
My best guess is three countries is like what an old boss told me a long time ago about hiring women. Never have them work in threes. Two of them will always join together and fight the third. I followed his advice.
-
I figured there was a good reason but I was really interested in what the advantage of the three country system is compared to a two country.
Given the nature of the business I think you can safely assume that Hitech chooses the setup that maintains more subscribers.
-
Given the nature of the business I think you can safely assume that Hitech chooses the setup that maintains more subscribers.
I can't argue with that point.
-
HiTech is as fallible as anyone.
Again, it used to be one, late-war arena that would promptly close and open two more at the strike of 5PM. The one main had room for 600 sticks and would frequently have 400-500. When it closed at the magic strike and open to two, 100-150 would leave altogether. It took AH forever to figure out it was impacting the game. Maybe years past having this change from one to two worked, but life and business is dynamic. Things change. And if you don't change with it you are on a path to death.
I like the idea of doing a two-country setup in the MA on Tuesday nights for a period of time. Let it go on for 5 hours over 6-weeks and see what happens. One thing for certain, our numbers are slowly declining and in part this is due to the lack of fights. Increase fights, fewer will leave and if it works well, more will return.
Times change, get with the times or go home....old business saying.
-
mthrockmor you are wrong. when the two arenas would open there would be one that was full and it was hard to get in and the other had 200+ players. everybody wanted to get into the arena that had the most players but was full, you would stay there sometimes for 10 or 15 minutes waiting to get in, but you got in.
I dont think many people logged off just because two arenas opened up. the reason many people quit later on was because of the economy. I had a lot of friends who lost their jobs and had no reason but to quit the game. I remember because I and a few others who were lucky to have a job payed for other squadies's subscriptions.
numbers are increasing now, that can be clearly seen on fridays during fso. btw there's lots of players who only do fso or special events.
btw we already have a two country set up. it's called the ava and it sits empty. they can change settings to allow for all different things just contact them. easiest way to test your theory that it would increase fights.
semp
-
Again, it used to be one, late-war arena that would promptly close and open two more at the strike of 5PM. The one main had room for 600 sticks and would frequently have 400-500. When it closed at the magic strike and open to two, 100-150 would leave altogether. It took AH forever to figure out it was impacting the game. Maybe years past having this change from one to two worked, but life and business is dynamic.
This was a transitional system between the "two LW arenas all the time, with arena caps" and the current one LW arena setup. It lasted for about half a year.
Single Main Arena - up to tour 80
2 LW arenas with caps (+ addition of EW, MW and later WW1) - tour 80 to tour 130
On/Offpeak LW arena system - tour 130 to tour 137
Single LW arena - since tour 137
-
Given the nature of the business I think you can safely assume that Hitech chooses the setup that maintains more subscribers.
I would argue against that. He may choose the setup he BELIEVES keeps the most subscribers, but since numbers are falling regardless, I don't know how you can determine what causes what.
-
I would argue against that. He may choose the setup he BELIEVES keeps the most subscribers, but since numbers are falling regardless, I don't know how you can determine what causes what.
I'm pretty sure he has access to more information than us..
-
I'm pretty sure he has access to more information than us..
Because he's a subscriber to Lusche's Premium Statistical Bulletin :old:
:D
-
I would argue against that. He may choose the setup he BELIEVES keeps the most subscribers, but since numbers are falling regardless, I don't know how you can determine what causes what.
Equally inexplicable is the decline in housing and new car sales. Imagine how delusional Hitech would be without the constant correction he receives here on the BB. :lol
-
I would argue against that. He may choose the setup he BELIEVES keeps the most subscribers, but since numbers are falling regardless, I don't know how you can determine what causes what.
I have been here for 8 years and since I got here I am reading about how the number of subscribers is dropping and the game is on the decline. I just spent another 400 bucks in hardware not needed but I want, to play this game, what the hell am I thinking :furious.
semp
-
HiTech is as fallible as anyone.
Yet all wishes have to be approved by him before they even get considered to be implemented.
No one is perfect, and while I can't say I agree with every little thing that any company does or how people act. I have to admit, that how HTC has run their company, and how they respond to their customers both foam-at-the-mouth and peachy-keen, is very respectable.
Just because I pay a subscription doesn't mean that I have the right to nag for this or that. What attracted me to the game back in 2007 is why I am here today. Not because of anything new that is added, that is just icing on the cake.
-
I like the idea of doing a two-country setup in the MA on Tuesday nights for a period of time. Let it go on for 5 hours over 6-weeks and see what happens.
You don't need to re-write the foundation the Main Arena is built on. Simply do this in the AvA. Why does everyone want HTC to redesign something that is working for most players when they already have the tools in front of them to set up exactly what they want?
The AvA is empty while the MAs are stuffed with a few hundred people. Seems pretty clear to me. The main arena has a few hundred players while FSO is going on with another few hundred players, and the AvA is still empty. Take your 2 front war and make it happen. HTC needs to do nothing for this to occur. The AvA group, I am sure, would love to see a reason to keep the staff busy and set this up for you. As it is, you guys are looking for a 2 front war and the people who can make it happen are flying in the Main Arena because their arena is empty. And you want HTC to redesign the main arena because some of you think it's a good idea? Doesn't look so good to me.
If it's a great idea, then you can make it work in the AvA. Try it there, if it's wildly successful you now have some facts to show HTC. Some of you have spent more time in here wishing it were so, and could have simply made it so.
-
Why does everyone want HTC to redesign something that is working for most players when they already have the tools in front of them to set up exactly what they want?
I'm guessing it's because of the MA score. If 2 or more players "can't find a fight" they aren't going outside the MA.
-
If 2 or more players "can't find a fight" they aren't going outside the MA.
Hmm, you might be right. I keep forgetting about score. Getting old, haven't thought about score in so long, it just doesn't register. If I'm looking for a fight, it's for the fight. That's what I thought these guys have been asking for this whole time.
-
All the base takers would congregate in one country and roll the map. May as well go with a one country set-up. Then they can log on feeling all warm and fuzzy since they already own the map.
-
Hmm, you might be right. I keep forgetting about score. Getting old, haven't thought about score in so long, it just doesn't register. If I'm looking for a fight, it's for the fight. That's what I thought these guys have been asking for this whole time.
It's like the no HO issue "making fights more challenging" except it makes them easier if you know what you're doing. But I digress. :lol
-
Equally inexplicable is the decline in housing and new car sales. Imagine how delusional Hitech would be without the constant correction he receives here on the BB. :lol
:lol
-
You don't need to re-write the foundation the Main Arena is built on. Simply do this in the AvA. Why does everyone want HTC to redesign something that is working for most players when they already have the tools in front of them to set up exactly what they want?
The AvA is empty while the MAs are stuffed with a few hundred people. Seems pretty clear to me. The main arena has a few hundred players while FSO is going on with another few hundred players, and the AvA is still empty. Take your 2 front war and make it happen. HTC needs to do nothing for this to occur. The AvA group, I am sure, would love to see a reason to keep the staff busy and set this up for you. As it is, you guys are looking for a 2 front war and the people who can make it happen are flying in the Main Arena because their arena is empty. And you want HTC to redesign the main arena because some of you think it's a good idea? Doesn't look so good to me.
If it's a great idea, then you can make it work in the AvA. Try it there, if it's wildly successful you now have some facts to show HTC. Some of you have spent more time in here wishing it were so, and could have simply made it so.
Thank you ROC. Sadly most won't listen. They don't even realize they are missing out on half the terrains on the server. Tuesday & Thursday nights we are getting around 20 players, so I invite all of you, yet again, to at least come in and check it out on one of those nights. :salute
-
The more I think about two countries, the more I see the flaw. With two countries, inevitably, one side would become dominate and stay that way. With three countries, the chance of that is more remote.
-
The more I think about two countries, the more I see the flaw.
Everybody should have seen the flaw by page 3 when this was posted..
It is not going to happen.
Hitech
Why anybody thinks they need to ponder the subject another three pages
is the real mystery.
-
Equally inexplicable is the decline in housing and new car sales. Imagine how delusional Hitech would be without the constant correction he receives here on the BB. :lol
This ain't cars and houses, bruh.
This is a market segment in decline. Other games in this genre have slogged this death march already. It remains to be seen if AH will go the same route. I am hoping not. We shall see.
-
The more I think about two countries, the more I see the flaw. With two countries, inevitably, one side would become dominate and stay that way. With three countries, the chance of that is more remote.
Not true. The only way that might happen is if switching sides is too hard. In WBs people switched sides for balance regularly. The movement of the battle lines was dynamic and exciting. It went back and forth.
-
This ain't cars and houses, bruh.
Thanks for the heads up. You cut straight to the point. I don't know what I was thinking. :D
I should have remembered you made a similar point earlier. Where you pointed out that landing an aircraft is nothing like choosing between 2 and 3 sides in the MA.
Let me try to find it.
Because things have obviously changed.
"I already tried landing off the ILS and couldn't see the approach lights at minimums. Why must I try again?" Because the RVR has gone up. You can get in now. American and Delta just made it and they said they had the runway at 500 feet. (Or you can head to your alternate if you so choose. Whichever is safer.)
Oops, sucks to be old, I remembered that wrong.
-
In WBs people switched sides for balance regularly.
Odd. Reading the posts on WBs right now. I don't think you really meant to bring this up ;) It won't help your argument at all. Their big concern? The horde steam rolling the bases, unacceptable odds, 5 hours of fighting for the under dog and this has gone on for 6 months. It's so bad, that one side even had enough players on that they could send 2 to 3 bombers onto the other sides field and level them. 7 to 2 at around 10pm eastern.
Like I said earlier, you should make it happen instead of trying to convince everyone in here it should happen. I think it's possible that HTC has enough sense to not model this game after one that in prime time has the audience of a Wednesday night snapshot.
This isn't a dig at you Vraciu, it's clarification. You have at your fingertips a game that will support you with tools we have in place to create the game you want. Quit waiting for HTC to do something that doesn't need done. Use the AvA and make it happen.
-
Odd. Reading the posts on WBs right now. I don't think you really meant to bring this up ;) It won't help your argument at all. Their big concern? The horde steam rolling the bases, unacceptable odds, 5 hours of fighting for the under dog and this has gone on for 6 months. It's so bad, that one side even had enough players on that they could send 2 to 3 bombers onto the other sides field and level them. 7 to 2 at around 10pm eastern.
Like I said earlier, you should make it happen instead of trying to convince everyone in here it should happen. I think it's possible that HTC has enough sense to not model this game after one that in prime time has the audience of a Wednesday night snapshot.
This isn't a dig at you Vraciu, it's clarification. You have at your fingertips a game that will support you with tools we have in place to create the game you want. Quit waiting for HTC to do something that doesn't need done. Use the AvA and make it happen.
A horde in WBs these days is five players--essentially the entire country. Behold the future if past is prologue.
-
A horde in WBs these days is five players--essentially the entire country. Behold the future if past is prologue.
This ain't WB, bruh. :aok
-
Vraciu
Silver Member
****
Reg: Nov 2013
Posts: 921
Offline Offline
View Profile WWW Personal Message (Offline)
Re: Two countries vs Three
« Reply #54 on: May 23, 2014, 12:55:53 PM »
Reply with quoteQuote
Quote from: Wiley on May 23, 2014, 12:30:43 PM
I've come to the realization that what I actually want by supporting this wish is for there to be more of a chance of opposing action for me to work against. Number of countries doesn't matter, I just want to be able to get in on whatever action is available rather than watching a red bardar on the other front from across the map.
Wiley.
I am with you on this one. Chasing Dar Bars is boring.
Shrink the map in relation to player numbers and leave it three sided then. I am guessing three sides dampens the volatility of the battles. Only reasoning I can think of. But the maps are way too big.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2014, 12:57:33 PM by Vraciu » Report to moderator Logged
A worthy cause for a childhood hero of mine.... http://www.AlexVraciu.net.
lunatic1
you can never satisfy everybody--big map people whine that the map is too big--smaller map--people whine it's too small
-
I tell you what randy1--go to the ava and set up a 2 country ma type map do it for-lets say 2 nights advertise it--let people know what you are doing...and see how it turns out.......I won't be there....I already have fun in the ma.
-
I tell you what randy1--go to the ava and set up a 2 country ma type map do it for-lets say 2 nights advertise it--let people know what you are doing...and see how it turns out.......I won't be there....I already have fun in the ma.
Keep in mind my Original Post did not advocate a two country system nor do I now. I was trying to understand the bases for the current three country system.
-
Keep in mind my Original Post did not advocate a two country system nor do I now. I was trying to understand the basis for the current three country system.
Fixed
-
This ain't WB, bruh. :aok
Pretty much is. WB circa 2008. You can see where they are.
-
you can never satisfy everybody--big map people whine that the map is too big--smaller map--people whine it's too small
Which is why dynamic map scaling would please everyone. There is no need for 250 bases when you have 25-50 players total. Or even with 200 players. Too big.
-
All the base takers would congregate in one country and roll the map. May as well go with a one country set-up. Then they can log on feeling all warm and fuzzy since they already own the map.
:aok
I have advocated the one country setup myself before!
just log in and let it kick you back to desktop "your side has won the war"
-
Pretty much is. WB circa 2008. You can see where they are.
False comparison. You can compare WB today with AH today or WB in 2008 to AH in 2008. Your choice.
The critical difference will always be that Hitech wrote WB in 1995 then he quit to make a better flight sim.
-
The more I think about two countries, the more I see the flaw. With two countries, inevitably, one side would become dominate and stay that way. With three countries, the chance of that is more remote.
Well said.
-
See rule #4
-
See rule #4
-
See rule 4
-
False comparison. You can compare WB today with AH today or WB in 2008 to AH in 2008. Your choice.
The critical difference will always be that Hitech wrote WB in 1995 then he quit to make a better flight sim.
Same game, essentially, with minor tweaks. Same timeline...so far. I am hoping it lives another fifty years. It is the last of its kind.
-
Keep in mind my Original Post did not advocate a two country system nor do I now. I was trying to understand the bases for the current three country system.
Sorry
-
Which is why dynamic map scaling would please everyone. There is no need for 250 bases when you have 25-50 players total. Or even with 200 players. Too big.
Only ti.e ive ever seen 25 to 50 players on is the early am--- thats not hitechs fought.
And why r we still dissuing this, hitech already said no--
-
Only ti.e ive ever seen 25 to 50 players on is the early am--- thats not hitechs fought.
And why r we still dissuing this, hitech already said no--
Who is at fault then? Are those players less important than the prime time horde? As it stands an entire continent is basically being written off. People are getting frustrated and logging off. There should be a way to accommodate them.
I dare say most players have no idea what the other 21 hours of the day they DON'T play are like...
-
Who is at fault then? Are those players less important than the prime time horde? As it stands an entire continent is basically being written off. People are getting frustrated and logging off. There should be a way to accommodate them.
I dare say most players have no idea what the other 21 hours of they day they DON'T play are like...
While that might be the case, 2 sides isn't the way to do it.
When I think of games that have two sides, I think of Call of Duty. For those who don't know, it's typically matches of 12 v 12 . Sometimes you would have players switch to make a slightly lobsided match like 9 v 15 . However, quite often, it was 18 v 6 or better, and the players did it for various reasons. Being a jerk, score (win/loss ratio :rolleyes: ), etc.
I personally think a good solution would be to limit what bases players could take off from, and make it so they could only take off from bases more on the front lines or closer to each other. Making the bigger maps 'smaller', by limited the bases you could take off from, would make finding fights at late hours (or off peak times) easier.
Edit: Interesting, while looking for an old post of mine with screenshots of the idea. I found this.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,300387.0.html
While this was discontinued if I am not mistaken. I think it has merit here for this topic. (Note: not my intention to hi-jack but to me it relates to the topic and is a possible solution.)
Instead of 3 areas, like in the link, why not have 1 'off peak' arena, and one 'prime time' arena, that run on a similar clock to the link above. The 'off peak' arena would have small maps only, or small/medium maps. And the other would be what the rotation is now.
While I can see some cons to it, I won't bother writing an article on it, but I'll let you guys munch on it now that I thrown some potential new meat.. but what do I know, it could be just air *shrug* .
:salute
-
Same game, essentially, with minor tweaks.
You must have some notion of property rights even if you can't tell the difference simply by playing.
-
You must have some notion of property rights even if you can't tell the difference simply by playing.
And Copyrights. Doesn't matter. Frankly I am surprised IEN and HTC didn't sue each other out of business. Probably agreed to disagree and do their own thing. (I don't blame Hitech for leaving, fwiw.)