Post by: Rich46yo on June 17, 2017, 08:51:08 PM
One is to be the clubber'er (http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/ah-2b_zpshfrklnia.jpg)
The other is to be the clubbee.(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/ah-1b_zpsaaivj2h6.jpg)
And I know everyone else is seeing the same thing. So I'll fly one sortie and either be one of 10 on one or be one with 10 on me. Either way it is no fun whatsoever. I hope Steam is the answer and I hope the game prospers. I still think it was a fine update.
Post by: cav58d on June 17, 2017, 09:53:57 PM
Post by: JimmyC on June 17, 2017, 10:13:53 PM
Post by: The Fugitive on June 17, 2017, 10:19:17 PM
Post by: ImADot on June 17, 2017, 10:19:18 PM
2 country war fixes this.
Yeah, by having one country with 200 players steamrolling the other country populated by 2 players.
Post by: cav58d on June 17, 2017, 10:25:34 PM
Yeah, by having one country with 200 players steamrolling the other country populated by 2 players.
Fine, rolling plane set.
Post by: The Fugitive on June 17, 2017, 10:40:15 PM
Fine, rolling plane set.
That will never work. Need more incentives for "good" game. Attacking bases or \strats... good. Running supplies to towns..... bad. Running from fights, playing the alt monkey.... bad. Fighting it out at a disadvantage good.
Game play needs to change.
Post by: Brooke on June 17, 2017, 11:01:11 PM
I understand time limits on side changes so you don't get people changing to the side that is doing the steamrolling.
I also understand that you have to be careful about whatever you implement being able to be exploited for unintended consequences.
I just wish there were a way for me to could get on that outnumbered side more than once per night. It's not uncommon for me to switch only to have the situation change later on, but then I'm stuck.
Post by: cav58d on June 17, 2017, 11:20:18 PM
I would like it if I could always change to the side with fewer people.
I understand time limits on side changes so you don't get people changing to the side that is doing the steamrolling.
I also understand that you have to be careful about whatever you implement being able to be exploited for unintended consequences.
I just wish there were a way for me to could get on that outnumbered side more than once per night. It's not uncommon for me to switch only to have the situation change later on, but then I'm stuck.
Regarding side switching from a pouts stand point the solution is so easy. You only receive "win the war" perk points if you have been a member of the winning country for the past "X" whatever amount of hours.
Also, ENY really need to be based off of players in "flight", which should be renamed players in action and includes those in GV's
Post by: Wiley on June 17, 2017, 11:40:37 PM
Regarding side switching from a pouts stand point the solution is so easy. You only receive "win the war" perk points if you have been a member of the winning country for the past "X" whatever amount of hours.
Which is already how it works.
Wiley.
Post by: nugetx on June 18, 2017, 01:33:38 AM
Yeah, by having one country with 200 players steamrolling the other country populated by 2 players.
There can be balance implemented..... if the difference is greater than 10 players for example, people joining the fight must join the side with less players, simple and problem fixed.
Post by: FESS67 on June 18, 2017, 01:58:23 AM
Imagine that, we are having a really really good EVEN fight locally and ENY screws us.
How do we fix the gang / be ganged? 2 sides with balancing may work.
Post by: fd ski on June 18, 2017, 02:34:01 AM
my 2 cents.
Post by: Rich46yo on June 18, 2017, 07:35:43 AM
Upon a time CV fights were some of the best. Even then sinking the CVs was to easy but now? They dont stand a chance. No cap and to many bored players needing something to do.
1/2 your players are in GVs. Maybe 1/3 of the rest are in the tower. So going to a enemy base to start a fight with an ack runner doesnt sound fun. Neither does defending one from a B&Z run-90 or runstang. Why are "whats left" so afraid of getting killed in a fair fight? I havnt had a decent fight since the upgrade last winter. Go to a new base to "stir up a fight", I bet you'll either be looking at a lot of air or chasing an ack runner around like a roach.
So since we had the same game back when players wanted to fight I guess we can assume whats left of those players just dont want to. Yeah I know we had pickers and ack runners...ect back then but I never remember it being this bad. For a month now Ive been flying one sortie and signing off and last night I just unsubbed.
This isnt sour grapes, I'm just stating the obvious. I hope to come back in better times and wish the game the best but this kind of play is like taking a Ronson to $16 a month and lighting it.
Post by: Lusche on June 18, 2017, 07:50:37 AM
1/2 your players are in GVs. Maybe 1/3 of the rest are in the tower.
Currently, AH players spend about 28% of the time 'in sortie' per tour in GV vs 72% in planes. :old:
Post by: Krupinski on June 18, 2017, 08:26:21 AM
2 country war fixes this.
I agree... it works for every other war game out there, why couldn't it work here??
Naturally the numbers would even out on both sides, because in AH there isn't an advantage on one country as opposed to the other, where in other games sometimes the other side may have better equipment that will skew the numbers... Here in AH that's not so.
If the numbers don't even out, then auto balance the sides.
It couldn't hurt to test a 2 country war for an hour, a day, a week... If it doesn't work out, you can always switch it back.
Post by: Traveler on June 18, 2017, 08:28:17 AM
That will never work. Need more incentives for "good" game. Attacking bases or \strats... good. Running supplies to towns..... bad. Running from fights, playing the alt monkey.... bad. Fighting it out at a disadvantage good.Have to disagree with your thoughts on good and bad game play. Running supplies requires the opposing force to think out their strategy. One could as part of the base taking strategy organize attacks on Troops at supporting fields and take those out alone with VH to cut off re-supply. Unfortunately we don’t so much need to change the game play as much as we need to change the game players. The lone wolf mind set is not very helpful, and I think it has become the prevalent mind set of the game.
Game play needs to change.
True the game has always had lone wolfs but I don’t think they were the majority of numbers on at any time. But with the very low numbers of today. They stand out. Attempting to get an organized mission aloft is next to impossible, Asking people to actually carry a bomb and attempt to attack a predetermined target is impossible. It appears to me that team work, loyalty, and commitment are foreign concepts to many of today’s players.
Yesterday my wingman and I flew in the special events, we were walk on, split up and assigned to different squads what we noticed and discussed later on at our weekly 113th Saturday night Squad night, was the lack of a welcome, thanks for joining , wing up with so and so, here’s the plan and introduction to the full squad. What I experienced was not good for player retention. Even though I asked questions both on VOX and in text, I received no guidance, was not assigned to a wingman. I was told one thing, everyone is on their own, and during the dog fight heard very little chatter and not one check six, other than the one’s I issued.
Post by: TequilaChaser on June 18, 2017, 08:49:27 AM
It appears to me that team work, loyalty, and commitment are foreign concepts to many of today’s players.
I'd agree somewhat with you, for the MA only....but it is the generation gaps, they causes CHANGE... can not keep trying to look through Rose Colored Glasses, as NoBaddy ( NB ) would always tell me, about yester year!
Yesterday my wingman and I flew in the special events, we were walk on, split up and assigned to different squads what we noticed and discussed later on at our weekly 113th Saturday night Squad night, was the lack of a welcome, thanks for joining , wing up with so and so, here’s the plan and introduction to the full squad. What I experienced was not good for player retention. Even though I asked questions both on VOX and in text, I received no guidance, was not assigned to a wingman. I was told one thing, everyone is on their own, and during the dog fight heard very little chatter and not one check six, other than the one’s I issued.
not sure who you flew with, but what you say is all incorrect for the people I've been flying with in the Scenario for the past 3 weeks! that includes the walk-ons we have used!
just saying, want film for proof?
TC
Post by: TequilaChaser on June 18, 2017, 08:52:40 AM
if hitech & HTC gave every single one of the wishes or demands that people posted, they ( y'all! ) would still find something to complain about!
I been reading the same dang stuff for over 20+ years in 4 different flight sims......
TC
Post by: Zimme83 on June 18, 2017, 08:55:09 AM
Have to disagree with your thoughts on good and bad game play. Running supplies requires the opposing force to think out their strategy. One could as part of the base taking strategy organize attacks on Troops at supporting fields and take those out alone with VH to cut off re-supply. Unfortunately we don’t so much need to change the game play as much as we need to change the game players. The lone wolf mind set is not very helpful, and I think it has become the prevalent mind set of the game.
True the game has always had lone wolfs but I don’t think they were the majority of numbers on at any time. But with the very low numbers of today. They stand out. Attempting to get an organized mission aloft is next to impossible, Asking people to actually carry a bomb and attempt to attack a predetermined target is impossible. It appears to me that team work, loyalty, and commitment are foreign concepts to many of today’s players.
Yesterday my wingman and I flew in the special events, we were walk on, split up and assigned to different squads what we noticed and discussed later on at our weekly 113th Saturday night Squad night, was the lack of a welcome, thanks for joining , wing up with so and so, here’s the plan and introduction to the full squad. What I experienced was not good for player retention. Even though I asked questions both on VOX and in text, I received no guidance, was not assigned to a wingman. I was told one thing, everyone is on their own, and during the dog fight heard very little chatter and not one check six, other than the one’s I issued.
Normally you would have a few guys hunting the M3:s running in supps or kill VH on nearby bases but good strategy and tactic seems to be absent, now its more of trying to either sneak or overwhelm the defence. you dont even see the noe smash-n-grab missions anymore.
If you are heavily outnumbered resupping town is the only option you have if you want to save the base, upping a fighter or tank wont help since you cannot fight against 5-10 enemies.
Post by: nugetx on June 18, 2017, 09:00:53 AM
Have to disagree with your thoughts on good and bad game play. Running supplies requires the opposing force to think out their strategy. One could as part of the base taking strategy organize attacks on Troops at supporting fields and take those out alone with VH to cut off re-supply. Unfortunately we don’t so much need to change the game play as much as we need to change the game players. The lone wolf mind set is not very helpful, and I think it has become the prevalent mind set of the game.
True the game has always had lone wolfs but I don’t think they were the majority of numbers on at any time. But with the very low numbers of today. They stand out. Attempting to get an organized mission aloft is next to impossible, Asking people to actually carry a bomb and attempt to attack a predetermined target is impossible. It appears to me that team work, loyalty, and commitment are foreign concepts to many of today’s players.
Yesterday my wingman and I flew in the special events, we were walk on, split up and assigned to different squads what we noticed and discussed later on at our weekly 113th Saturday night Squad night, was the lack of a welcome, thanks for joining , wing up with so and so, here’s the plan and introduction to the full squad. What I experienced was not good for player retention. Even though I asked questions both on VOX and in text, I received no guidance, was not assigned to a wingman. I was told one thing, everyone is on their own, and during the dog fight heard very little chatter and not one check six, other than the one’s I issued.
This is why this :
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,387548.0.html
caters to every type of player.
Post by: thndregg on June 18, 2017, 09:03:35 AM
Nothing stopping you going to a new base and stirring up a fight
I do this. Usually if I get weary of the "beaten path", I'll get something together to open up a new front, a new conflict, or something.
Post by: The Fugitive on June 18, 2017, 09:07:33 AM
Radar + Dar isnt helping nothing. Except showing players where the best place is to either gang or avoid a fight, thus , never having to take the chance of losing.
Upon a time CV fights were some of the best. Even then sinking the CVs was to easy but now? They dont stand a chance. No cap and to many bored players needing something to do.
1/2 your players are in GVs. Maybe 1/3 of the rest are in the tower. So going to a enemy base to start a fight with an ack runner doesnt sound fun. Neither does defending one from a B&Z run-90 or runstang. Why are "whats left" so afraid of getting killed in a fair fight? I havnt had a decent fight since the upgrade last winter. Go to a new base to "stir up a fight", I bet you'll either be looking at a lot of air or chasing an ack runner around like a roach.
So since we had the same game back when players wanted to fight I guess we can assume whats left of those players just dont want to. Yeah I know we had pickers and ack runners...ect back then but I never remember it being this bad. For a month now Ive been flying one sortie and signing off and last night I just unsubbed.
This isnt sour grapes, I'm just stating the obvious. I hope to come back in better times and wish the game the best but this kind of play is like taking a Ronson to $16 a month and lighting it.
I think the lack of numbers is what points out all this crappy play stuff. Yes we have always had the guys who run to ack, HO every chance they get, run supplies to repair damage rather than fight to stop the damage from happening. The difference is when you have the numbers there were more things going on to cover up the crappy play.
Back then if you found an ack runner you just went to a different fight. Today we dont have that option, the ack runner is the only "fight" we have going.
This is why this :
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,387548.0.html
caters to every type of player.
LOL!!!! not again! It has already been proven that it does NOT cater to every type of player.
I do this. Usually if I get weary of the "beaten path", I'll get something together to open up a new front, a new conflict, or something.
Sometimes that works, but these days not so much. We rolled 3 or 4 bases last night because the bish didn't defend. They were in a fight with the knights and were having fun over there. Not enough numbers to cover both fronts.
Post by: nugetx on June 18, 2017, 09:13:26 AM
LOL!!!! not again! It has already been proven that it does NOT cater to every type of player.
Don't get me started :grin: , this thread is esentialy the same thing of which the other thread is.......
Post by: TequilaChaser on June 18, 2017, 09:18:18 AM
this thread is esentialy the same thing of which the other thread is.......
Hello Greenhorn, Welcome to AH....haha
but seriously Welcome to AH, nugetx
TC
Post by: nugetx on June 18, 2017, 09:22:16 AM
Hello Greenhorn, Welcome to AH....haha
but seriously Welcome to AH, nugetx
TC
Hi :airplane: :salute
Post by: Traveler on June 18, 2017, 09:30:31 AM
just saying, want film for proof?
TC
https://www.mediafire.com/?6c9be49m8zuj029
I got another 30 min if you want it, it's mostly the same, looking at it, it almost appears that they are on a different channel, It almost appears that the other 38’s are on a different channel than the one I was assigned. Coordinated somehow? Just saying the experience was not a good one, had I been a newbee I'd be out of here. But I've been here since the begining.
Post by: flippz on June 18, 2017, 09:40:08 AM
Post by: TequilaChaser on June 18, 2017, 09:54:27 AM
It almost appears that the other 38’s are on a different channel than the one I was assigned. Coordinated somehow?
Yep, looks like it, someone dropped the ball somewhere or you may have missed a room/local Vox or text maybe.... this is not the norm though
<S>
TC
Post by: NatCigg on June 18, 2017, 10:15:55 AM
its not to complicated or hitechs fault. Are you going to play multiplayer or fly solo?
enjoy.
:salute
Post by: lunatic1 on June 18, 2017, 10:19:04 AM
smaller maps for lower player count times. Numbers reevaluation at map reset ( if more people, next map larger ) and every hour ( if less then 50% players map is designed for - then reset to smaller map )...you do know that when a map changes it kicks people off, you have to relog back to the game, or like a few people go to the WWI arena for awhile.. theres no way the game computer can know how many people are going to log back on. it could be 50 or 100 or just 30.
my 2 cents.
and how is this suppose to happen, so we get logged back in and the map is say Bowlma and there are only 30 players, so what the computer Auto resets to a smaller map, what happens when it is a map better suited to 30 people and 60 people log back in, does it auto reset again?
it could do that all day you would never get to play.
Post by: lunatic1 on June 18, 2017, 10:20:10 AM
2 country war fixes this.
Hitech already said more than once there will not be a 2 country war system
Post by: lunatic1 on June 18, 2017, 10:21:23 AM
Fine, rolling plane set.
HiTech also said more than once NO R.P.S.
Post by: lunatic1 on June 18, 2017, 10:24:29 AM
I agree... it works for every other war game out there, why couldn't it work here??
Naturally the numbers would even out on both sides, because in AH there isn't an advantage on one country as opposed to the other, where in other games sometimes the other side may have better equipment that will skew the numbers... Here in AH that's not so.
If the numbers don't even out, then auto balance the sides.
It couldn't hurt to test a 2 country war for an hour, a day, a week... If it doesn't work out, you can always switch it back.
Hitech already tried a 2 sided war long ago and said it wouldn't work
Post by: lunatic1 on June 18, 2017, 10:28:39 AM
Have to disagree with your thoughts on good and bad game play. Running supplies requires the opposing force to think out their strategy. One could as part of the base taking strategy organize attacks on Troops at supporting fields and take those out alone with VH to cut off re-supply. Unfortunately we don’t so much need to change the game play as much as we need to change the game players. The lone wolf mind set is not very helpful, and I think it has become the prevalent mind set of the game.I flew in that scenario for the last 3 weeks on the Allies side we are friendly and communicative
True the game has always had lone wolfs but I don’t think they were the majority of numbers on at any time. But with the very low numbers of today. They stand out. Attempting to get an organized mission aloft is next to impossible, Asking people to actually carry a bomb and attempt to attack a predetermined target is impossible. It appears to me that team work, loyalty, and commitment are foreign concepts to many of today’s players.
Yesterday my wingman and I flew in the special events, we were walk on, split up and assigned to different squads what we noticed and discussed later on at our weekly 113th Saturday night Squad night, was the lack of a welcome, thanks for joining , wing up with so and so, here’s the plan and introduction to the full squad. What I experienced was not good for player retention. Even though I asked questions both on VOX and in text, I received no guidance, was not assigned to a wingman. I was told one thing, everyone is on their own, and during the dog fight heard very little chatter and not one check six, other than the one’s I issued.
I'm sorry travler, you must have been on Knights/Axis-the allies are a lot friendlier
Post by: Traveler on June 18, 2017, 10:32:40 AM
Yep, looks like it, someone dropped the ball somewhere or you may have missed a room/local Vox or text maybe.... this is not the norm though
<S>
TC
I understand and as I remember it, when my squad flew in the FSO’s things were very different way back then. Different time, different people and that’s kind of my point. After an FSO had someone commented about not feeing welcome in our squad or not getting briefed on the mission. I don’t think our first reaction would have been, “ want film for proof?”. Like I said, different time, different people.
Post by: lutrel on June 18, 2017, 10:34:18 AM
Post by: lunatic1 on June 18, 2017, 10:36:16 AM
This is why this :
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,387548.0.html
caters to every type of player.
no it don't.
and HiTech said no.
Quit it.
Post by: Krupinski on June 18, 2017, 10:57:46 AM
Hitech already tried a 2 sided war long ago and said it wouldn't work
Exactly, long ago... when numbers and fights were probably much more balanced than what you see today.
"Long ago" has nothing in common with today's gameplay.
Post by: Kanth on June 18, 2017, 11:04:32 AM
How many folks will want to login to like 10 guys fighting on one side desperately against the 150 that joined the other side to get the perks.
Really it will ruin game play until it's reset.
Post by: Krupinski on June 18, 2017, 11:07:58 AM
Also, that's the beauty of AH's open world maps, if you're getting swarmed in one area, counter-attack in another.
Post by: Kanth on June 18, 2017, 11:13:13 AM
I wonder if there is an example of this working where the players can switch sides at any time.
That they self level to keep the game play alive. I'm doubtful though.
Post by: TequilaChaser on June 18, 2017, 11:17:41 AM
I understand and as I remember it, when my squad flew in the FSO’s things were very different way back then. Different time, different people and that’s kind of my point. After an FSO had someone commented about not feeing welcome in our squad or not getting briefed on the mission. I don’t think our first reaction would have been, “ want film for proof?”. Like I said, different time, different people.
Well Traveler, I hate message boards, because just typing text, like "want film for proof?", can be misleading or misunderstood
I was offering my films for all 3 Frames of the Scenario, because I have saw the exact opposite of what I originally quoted of you posting above....
reading it as I typed it seemed fine
reading it as you typed it, is like I was snapping at you, unintentionally.... I apologize for that. At the same time I do not like to see post like that from someone who has been her since the beginning, when they know the proper place a post like that should go... Hence my Response, I'm sure you can see it my way also
<S>
TC
Post by: nugetx on June 18, 2017, 11:30:32 AM
I think the trouble with a two sided war is that if you get pinned, there is no relief.
and 3 sides is only a illusionary relief, because the 3rd side players that would be on one of other sides, are clubbing together the other side or doing something else somewhere elsewhere while the one side still gets clubbed.
So it's better to have 2 sides, because if you are getting clubbed, you still can attack an undefended area, while with 3 sides there is a high chance you will then get attacked by 3rd horde.
Post by: nugetx on June 18, 2017, 11:31:46 AM
Post by: RufusLeaking on June 18, 2017, 11:34:29 AM
Against buffs, roll the big cannon birds. Against hordes, up fast mover birds and keep energy high. Always a rock-paper-scissors.
It is not always the exact way one may want to play at the time, but there are options.
... and during the dog fight heard very little chatter and not one check six, other than the one’s I issued.There are some players who are very good wing men. It is a matter of being in the same area at the same time.
Post by: Krupinski on June 18, 2017, 11:39:30 AM
that was just me saying that. And yes I did exaggerate, but I do feel it will be very unbalanced for a longer period of time than it is balanced, with only two sides playing. When everyone will want to feel like they at least have a chance.
I wonder if there is an example of this working where the players can switch sides at any time.
That they self level to keep the game play alive. I'm doubtful though.
Yeah there is, the new IL2 series allows you to switch sides whenever you want. The Germans have far superior planes than the Russians in that game, yet you will find the sides are balanced 90% of the time.
It's simply more fun when it's balanced, and the players know it.
Post by: redcatcherb412 on June 18, 2017, 11:48:44 AM
Also, that's the beauty of AH's open world maps, if you're getting swarmed in one area, counter-attack in another.
Same goes for offense. Many a time trying for a defended base on a large front, getting some 'lone wolves' to attack and get all the front line bases flashing at the same time thinning defenders works good too.
Post by: Lusche on June 18, 2017, 11:51:44 AM
I don't know why you guys think the numbers are going to be so dramatic as 1 vs 50, it simply isn't going to happen as long as both sides have the same resources....
Just as they do now. All three sides have the same resources, yet numbers fluctuate drastically over the day.
Why would these imbalances suddenly stop with 2 sides?
(http://i.imgur.com/v0jg2AT.jpg)
(Melee Arena Screenshot from April)
Post by: Krupinski on June 18, 2017, 11:53:51 AM
Post by: Lusche on June 18, 2017, 11:57:27 AM
There's your problem, side balancing clearly isn't.... ENABLED. :rofl
You said it won't happen because of the same resources available to both. That's the part I was looking to get explained.
Post by: gflyer on June 18, 2017, 11:59:12 AM
On another note, those that don't want to fight have just as easy a time avoiding it in a two sided war as they do in three. Two sided wars do not fix what is going on here. IMO, only more people will really solve the problem - or possibly much-much smaller maps. Why not have more countries instead of less? Why not end teleporting? Anyway you go nothing is a silver bullet to solve the perceived problems.
Post by: nugetx on June 18, 2017, 12:34:07 PM
not wanting to be on out-numberedThat's why there need to be in-game system that puts players on teams so its equal.
If there are 3 sides and all planes for everyone, it doesn't matter which team you are on.
Post by: DmonSlyr on June 18, 2017, 12:58:22 PM
The key issues that will bring the best fights, will be shorter base distance from back fields, and strat resupply adjustments. The side switch would be more reasonable at 3 hours. Or like Brooke said, players should be allowed to willingly choose to go to the lower side. Making the overall fighting area smaller, but shortening the base distance, would bring a lot of action to more people. At least in my opinion.
Post by: Kanth on June 18, 2017, 01:59:21 PM
I like those ideas too.
and gflyer I also think squad based movement between the countries due to numbers is a bit more cumbersome than it is for individual players. I would assume that most squads don't jump countries to even up the numbers for the short term. Most do it for the month or not at all.
The key issues that will bring the best fights, will be shorter base distance from back fields, and strat resupply adjustments. The side switch would be more reasonable at 3 hours. Or like Brooke said, players should be allowed to willingly choose to go to the lower side. Making the overall fighting area smaller, but shortening the base distance, would bring a lot of action to more people. At least in my opinion.
Post by: Zimme83 on June 18, 2017, 02:12:51 PM
Post by: cav58d on June 18, 2017, 03:20:36 PM
Just as they do now. All three sides have the same resources, yet numbers fluctuate drastically over the day.
Why would these imbalances suddenly stop with 2 sides?
(http://i.imgur.com/v0jg2AT.jpg)
(Melee Arena Screenshot from April)
Oh stop man, what an awful screen shot to try and make a point. Show me a consistent imbalance when the arena is populated with the normal 120-180 players during prime time, not SIX people during an off hour. SMH.
Post by: NatCigg on June 18, 2017, 03:36:39 PM
Pushing players into positions is not good for AH. That's why the 2 MAs failed, when squads could not all fly together. Everyone screams about titanic Tuesday, when that's how it should have always been.
The key issues that will bring the best fights, will be shorter base distance from back fields, and strat resupply adjustments. The side switch would be more reasonable at 3 hours. Or like Brooke said, players should be allowed to willingly choose to go to the lower side. Making the overall fighting area smaller, but shortening the base distance, would bring a lot of action to more people. At least in my opinion.
imo, 2 ma's failed because htc would Lock the first arena (in a attempt to fill the second arena) at noon central every day. this is euro prime time and a lot got upset everyday.
second, the main arena attracts a lot of ugly (herding cattle is ugly). eliminating the second arena up set me. being forced in the pen with cattle was not fun, Titanic Tuesday (big cattle farm) was not fun. Many liked it, many like the cattle farm, for friends and food.
:airplane:
Post by: Lusche on June 18, 2017, 03:52:15 PM
Oh stop man, what an awful screen shot to try and make a point. Show me a consistent imbalance when the arena is populated with the normal 120-180 players during prime time, not SIX people during an off hour. SMH.
'Prime time' Is only a small window of play time during a whole day. Many AH players have a totally different 'prime' time than you and never get to see 120-180 players anymore.
For example us Europeans usually get 15/30 at noon, 50-60 at the beginning of our 'prime time' and something like 80-90 players during the height of it.
Only for the smaller part of the day numbers raise above 100.
Even back in the day with 200+ during Euro and 500+ during US prime there were significant imbalances between the chesspieces, despite all sides having equal resources. This alone doesn't equalize the sides with three chesspieces, and so it won't with two. Which was the whole point I was making.
Post by: Ack-Ack on June 18, 2017, 03:58:41 PM
Exactly, long ago... when numbers and fights were probably much more balanced than what you see today.
"Long ago" has nothing in common with today's gameplay.
He didn't say it "long ago".
Post by: Ack-Ack on June 18, 2017, 03:59:59 PM
So it's better to have 2 sides, because if you are getting clubbed, you still can attack an undefended area, while with 3 sides there is a high chance you will then get attacked by 3rd horde.
It has been shown that is not the case by people with far more game design experience than you.
Post by: nugetx on June 18, 2017, 04:09:35 PM
It has been shown that is not the case by people with far more game design experience than you.I'm not the only one in this thread who is saying this.
Post by: Traveler on June 18, 2017, 04:13:54 PM
Well Traveler, I hate message boards, because just typing text, like "want film for proof?", can be misleading or misunderstoodNot sure I follow, I was posting in this thread about “the Game Play” and posted my observation . That is what this OP wanted discussed , Game play or his ideas about new or improved game play. I also want to be perfectly clear on this next statement. I don’t care if you think this is the proper place or not. I was commenting about Game play that I observed in the special events. I filmed it and you saw that film, my point was valid. And if not here just where do you think the proper place to post about game play is? No, never mind, I’m done.
I was offering my films for all 3 Frames of the Scenario, because I have saw the exact opposite of what I originally quoted of you posting above....
reading it as I typed it seemed fine
reading it as you typed it, is like I was snapping at you, unintentionally.... I apologize for that. At the same time I do not like to see post like that from someone who has been her since the beginning, when they know the proper place a post like that should go... Hence my Response, I'm sure you can see it my way also
<S>
TC
Post by: The Fugitive on June 18, 2017, 05:21:17 PM
Yeah there is, the new IL2 series allows you to switch sides whenever you want. The Germans have far superior planes than the Russians in that game, yet you will find the sides are balanced 90% of the time.
It's simply more fun when it's balanced, and the players know it.
What makes you think the sides would stay balanced? With the attitude of "the win the war is all important" that we see these days most would join the side with the numbers and roll map after map.
Auto balancing... why join squads, why make friends and fly with the same guys? That was the biggest down fall of the split arenas, part of your squad/friends are in one arena and your stuck in another.
Post by: ghi on June 18, 2017, 05:39:18 PM
The OP is pretty accurate in the description of player behavior. Like almost everything in the game, there are counter options.
Yep, Rich is right, unfortunately after 18 years AH is still rewarding the lowest qualities in human behavior and personality; The best fighter never takes off from clubbed fields, best GVer usually sits at spawn crying for sups and best bombers never takes risk bombing CVs, but some worthless targets from 30k, @ 4 AM.
Watch AH front page; this are AH heroes on front page and the newby crowd follows.
Imo, should reward teams, not individuals , the team vs team fight was eliminated slowly with every patch, making bases more and more difficult to capture,( LOOK at the size of V bases, airfield base, Ports in AH1,1,3) and what;s left is this nonsense vulch for kils and points.
Maybe i'm old fashion brainwashed commie, graduated eastern block officers schools, but what this game praises as heroes is selfish cowardness fit for firing squad only , behind the the barracks at dawn ; Poof! .
Imo, should reward teams, not individuals .
Since we discussed about this here, the MA population lost 30-40% more players.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,368381.msg4907874.html#msg4907874
Post by: Krupinski on June 18, 2017, 06:38:19 PM
Sorry, but this is the reality we're facing... and none of you seem to care.
Post by: The Fugitive on June 18, 2017, 06:49:29 PM
Alright, so don't change a thing... have fun when the few people that try the game from Steam leave after 2 weeks, and the game continues to die slowly. :rolleyes:
Sorry, but this is the reality we're facing... and none of you seem to care.
Who says we dont care? We are just pointing out that the ideas being put forth have been tried before and failed, why try them again?
Sure there should be some changes, but will never be set up as a pure fighter game like some of you guys seem to want. The sandbox setup HTC has is most likely the thing that has kept this game around as long as it has.
Post by: TequilaChaser on June 18, 2017, 07:25:17 PM
I then was trying to offer proof of the exact opposite of what you posted about the Special Events / Scenarios game play, that a lot of us take very seriously, and the Creators and host of he Scenarios spend months on end planning... I know you know this
the Proper place to post about Scenario Game Play is "Scenario General" forum, sorry if you did not know that before...... not trying to argue
<S>
TC
Post by: NatCigg on June 18, 2017, 08:29:50 PM
Alright, so don't change a thing... have fun when the few people that try the game from Steam leave after 2 weeks, and the game continues to die slowly. :rolleyes:
Sorry, but this is the reality we're facing... and none of you seem to care.
where is the mega squad? why did we we have a mega squad? how many people were in mega squads? where did they go?
what does a mega squad do? why?
these questions hint at the former mass of the community. did anyone speak for them? were they important?
how many were run out of town? or did they get bored? lack of money?
hmmm? :headscratch:
ghi makes good points.
ghi was a nemesis. when on his side, his communication helped the team, and he seemed always in the fight. it was fun playing with ghi.
:salute
Post by: Lazerr on June 18, 2017, 08:50:11 PM
Yeah, by having one country with 200 players steamrolling the other country populated by 2 players.
ENY
Post by: Rich46yo on June 18, 2017, 09:14:59 PM
Quote
its not to complicated or hitechs fault.
Theres always one isnt there? Coming to HiTechs defense when nobody was blaming him for anything. :rofl
Post by: nugetx on June 19, 2017, 12:11:09 AM
Quote
Auto balancing... why join squads, why make friends and fly with the same guys?
Auto balancing could balance squads...... 1 squad leader joins side...... then the auto balancer looks for the squad with similar number of players in squad and sends them to other side.
Post by: JimmyC on June 19, 2017, 12:12:06 AM
have you played yet btw?
Post by: nugetx on June 19, 2017, 12:19:02 AM
Quote
The sandbox setup HTC has is most likely the thing that has kept this game around as long as it has.And when I post ideas to expand this sandbox, people say i want to dumb it down or make this into a world of tanks which is not the case.
Seems some just complain for the sake of complaining.
Post by: cav58d on June 19, 2017, 12:32:59 AM
Auto balancing could balance squads...... 1 squad leader joins side...... then the auto balancer looks for the squad with similar number of players in squad and sends them to other side.
Hell no. Just stop dude. If you start to auto balance squads I promise you that will be the final death blow go this game.
Post by: nugetx on June 19, 2017, 12:33:54 AM
Hell no. Just stop dude. If you start to auto balance squads I promise you that will be the final death blow go this game.
and why ?
Having the game balanced, fun and fair will be final death for the game? that is really interesting.
Post by: JimmyC on June 19, 2017, 01:33:28 AM
You would know that if you had spent any time in game, in a squad or spent a few years in game.
Post by: nugetx on June 19, 2017, 01:38:40 AM
Have you played..your idea is ludicrous
You would know that if you had spent any time in game, in a squad or spent a few years in game.
Are you saying that OP doesn't know what he is talking about even though he is an old stick? i'm not the one that made this thread.
Post by: JimmyC on June 19, 2017, 01:56:45 AM
Ludicrous...on so many levels..
I find you offering solutions to problems you don't understand annoying at best.
Do some time in game to earn a tad of credibility.. you might find out some stuff before wading in with your over bloated opinions.
Post by: nugetx on June 19, 2017, 02:03:09 AM
Squad wants to fly together - so they fly together, just on a side picked by the game so the game is balanced, what's the problem with that? There is no AvA, there are no 2 sides, every plane is the same, there is no reason there should be a problem with this for anyone.
Post by: Dundee on June 19, 2017, 04:48:48 AM
Currently, AH players spend about 28% of the time 'in sortie' per tour in GV vs 72% in planes. :old:
I'm pretty sure the number of GV'er will drops some as those folks are leaving the game..........
Post by: TequilaChaser on June 19, 2017, 06:29:21 AM
I'm pretty sure the number of GV'er will drops some as those folks are leaving the game..........
Please provide the Aces High Community with your imperical data to prove your ridiculous post
:rofl
Post by: ImADot on June 19, 2017, 06:32:54 AM
Post by: Zygote404 on June 19, 2017, 07:53:04 AM
What I think would be better would be slow population of models after base capture based on ENY. If you take a plane the highest ENY planes are available with the lower ones coming in over 30 minute period. That would reduce the horde steam rolling base to base with fresh late war models available instantly.
There are other issues obviously. But that would be start.
Post by: Zener on June 19, 2017, 10:05:52 AM
Currently, AH players spend about 28% of the time 'in sortie' per tour in GV vs 72% in planes. :old:
I don't doubt your stats but frankly I am surprised it isn't higher. When you have a map that contains 18 Af and more than that for Gv bases/side then it seems logical many conflicts will be primarily ground based with limited air support. More drivers than fliers.
Sometimes circumstances dictate the best choices are GVs particularly if a base is captured that spawns into an enemy strat fac. I could take the time to climb and go there in a bomber to maybe drop strat 30% with good hits, risking attack inbound and outbound; or I could up a Jeep and drop vehicle supps then return in an M4/rockets and take the strat down to 0% in less time than it would take to reach target in a buff. Not a really hard choice if my goal is to damage strats.
As to the topic of game balancing, I don't believe there is a way that will always work and always make things fair. ENY is an attempt at that, but even a great plane isn't a match for a swarm of older models. I've just come to accept that this is a game about butt-kicking; sometimes you gives, sometimes you gets. If someone doesn't accept that - and I imagine every country has those who scream in the text buffer until you want to take an Excedrine - its only going to lead to them souring on the game. But that's their loss. Why pay to have fun if you spend all your time making it NOT fun?
I like to use those times my side is getting stompped to fly planes I normally wouldn't or go drive a vehicle I don't normally drive. going to get killed anyway so why not learn something new?
Post by: cav58d on June 19, 2017, 10:15:49 AM
I don't doubt your stats but frankly I am surprised it isn't higher. When you have a map that contains 18 Af and more than that for Gv bases/side then it seems logical many conflicts will be primarily ground based with limited air support. More drivers than fliers.
Sometimes circumstances dictate the best choices are GVs particularly if a base is captured that spawns into an enemy strat fac. I could take the time to climb and go there in a bomber to maybe drop strat 30% with good hits, risking attack inbound and outbound; or I could up a Jeep and drop vehicle supps then return in an M4/rockets and take the strat down to 0% in less time than it would take to reach target in a buff. Not a really hard choice if my goal is to damage strats.
As to the topic of game balancing, I don't believe there is a way that will always work and always make things fair. ENY is an attempt at that, but even a great plane isn't a match for a swarm of older models. I've just come to accept that this is a game about butt-kicking; sometimes you gives, sometimes you gets. If someone doesn't accept that - and I imagine every country has those who scream in the text buffer until you want to take an Excedrine - its only going to lead to them souring on the game. But that's their loss. Why pay to have fun if you spend all your time making it NOT fun?
I like to use those times my side is getting stompped to fly planes I normally wouldn't or go drive a vehicle I don't normally drive. going to get killed anyway so why not learn something new?
Can we please remove GV spawns into the strats. And while we are at it, can we balance the damn strats so they are all equal hardness and the field object hardness corresponds with its associated strat hardness.
Other then the city the strats are too soft to begin with. If you must, keep refinery and troop training at the measly 313 hardness, but please increase the hardness of the others to at least match the city -844lbs.
And speaking of the city strat...844 but it's associated objects - town buildings are 2.5 x's less. Doesn't make sense.
Edit: And if lame vehicles spawns will always be part of Aces high then give us manned guns at the strats.
Post by: Lusche on June 19, 2017, 11:52:45 AM
And speaking of the city strat...844 but it's associated objects - town buildings are 2.5 x's less. Doesn't make sense.
Why does it not? Two different targets, one tactical and one strategic. One being industrial buildings, the other residental ones. Heavy factory machinery was at times quite difficult to destroy.
Besides, what would happen to the gameplay if you almost triple the lbs requirement for whiteflagging the town?
Post by: Lusche on June 19, 2017, 11:53:54 AM
I don't doubt your stats but frankly I am surprised it isn't higher.
Actually, this is an all-time high.
Post by: cav58d on June 19, 2017, 12:13:26 PM
Why does it not? Two different targets, one tactical and one strategic. One being industrial buildings, the other residental ones. Heavy factory machinery was at times quite difficult to destroy.
Besides, what would happen to the gameplay if you almost triple the lbs requirement for whiteflagging the town?
Good point! Why aren't all the strats 844lbs then? They all had heavy machinery that was hard to destroy, no?
And going off of what you said, why are ord bunkers, barracks, fuel tanks and radar sites all as strong as their associates strat? Shouldn't their strat be stronger? Simple fix, make all the strats 844lb hardness.
Post by: Ack-Ack on June 19, 2017, 12:16:56 PM
I'm not the only one in this thread who is saying this.
Name one person in this thread of any of your other threads that has experience in working in the gaming industry agreeing with you.
Post by: Shuffler on June 19, 2017, 12:38:19 PM
Are you saying that OP doesn't know what he is talking about even though he is an old stick? i'm not the one that made this thread.Squad size means nothing when one person logs on. The Squad leader is ONE person.
Post by: flippz on June 19, 2017, 01:49:44 PM
I ask this, what if this would have been someones first day to the game, they would be assigned to knights and there worthless attempts to up would have been very frustrating and unexplained.
this might as well be a two sided war, combine the rook and knight forces and we still wouldn't have the numbers. ENY is worthless and no good as proved by this morning nonsense. this continues to be the norm until about 4pm my time and seems to be getting worse. BUT AGAIN GREAT GAME PLAY THIS MORNING
Post by: Zoney on June 19, 2017, 02:13:07 PM
GAME PLAY WAS GREAT THIS AM logged in an there was 28 bish, 8 knight, and 13 rooks. it was exhilarating. any field you tried to defend you were quickly swarmed and horded, at other times you didn't even have to worry about flying because you couldn't get off the field. when the 3 or 4 planes vs 1 didn't work well they just called in several more. I did go to attack a base that was wf from a capture but you know they quickly upped three or four to defend and I was swatted down. then to top it off during the inhalation sweep of the bish the rooks began to attack knight bases as if we were not busy enough. then I check the roster and find two that had been knights had changed to bish? side balance?
I ask this, what if this would have been someones first day to the game, they would be assigned to knights and there worthless attempts to up would have been very frustrating and unexplained.
this might as well be a two sided war, combine the rook and knight forces and we still wouldn't have the numbers. ENY is worthless and no good as proved by this morning nonsense. this continues to be the norm until about 4pm my time and seems to be getting worse. BUT AGAIN GREAT GAME PLAY THIS MORNING
Sounds like a lot of fun, sorry I missed it. I love being outnumbered, you sure can't complain about lack of action in those circumstances.
Post by: FESS67 on June 20, 2017, 02:47:14 AM
I called it quits as we were totally outnumbering the enemy on our available fronts. Sure I could have changed teams however that does not guarantee me fights in an hours time and I would be stuck there for the duration of the change timer. Just easier to log off and go find a better use of my time.
Post by: lunatic1 on June 20, 2017, 02:52:51 PM
That's why there need to be in-game system that puts players on teams so its equal.<---this is dumb---if people can't play where they want they will just quit
If there are 3 sides and all planes for everyone, it doesn't matter which team you are on.
Post by: lunatic1 on June 20, 2017, 03:03:57 PM
Any why it would be ludicrous? Please explain.
Squad wants to fly together - so they fly together, just on a side picked by the game so the game is balanced, what's the problem with that? There is no AvA, there are no 2 sides, every plane is the same, there is no reason there should be a problem with this for anyone.
if players/squads single players are forced to play on a side they don't like they will quit.
there is no reason there should be a problem with this for anyone.<-- if you played this game longer than 2 weeks you would know that people on these countries don't like each other there are people on rooks who don't like some people on the other 2 countries and etc- and vice versa.
[/quote]
Squad wants to fly together - so they fly together, just on a side picked by the game so the game is balanced, what's the problem with that?
yeah what happens if only half the squad is sent to another country, they will just log off.
Post by: lunatic1 on June 20, 2017, 03:12:31 PM
all the suggestion's you make in one way or another will hurt this game
HiTech has told you several times that your ideas won't work.
HiTech has well over 18 years in this business, I think he knows by now what will and won't work in this game, mostly because he has already tried them. :bhead
Post by: lunatic1 on June 20, 2017, 03:22:08 PM
GAME PLAY WAS GREAT THIS AM logged in an there was 28 bish, 8 knight, and 13 rooks. it was exhilarating. any field you tried to defend you were quickly swarmed and horded, at other times you didn't even have to worry about flying because you couldn't get off the field. when the 3 or 4 planes vs 1 didn't work well they just called in several more. I did go to attack a base that was wf from a capture but you know they quickly upped three or four to defend and I was swatted down. then to top it off during the inhalation sweep of the bish the rooks began to attack knight bases as if we were not busy enough. then I check the roster and find two that had been knights had changed to bish? side balance?
I ask this, what if this would have been someones first day to the game, they would be assigned to knights and there worthless attempts to up would have been very frustrating and unexplained.
this might as well be a two sided war, combine the rook and knight forces and we still wouldn't have the numbers. ENY is worthless and no good as proved by this morning nonsense. this continues to be the norm until about 4pm my time and seems to be getting worse. BUT AGAIN GREAT GAME PLAY THIS MORNING
Flippz is right as rain-when I logged in it was 35 bish 14 knights 13 rooks- also noticed a couple of Knights switched to bish..
side balancing In reverse.
HiTech you or/and Skuzzy need to log on the game when you get to the office, and see this for your selves--bish usualy have more players than nit and rooks put together, they get and eny 24-29% and none switch your currant eny program is not working.
PLEASE log in and take a look.
Post by: nugetx on June 20, 2017, 03:48:14 PM
NUGETX why do you insist on suggesting changes that will make people quit this wonderful game.
all the suggestion's you make in one way or another will hurt this game
Man, I love this guy
Post by: Shuffler on June 20, 2017, 04:04:19 PM
Post by: cegull on June 20, 2017, 04:40:12 PM
Sorry to see that game play is still so much of an issue. AH is not alone in this respect. The other sims that grew out of the original War Birds have similar issues. I have seen WW2 arenas melt down to 3 or 4 players because most players headed for the open arena so they could bash each other for points I guess. I personally liked a sim that incorporated some strategy, but strategy takes time and patience and a lot of players don't have it.
Anyway I thought Traveler made some good points. Players are different these days. And I think that the overall effect of the points ladder is to stimulate score "whoring" and quick and dirty play styles. There are other aspects to play as others have pointed but significant change does not seem possible at present.
Cyas
Post by: nugetx on June 20, 2017, 04:47:52 PM
Quote
if you played this game longer than 2 weeks you would know that people on these countries don't like each other there are people on rooks who don't like some people on the other 2 countries and etc- and vice versa.
It's not a games problem that some people do not like each other.
Face the music.
Post by: The Fugitive on June 20, 2017, 06:21:38 PM
It's not a games problem that some people do not like each other.
Face the music.
No its not, but forcing them together will only cause more issues, one of which is players quitting.
Post by: FBKampfer on June 20, 2017, 06:47:34 PM
For squadrons, perhaps the squad leader and privileged members can set a country for the squad, and upon logging in, members are notified if the country has changed, and given the option to be automatically placed with their squad?
Post by: flippz on June 20, 2017, 07:14:19 PM
Amazes me that some complain of no action then complain when there is action.its not really complaining shuf, but when you log in and all you can do is drive m3s, which still get swarmmed for 3 hrs thats not a very good showing. i dont mind resupping but i dont want to be put in a position that is my only choice. i tried many many times to up that day and many other mornings with no avail. the point i am getting at is what if that was my first day? for sure if a new person would have logged in that day they would have been a knight to my understanding the new guy goes to lowest numbered side. that would have been horrible. it seems lately it has gotten worse for both knight and rooks. thats my point not really the "action" but the presentation of action. and eny is a joke.
Post by: DmonSlyr on June 20, 2017, 09:29:05 PM
its not really complaining shuf, but when you log in and all you can do is drive m3s, which still get swarmmed for 3 hrs thats not a very good showing. i dont mind resupping but i dont want to be put in a position that is my only choice. i tried many many times to up that day and many other mornings with no avail. the point i am getting at is what if that was my first day? for sure if a new person would have logged in that day they would have been a knight to my understanding the new guy goes to lowest numbered side. that would have been horrible. it seems lately it has gotten worse for both knight and rooks. thats my point not really the "action" but the presentation of action. and eny is a joke.
While I do understand your sentiment. Why not just roll from a back base? You can get some alt and come crashing down on the hoard. That's what I do when the hoard comes. Now I do think that back bases need to be closer together. Closer back bases would allow for an easier defense agaisnt the hoard so that air fights will be more prevelant. Some people just don't want to spend 20 minutes getting alt and flying to their own base, and in that time, it could be taken, or the fight disappears. Honestly, closer bases would solve most of the issues of stale gameplay during the off hours.
Post by: puller on June 20, 2017, 10:00:49 PM
While I do understand your sentiment. Why not just roll from a back base? You can get some alt and come crashing down on the hoard. That's what I do when the hoard comes. Now I do think that back bases need to be closer together. Closer back bases would allow for an easier defense agaisnt the hoard so that air fights will be more prevelant. Some people just don't want to spend 20 minutes getting alt and flying to their own base, and in that time, it could be taken, or the fight disappears. Honestly, closer bases would solve most of the issues of stale gameplay during the off hours.
If I get picked or vulched...You can guarantee I'm coming with alt from the next base back :aok
Only you can prevent getting vulched or horded to the extent of rage quit :aok
Post by: nugetx on June 21, 2017, 12:18:55 AM
No its not, but forcing them together will only cause more issues, one of which is players quitting.
Do the developers in Planetside 2 or any other mmo game care that people do not like each other and specificaly design their game so 2-5 people can have it their way instead of other thousand of players?
If i had a choice of 5 condescending people leaving the game and having 400 new players in their place, the choice is obvious.
Post by: flippz on June 21, 2017, 07:59:48 AM
my point is game play, with low numbers and then numbers skewed so drastic to one side is not helping. I have read many many posts about that and seems the rooks went through this a few months ago and it doesn't seem that its going to change by player involvement. I don't know what makes people stay on a largely out numbering side 25 perks? a score that is only relevant to them that has no affect on anything in the rest of your life? bragging rights to only people that are in the game, to whom most don't care if youre 20vs2? wouldn't it be more fun if you upped 5vs5 and came out the victor versus 5 on 1? every one complains about the map close to war loss, let them win so we can move on to the next map I hear but the next map has bases and the same people are going to be playing and the same groups are gonna be hording and the same eny is going to in affect (or ineffective). I hear on 200 oh the eny sucks, oh the eny is terrible but they will not switch to help it and throwing a map to get to another map seems redundant.
and again I go back to what if that day was a persons first day in here? what we would have showed on the first impression would have been horrible. I downloaded a game and tried to play it a few months and the three or four times I flew in it the people were not helpful, and seems to be closed in to not wanting new people, so I don't fly that game at all anymore. now I'm not saying that about this game but referring to first impressions are very strong as to whether some one is going to stay and learn the game or say to hell with that. I don't guess there is a magical fix for the issue because we leave it up to man to decide and man is not the best choice making invention at times.
this is a great game in the aspect it has lasted 20 years (maybe wrong on the years). we just need to police it a bit better and look at whats best for the game to make it last for the duration. switching sides for a little while is not that big of a deal, you will not be banned from a country for going rook or knight or bish. you actually might find it to be fun and enjoy the game a little while. become a better stick for fighting guys you normally would not fight. find new guys to talk with about stuff. maybe wind up with a better score in the end because there are more targets to shoot at. '
that's all I'm getting at, enrich the game playing experience. I guess in a matter of sense we should tidy the house before the guests get here for better first impression and more enjoyable game play for all that are involved.
Post by: lunatic1 on June 21, 2017, 08:42:37 AM
side balancing at work.
in 6hrs 41 mins. bish own 33.3% of the rook bases and 4.8% Knights, side balancing at work
Post by: Shuffler on June 21, 2017, 09:27:31 AM
Post by: lunatic1 on June 21, 2017, 09:34:38 AM
Do the developers in Planetside 2 or any other mmo game care that people do not like each other and specificaly design their game so 2-5 people can have it their way instead of other thousand of players?.
If i had a choice of 5 condescending people leaving the game and having 400 new players in their place, the choice is obvious.
AND THAT IS WHY YOU WILL NEVER BE A GAME DEVOLEPER
Post by: The Fugitive on June 21, 2017, 09:41:14 AM
Do the developers in Planetside 2 or any other mmo game care that people do not like each other and specificaly design their game so 2-5 people can have it their way instead of other thousand of players?
If i had a choice of 5 condescending people leaving the game and having 400 new players in their place, the choice is obvious.
Had you played the game for more than 2 weeks you would know that this would effect more than 5 people. HTC split the arenas when the numbers got high. One of the reasons why was the social part of the game got lost with all those people. Players could feel lost and out of touch with the others players and so not enjoy the game as much.
Now you propose to break up the social groups/squads/teammates. Not going to happen
Post by: Zygote404 on June 21, 2017, 10:39:54 AM
Bish do not have to change sides. ENY works by handicapping the side that has players who will not even up sides.Right now there are 30 bish, 9 nits and 10 rooks. Bish could be flying 202's and they still kick bellybutton at 3 to 1 odds. I logged off since its a waste of time. People logging off because the game is not fun due to numbers imbalance is not a good way to attract and keep subs.
Good game but not worth logging in atm.
Just had a thought maybe a solution to the problem is to increase hardness of base targets based on eny. If one side had a significant advantage in numbers increase the hardness of objects an equally significant amount. Doesn't force anyone to change sides or anything but increases the ability of a defender to defend. ATM its a waste of time apart from buzzing a red horde from alt or logging off.
Post by: Shuffler on June 21, 2017, 10:55:48 AM
Right now there are 30 bish, 9 nits and 10 rooks. Bish could be flying 202's and they still kick bellybutton at 3 to 1 odds. I logged off since its a waste of time. People logging off because the game is not fun due to numbers imbalance is not a good way to attract and keep subs.
Good game but not worth logging in atm.
Just had a thought maybe a solution to the problem is to increase hardness of base targets based on eny. If one side had a significant advantage in numbers increase the hardness of objects an equally significant amount. Doesn't force anyone to change sides or anything but increases the ability of a defender to defend. ATM its a waste of time apart from buzzing a red horde from alt or logging off.
Interesting!
Post by: popeye on June 21, 2017, 11:00:59 AM
Just had a thought maybe a solution to the problem is to increase hardness of base targets based on eny.
My suggestion was to modify downtimes relative to numbers imbalance (didn't get much interest), but target hardness could also work.
Post by: Lazerr on June 21, 2017, 01:26:08 PM
Folks say two countries doesnt work. It probably wouldnt without ENY. But.. hey... we have ENY now. , ;)
A lot of the time when i log in.. which isnt often anymore.. its two countries piling onto one. Not one certain country either, it happens to them all.
Imagine the nice big furballs and battles that would come from 100 vs 100 rather than 75 vs 75 vs 50. After the m3 resupply is nerfed that is. :D
Post by: Ack-Ack on June 21, 2017, 01:30:56 PM
I would think ENY would easier balance a two country system.. and i also think more action would come out of that.
Folks say two countries doesnt work. It probably wouldnt without ENY. But.. hey... we have ENY now. , ;)
ENY won't change anything under a two country system, and it won't make a 2 sided war viable in this type of game.
Post by: Lazerr on June 21, 2017, 01:34:22 PM
ENY won't change anything under a two country system, and it won't make a 2 sided war viable in this type of game.
Ak, i explained how i think it could help. Can you explain how it wouldnt?
Post by: Zoney on June 21, 2017, 03:26:41 PM
I would think ENY would easier balance a two country system.. rather than join
Folks say two countries doesnt work. It probably wouldnt without ENY. But.. hey... we have ENY now. , ;)
Ak, i explained how i think it could help. Can you explain how it wouldnt?
Thinking it would work is far from knowing it will work
Those folks you speak of are HiTech who knows 2 sides has not worked as well as 3 in the past, sir.
Post by: Shuffler on June 21, 2017, 05:13:38 PM
Ak, i explained how i think it could help. Can you explain how it wouldnt?
One side with 140 and one side with 50.
I'm not AKAK, but I slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Post by: flippz on June 21, 2017, 05:20:08 PM
One side with 140 and one side with 50.funny the three sided war isn't working either then. because the bish generally have double the numbers as any other team until about 4pm est. so if the two sided war didn't work what are we gonna say about the three sided war? it works for a couple hours a day?
Post by: Shuffler on June 21, 2017, 05:22:57 PM
funny the three sided war isn't working either then. because the bish generally have double the numbers as any other team until about 4pm est. so if the two sided war didn't work what are we gonna say about the three sided war? it works for a couple hours a day?
It is just not that busy during the day when folks are working in the US.
Now let me get this straight.... you are looking for a fight or you are wanting to capture a base?
Post by: DmonSlyr on June 21, 2017, 05:53:30 PM
demon, I understand the not getting vulched part. I am speaking of the title. GAME PLAY. we are low on numbers and I was not around for the hay day. but it seems it would be a lot more fun if the sides equaled out some how. I don't have the raw data and exact numbers but I am sure map wins for the bish are in the 90% range. that seems a little skewed to me. I guess I don't understand the horde mentality, its not really fun to me when I'm the horder or the horded. I love a great big furball, but I also like to get my butt kicked in a one on one fight. I can see every once in a while a group raids a base and closes it, but everyday every base and seems to be the same group constantly. I am still under a year in this game but I have noticed the bases that are hard to capture seems to draw the largest crowd ie. tank town on the ndislands map. also the uncapturable mountain bases with the indestructible vh. there are huge fights there and fun as well.
my point is game play, with low numbers and then numbers skewed so drastic to one side is not helping. I have read many many posts about that and seems the rooks went through this a few months ago and it doesn't seem that its going to change by player involvement. I don't know what makes people stay on a largely out numbering side 25 perks? a score that is only relevant to them that has no affect on anything in the rest of your life? bragging rights to only people that are in the game, to whom most don't care if youre 20vs2? wouldn't it be more fun if you upped 5vs5 and came out the victor versus 5 on 1? every one complains about the map close to war loss, let them win so we can move on to the next map I hear but the next map has bases and the same people are going to be playing and the same groups are gonna be hording and the same eny is going to in affect (or ineffective). I hear on 200 oh the eny sucks, oh the eny is terrible but they will not switch to help it and throwing a map to get to another map seems redundant.
and again I go back to what if that day was a persons first day in here? what we would have showed on the first impression would have been horrible. I downloaded a game and tried to play it a few months and the three or four times I flew in it the people were not helpful, and seems to be closed in to not wanting new people, so I don't fly that game at all anymore. now I'm not saying that about this game but referring to first impressions are very strong as to whether some one is going to stay and learn the game or say to hell with that. I don't guess there is a magical fix for the issue because we leave it up to man to decide and man is not the best choice making invention at times.
this is a great game in the aspect it has lasted 20 years (maybe wrong on the years). we just need to police it a bit better and look at whats best for the game to make it last for the duration. switching sides for a little while is not that big of a deal, you will not be banned from a country for going rook or knight or bish. you actually might find it to be fun and enjoy the game a little while. become a better stick for fighting guys you normally would not fight. find new guys to talk with about stuff. maybe wind up with a better score in the end because there are more targets to shoot at. '
that's all I'm getting at, enrich the game playing experience. I guess in a matter of sense we should tidy the house before the guests get here for better first impression and more enjoyable game play for all that are involved.
What you are saying is that you like furballs and aircombat situations, which is exactly what I want. We have the same problems. I agree that most new sticks and players in general cannot handle a "hoard". That is why my solutions of shorter base distance, will actually make more furball action. Defending from a back base is very important in AH. If there is no back base and a hoard is over a base, it's very difficult to stop. Shorter back base distances will spark more people in to rolling to go help the base. It will create better furballs overall. Long drawn out base distances are why hoards can easily be created. Further bases create higher alts and more time to get to the fight. That's more time and more cruising just to help your base out. No wonder so many get in (point and shoot) wirbles. What fun is that? Shorter base distance equals more furballs and more people participating in the fight. That's why furball island works so well on ndisles (island map) ( I think that's the name of it. It works!
Right now there are 30 bish, 9 nits and 10 rooks. Bish could be flying 202's and they still kick bellybutton at 3 to 1 odds. I logged off since its a waste of time. People logging off because the game is not fun due to numbers imbalance is not a good way to attract and keep subs.
Good game but not worth logging in atm.
Just had a thought maybe a solution to the problem is to increase hardness of base targets based on eny. If one side had a significant advantage in numbers increase the hardness of objects an equally significant amount. Doesn't force anyone to change sides or anything but increases the ability of a defender to defend. ATM its a waste of time apart from buzzing a red horde from alt or logging off.
I actually really like this idea!
Post by: Lazerr on June 21, 2017, 06:09:41 PM
Thinking it would work is far from knowing it will work
Those folks you speak of are HiTech who knows 2 sides has not worked as well as 3 in the past, sir.
I didnt know he tried two counties with the ENY system in place.
Post by: caldera on June 21, 2017, 06:17:09 PM
I didnt know he tried two counties with the ENY system in place.
I would like to see that tried once per week, on whichever day gets the least traffic.
Make two new teams: X and Z, just for that day. Allow 1 hour switching to the low numbered side.
Post by: bustr on June 21, 2017, 06:31:39 PM
It is just not that busy during the day when folks are working in the US.
Now let me get this straight.... you are looking for a fight or you are wanting to capture a base?
I wonder if you can ask the audience to first apply this filter to themselves before positing their opinion and if they are playing during the 2 hour USA high number window, or outside of it?
It would strip away the monolithic generalization called "game play" that is used to flog this subject. It is too easy to take a position, then throw out pet solutions for the collective community. While they assume an illusion of a monolithic unified community at any given time supporting their position. Because they assume the community is victimized the same as they are by what their position argues.
During a two hour evening window USA Pacific coast time, about 100-150 players are in the Melee arena with all three countries either in a furball, or stuck in a base capture or base defense at one of their two fronts. Before and after that window, numbers are lower and the game is played much less like during the 2 hour window directly due to lower numbers. And during the average 300-400 nights in the 2000's, all of these game play complaints were leveled in these forums almost verbatim by a minority who assumed they were speaking for a unified monolithic community victimized like themselves. Or using them as an illusion for legitimizing their argument on the community's behalf, versus as one man's opinion about his pet peeve.
I suppose the majority were too busy making due and scraping by with the crappy conditions in the Melee arena back then and didn't know better, or something like that. On Friday nights for an hour or so just before everyone who is warming up for FSO bails from the Melee arena to enter the SEA arena. The numbers can be as high as 250 or more, and the arena is full of fun group driven activity. While everyone is busy shooting at or evading being shot at and having fun.
This complaint seems poorly directed when the source of the whole problem is not enough players generating activity. Hitech did agree to the experiment called Titanic Tuesdays, so it is not out of the scope of things to give him a good enough argument to try something again once a week to work with the lower numbers. Something along that line is more constructive than using a community who never voted for a representative to air their assumed common victimization by circumstances here.
Post by: flippz on June 21, 2017, 06:40:14 PM
It is just not that busy during the day when folks are working in the US.I am more of a base defender type I guess. I am horrible at bombing with a fighter and getting better at deacking. I joined the game to fly and fight fighters and unfortunately that's not really available except for a few hours a day. otherwise its flying in a hoard (which I don't care much for) or up and try to defend against a hoard (which sucks). and I don't want you to think I am crying about one hoard that I tried to up and got vulched once or twice. its a continuous phenomenon that's created day after day. even last night at 11 pm it was hoard after hoard at bases. I even had one apologize in a pm because I had been vulched so much that day by them. if we were able to come up with a side number balancing system I think that would work. I want to up a fighter and fight in either since.
Now let me get this straight.... you are looking for a fight or you are wanting to capture a base?
violator is correct we should find a way for closer back bases to up and be able to have a chance at defending, espically with numbers skewed as bad as they are. I know we should offer solutions to a concern but this is the first game I have ever really played so my input would invalid but I support violators idea of closer bases, look at ndislands when the bases are close there are awesome fights.
Post by: SPKmes on June 21, 2017, 07:26:18 PM
Post by: NatCigg on June 22, 2017, 03:45:56 AM
funny the three sided war isn't working either then. because the bish generally have double the numbers as any other team until about 4pm est. so if the two sided war didn't work what are we gonna say about the three sided war? it works for a couple hours a day?
bish win. they still play the "old" way. go bish!
:airplane:
Post by: thndregg on June 22, 2017, 05:35:14 AM
I think it is getting better.... the ugly is still here but I have noted a difference in player mentality creeping back in... it is encouraging
A few of us have been trying to bring it back. Semi-organized bomber/escort missions, a little "hangar queen" fun here and there.. I think it'll happen again. Had a great sortie and some comic relief last night with some familiar names. Overall, despite a few minor misgivings about terrain environment, it has been a fun few weeks so far back in the game.
Post by: Shuffler on June 22, 2017, 09:35:24 AM
I am more of a base defender type I guess. I am horrible at bombing with a fighter and getting better at deacking. I joined the game to fly and fight fighters and unfortunately that's not really available except for a few hours a day. otherwise its flying in a hoard (which I don't care much for) or up and try to defend against a hoard (which sucks). and I don't want you to think I am crying about one hoard that I tried to up and got vulched once or twice. its a continuous phenomenon that's created day after day. even last night at 11 pm it was hoard after hoard at bases. I even had one apologize in a pm because I had been vulched so much that day by them. if we were able to come up with a side number balancing system I think that would work. I want to up a fighter and fight in either since.
violator is correct we should find a way for closer back bases to up and be able to have a chance at defending, espically with numbers skewed as bad as they are. I know we should offer solutions to a concern but this is the first game I have ever really played so my input would invalid but I support violators idea of closer bases, look at ndislands when the bases are close there are awesome fights.
Not implying that you are crying or whining about anything. Just asking that question so I can better understand your position.
We all have our preferences.
Post by: SlipKnt on June 22, 2017, 10:29:57 AM
When I have logged on, I mainly see sporadic base take attempts (and successes). I have noticed a more defensive stance than offensive. ET37 always seemed busy running things and had quite a following.
I feel that we need more guys like him willing to run bomber missions with escort. I believe the 49th still does that. It does make it fun and challenging whether you are in the mission or trying to sniff out the incoming mission.
As I start getting back into MA game play, I may start trying a few things by either posting missions or announcing runway information to see if we can get something going again. I am Knight for now so if you are a Knight and see me posting missions. Come along. It may materialize into something.
Things that will never change... HOing, BnZ. Vulching, Ganging, Hoarding, etc...
Things we can change, our fun. Run missions, etc...
Just play your game. But don't be afraid to go offensive. Who really seriously cares about score anyways?
:rock
Post by: NatCigg on June 22, 2017, 12:49:37 PM
<S>
Go Blue.
:salute
Post by: bustr on June 22, 2017, 02:11:20 PM
Now the terrains have bases and towns on them that spit in the eye of groups while radar is set so low the trees can be heard making bets on who will auger first to feed them. We have hours long stalled fights over feilds that end up promoting all those lame things everyone complains about here in the forums under "game play". With the lower numbers those hours long stalled fights bore people during the general 2 hour prime time window that we get our max population of 100-150 players.
We no longer have the hoard problems the game has evolved to temper since the middle of the 2000's. And we no longer have the numbers some of those evolved mechanisms were introduced to keep the game fair for everyone. So now fast paced is not a term to describe action during prime time. Action was fast paced years ago....
I would suggest a titanic tuesday style once a week testing with a terrain, old or purpose built, with many of those hoard controlling mechanisms dialed way down, radar minimums back to early AH2 to help generate NOE which created activity on both sides. To see how the current smaller community plays with it. In the old days the base captures were faster paced and drew in the fighter players to harass the attackers while the newbies and strategic players played WW2 taking bases. Today newbies get thrown to the wolves while the strategic players beat their heads against the hanger walls and complain here in the forums. And there are not quite as many of the higher talented fighter jocks around as once played with us. I see them more often here in the forums than in the arenas.
I've never seen trying to overwhelm Hitech with complexity for the sake of complexity work. Keeping it simple and reasonable sometimes works.
Post by: The Fugitive on June 22, 2017, 08:52:21 PM
We used to have that, then many adjustments were made to slow down the iconic AH2 base taking NOE hoards which sheltered and gave newbies a chance to learn the game.
Now the terrains have bases and towns on them that spit in the eye of groups while radar is set so low the trees can be heard making bets on who will auger first to feed them. We have hours long stalled fights over feilds that end up promoting all those lame things everyone complains about here in the forums under "game play". With the lower numbers those hours long stalled fights bore people during the general 2 hour prime time window that we get our max population of 100-150 players.
We no longer have the hoard problems the game has evolved to temper since the middle of the 2000's. And we no longer have the numbers some of those evolved mechanisms were introduced to keep the game fair for everyone. So now fast paced is not a term to describe action during prime time. Action was fast paced years ago....
I would suggest a titanic tuesday style once a week testing with a terrain, old or purpose built, with many of those hoard controlling mechanisms dialed way down, radar minimums back to early AH2 to help generate NOE which created activity on both sides. To see how the current smaller community plays with it. In the old days the base captures were faster paced and drew in the fighter players to harass the attackers while the newbies and strategic players played WW2 taking bases. Today newbies get thrown to the wolves while the strategic players beat their heads against the hanger walls and complain here in the forums. And there are not quite as many of the higher talented fighter jocks around as once played with us. I see them more often here in the forums than in the arenas.
I've never seen trying to overwhelm Hitech with complexity for the sake of complexity work. Keeping it simple and reasonable sometimes works.
Its not the game, its the players.
In the old days we had a number of the maps we use now. We had most of the planes we have now. Even before the "heyday" of 600 in the arenas we still had good game play. The reason was those that did play back then played "the right way" for a lack of better way to say it.
In the old days most of the player base wanted combat, ran missions, defended against missions, defended bases in ostys and then eventually wirbles, ran NOE, ran high or medium alt missions with bombers and escorts.
Todays player looks to grab the base with as little opposition as possible, bomb strats for points only to bail as soon as another player shows up to battle them. Players dont run many missions any more, mostly because few join the missions any more. The horde is more likely to roll along with the call going out after a capture"Where to next?" and players grabbing what they want to bomb what they want, of 6 guys bring troops.... or nobody brings troops at all.
All that was in the game years ago is STILL in the game.
In another thread the OP was complaining about the ack being too lethal and that is should be turned down. :rolleyes: WHY? Because the players have become too lazy. The players of today are of the "I want it now" generation and cant take the time to do a full mission. 3 players running co-ordinated runs can deack a field in as little as 2 passes. All it takes is a little practice and team work.
Above I mentioned "play the right way". What I mean by that is in those days we played a WWII combat game. We looked at missions and the battles they provided the "way to play". Capturing a base was only a means to an end with the end being a battle against those hated .... (insert favorite name of the enemy team here). Be it stopping them from taking our base, or us taking one from them, it was all about the fight for that base.
These battles provided all kinds of action for all kinds of players. Strat runners, bombers, attack pilots, GVs both attacking and defending as well as those lone wolf fighter pilots.
First we need more numbers, second, of those coming in we can only hope that most of them WANT to play the game.
Post by: Zygote404 on June 22, 2017, 10:09:50 PM
Nah. I played back then and have just returned a few weeks ago.
Its not the game, its the players.
In the old days we had a number of the maps we use now. We had most of the planes we have now. Even before the "heyday" of 600 in the arenas we still had good game play. The reason was those that did play back then played "the right way" for a lack of better way to say it.
In the old days most of the player base wanted combat, ran missions, defended against missions, defended bases in ostys and then eventually wirbles, ran NOE, ran high or medium alt missions with bombers and escorts.
Todays player looks to grab the base with as little opposition as possible, bomb strats for points only to bail as soon as another player shows up to battle them. Players dont run many missions any more, mostly because few join the missions any more. The horde is more likely to roll along with the call going out after a capture"Where to next?" and players grabbing what they want to bomb what they want, of 6 guys bring troops.... or nobody brings troops at all.
All that was in the game years ago is STILL in the game.
In another thread the OP was complaining about the ack being too lethal and that is should be turned down. :rolleyes: WHY? Because the players have become too lazy. The players of today are of the "I want it now" generation and cant take the time to do a full mission. 3 players running co-ordinated runs can deack a field in as little as 2 passes. All it takes is a little practice and team work.
Above I mentioned "play the right way". What I mean by that is in those days we played a WWII combat game. We looked at missions and the battles they provided the "way to play". Capturing a base was only a means to an end with the end being a battle against those hated .... (insert favorite name of the enemy team here). Be it stopping them from taking our base, or us taking one from them, it was all about the fight for that base.
These battles provided all kinds of action for all kinds of players. Strat runners, bombers, attack pilots, GVs both attacking and defending as well as those lone wolf fighter pilots.
First we need more numbers, second, of those coming in we can only hope that most of them WANT to play the game.
I think there's a definite correlation between the low numbers and the way the game has changed.
Things have definitely changed mechanically, very likely IMO that that's the problem rather than the players.
I saw two map resets in one night the other day both by bish with more numbers than nits and rooks combined.
Don't want to insult the designers of buzzsaw, pizza and the other monstrosity but they're so ugly and unpleasant I can't fly in them.
There are a few things that could be done -
Vote to turf maps that are terrible
Remove eny from planes and apply it to base capture - if you have 3 times number vs a country hardness of objects x 3
If there are 30 enemy and 10 of you let those 10 use perk planes free or really cheaply - 10 262 vs 30 late war planes is pretty fair and it might encourage more switching.
Allow switching to a very outnumbered country without penalty - already heaps of spies in game
Etc etc
If its tried and doesn't work better than not trying and can always be reverted
Post by: Shuffler on June 23, 2017, 05:21:22 PM
Nah. I played back then and have just returned a few weeks ago.
I think there's a definite correlation between the low numbers and the way the game has changed.
Things have definitely changed mechanically, very likely IMO that that's the problem rather than the players.
I saw two map resets in one night the other day both by bish with more numbers than nits and rooks combined.
Don't want to insult the designers of buzzsaw, pizza and the other monstrosity but they're so ugly and unpleasant I can't fly in them.
There are a few things that could be done -
Vote to turf maps that are terrible
Remove eny from planes and apply it to base capture - if you have 3 times number vs a country hardness of objects x 3
If there are 30 enemy and 10 of you let those 10 use perk planes free or really cheaply - 10 262 vs 30 late war planes is pretty fair and it might encourage more switching.
Allow switching to a very outnumbered country without penalty - already heaps of spies in game
Etc etc
If its tried and doesn't work better than not trying and can always be reverted
You can already switch to low number side without penalty.
Post by: Ack-Ack on June 23, 2017, 05:24:31 PM
You can already switch to low number side without penalty.
Actually there is a penalty for switching sides, having to wait 6 hours.
Post by: Shuffler on June 23, 2017, 05:26:42 PM
Actually there is a penalty for switching sides, having to wait 6 hours.
When you switch sides and fly. Time goes by quickly.
Post by: Ack-Ack on June 23, 2017, 05:29:45 PM
When you switch sides and fly. Time goes by quickly.
Regardless, the 6 hour time limit is a penalty for switching countries.
Post by: Shuffler on June 23, 2017, 05:33:52 PM
Regardless, the 6 hour time limit is a penalty for switching countries.
I do not feel that way. I switch and am busy flying and fighting. I didn't switch to sit and watch the old clock. :devil
Post by: DmonSlyr on June 23, 2017, 06:09:24 PM
I do not feel that way. I switch and am busy flying and fighting. I didn't switch to sit and watch the old clock. :devil
AKAK is correct. But it totally put me in a lame position today. The Bishop's this morning had all the #s. A small fight broke out which was fun for a bit. Then the bish were starting to show their #s. I switched to knights to help them out, which was the lowest # at the time. Then about an hour and half later. A huge fight broke out south of the map, with bishop vs rooks. There wasnt a fight the rest of the day on the Knight front. The knights were reking the bish now, big hoard. While the rooks and bish fought for hours in the same spot. The rooks never attacked us, that side was completely stale.
So now I'm stuck in the knights with the board and the #s. I can't switch to bish to fight the knights, or even to rooks to fight on the other front or join the action down in the south east.
Personally, I think 3 hours is the better switch time because the directions of the fights and #s change during the day. 3 hours would create a better flow. I really don't see how 3 hours would effect "spying" anymore than 6 hours would. It would however, allow players like me, join the action on the other side, and maybe push players to other sides of the map.
Post by: Shuffler on June 26, 2017, 05:21:08 PM
AKAK is correct. But it totally put me in a lame position today. The Bishop's this morning had all the #s. A small fight broke out which was fun for a bit. Then the bish were starting to show their #s. I switched to knights to help them out, which was the lowest # at the time. Then about an hour and half later. A huge fight broke out south of the map, with bishop vs rooks. There wasnt a fight the rest of the day on the Knight front. The knights were reking the bish now, big hoard. While the rooks and bish fought for hours in the same spot. The rooks never attacked us, that side was completely stale.
So now I'm stuck in the knights with the board and the #s. I can't switch to bish to fight the knights, or even to rooks to fight on the other front or join the action down in the south east.
Personally, I think 3 hours is the better switch time because the directions of the fights and #s change during the day. 3 hours would create a better flow. I really don't see how 3 hours would effect "spying" anymore than 6 hours would. It would however, allow players like me, join the action on the other side, and maybe push players to other sides of the map.
You got out of your line to get in the shorter line..... which then slowed down.
In traffic on the freeway the same thing happens.... such is life. Did you help the knights try to startup a fight?
Post by: SirNuke on June 27, 2017, 04:18:39 AM
Post by: Oldman731 on June 27, 2017, 07:00:45 AM
switching country is not an option when you are in a squad.
Of course it is! Some of my most memorable fights have been against squad-mates.
- oldman
Post by: ACE on June 27, 2017, 07:42:59 AM
Ak, i explained how i think it could help. Can you explain how it wouldnt?No, he can't.
Post by: Vraciu on June 27, 2017, 08:03:49 AM
No, he can't.
This.
Post by: Zimme83 on June 27, 2017, 08:11:39 AM
You also get the chance to do this to them:
Of course it is! Some of my most memorable fights have been against squad-mates.
- oldman
(http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/_zimme_/Ny%20bitmappsbild_5.png)
Post by: Shuffler on June 27, 2017, 09:11:53 AM
switching country is not an option when you are in a squad. ALT-F4 is tho.
I'm in a squad and we switch.
Post by: SirNuke on June 27, 2017, 09:24:32 AM
To each squad its own I guess.
Post by: Vraciu on June 27, 2017, 09:40:34 AM
switching country is not an option when you are in a squad. ALT-F4 is tho.
Yep.
This.
Not to mention that you get stuck for six hours when ENY swings back the OTHER direction. It's a system that simply causes more harm than good as presently implemented.
Post by: Mister Fork on June 27, 2017, 10:09:53 AM
Remember the King of the Hill and you and I were the last two standing? :x
Of course it is! Some of my most memorable fights have been against squad-mates.
- oldman
Post by: DmonSlyr on June 27, 2017, 10:25:26 AM
AKAK is correct. But it totally put me in a lame position today. The Bishop's this morning had all the #s. A small fight broke out which was fun for a bit. Then the bish were starting to show their #s. I switched to knights to help them out, which was the lowest # at the time. Then about an hour and half later. A huge fight broke out south of the map, with bishop vs rooks. There wasnt a fight the rest of the day on the Knight front. The knights were reking the bish now, big hoard. While the rooks and bish fought for hours in the same spot. The rooks never attacked us, that side was completely stale.
So now I'm stuck in the knights with the board and the #s. I can't switch to bish to fight the knights, or even to rooks to fight on the other front or join the action down in the south east.
Personally, I think 3 hours is the better switch time because the directions of the fights and #s change during the day. 3 hours would create a better flow. I really don't see how 3 hours would effect "spying" anymore than 6 hours would. It would however, allow players like me, join the action on the other side, and maybe push players to other sides of the map.
That's a close analogy, but I wouldn't have to wait 6 hours to get back in the other lane... Well, the knights were now hoarding at that point. So 2 hours before, knits had low #s and we're getting crushed, then I switched to help em out (after 2 people called me out for being on the high # bish side.) Then it wasn't 20 minutes, the fight died and some how knits had all the #s and we're wooping bish hard core. Couldn't get anything started on the other side... Switching would have allowed me to try to slow the knit hoard, or take part on the other side where the big fight was.
Post by: Drano on June 27, 2017, 11:00:44 AM
Remember the King of the Hill and you and I were the last two standing? :x
You just kept him around like that 3ball by the corner pocket didn't ya?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Post by: Vinkman on June 27, 2017, 12:00:35 PM
Nothing stopping you going to a new base and stirring up a fight
This.
We all complain about the numbers and then join the horde.
Personally I switch to the side with low numbers..... and then whine about getting ganged. :rofl
Post by: TWCAxew on June 27, 2017, 12:25:24 PM
Maybe a few things that could be different for sure, but not a problem. Unless you call low numbers a game play problem...
I also do like the 3 sides, i think its cool and gives dynamic to the game. Some days i like to mix it up and get my self slow, dirty and HO (in a 110g2 at least) ,other times i like to fly in a smart way and singel out a target and land 10 kills. Or take a base or 2.
I think there is plenty of diversity in what you can do in the game, a personal preference about the way our opponent fly's shouldn't be up for discussion. If you cant handel there flying style.. Get Better.
Personally what i would like a better encouragement to fly early war planes. I would like to see more planes perked. Only for 3 or 4 perkies for a pony instead of the dreaded ENY. Lower numbers should get a bones to the perks they earn so they can get a better plane faster. I think that would be fun to see many ppl fly a p40 for example.
I'm sure many of you don't think the same way i do, and that's okay!
I go back to fly and get my butt wooped by Torquilla and his fricking 410 :joystick:
DutchVII
Post by: Mister Fork on June 27, 2017, 02:03:52 PM
You just kept him around like that 3ball by the corner pocket didn't ya?
Quiet you! :neener:
Post by: Drano on June 27, 2017, 02:05:28 PM
Quiet you! :neener:No respect!
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Post by: LilMak on June 27, 2017, 03:25:18 PM
Two or three guys with M3s can slow or stop a pretty big capture effort. This has the effect of forcing the other side to pile more on. In order achieve the capture, it pulls players from the other front. Leaving one front quiet.
Also it used to be, if you showed up alone over an enemy base, you'd always have A few red guys come out to meet you. Now people are just not worried about a single con showing up or simply sit in an 88 trying to snipe you. No darbar forms and the fight doesn't organically develop. So, even when you're trying to kick up an ant hill and get a fight started on the quiet front, it takes multiple players to do so. Even then, there is no guarantee it will have the achieved results. So there isn't a whole lot of incentive to make that effort.
Where players go on the map is largely driven by where the fight is. No darbar = no fight. Used to be you had to worry about NOE raids. Now the level of darbar coverage is so low to the ground you can look at the map and know there are virtually no aircraft at a base. Why even investigate unless you like bombing tanks?
Post by: Mister Fork on June 27, 2017, 04:04:44 PM
:noid