General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Chris79 on December 29, 2019, 03:37:05 PM
Title: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Chris79 on December 29, 2019, 03:37:05 PM
I think this topic is somewhat related to the general discussion topic of "why have some many people have left". What I am suggesting here for the most part isn't necessarily meant to bring in new players, but more or less to retain existing players. 1. Maps are still far to large. With the max players online at any given time being no more then 150, I think 60 total bases ought to be the max size allowed for a terrain. 2. Battleships need to be kept far enough out to sea where they can not pour direct fire into an enemy field. Allowing players who sit in guns to shut down a field with no risk is de-incentivizing upping a jabo or buffs. 3. Remove Vbases, and ports. Vbases ought to be replaced with a modified small airfield with 3 Vhh, 1 Fth, and 1BMH. Task groups ought to be assigned to a standard airfield like they were in OZkansas I think. 4. Add punitive measures to negate ganging. Lets say you have countries "A", "B" and "C". If country "A" has 10% of "C"s bases and 0% of "B"s, and country "B" has 13% of "C"s base and 0% of "A"s then at which point country either country "C"s base should be un-capturable for 15-20 minutes or country "A" and "B" need to have a substantial ENY penalty. 5. remove icons for aircraft under 45 feet. 6. Remove half of the tress or re-implement gv icons. 7. Remove the ability for damaged gvs to instantly repair themselves from a box of supplies maybe add a recovery vehicle and a 30 second repair time in its stead. 8. Allow gv'rs who are in the command position to be killed by strafing 9. Give dedicated GV killers, ie, the Ju87g and Il2 storch vision.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Chris79 on December 29, 2019, 03:41:15 PM
Oh, and maybe a separate subscription for those who just strictly do special events.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on December 29, 2019, 04:07:36 PM
You got my vote.
That all sounds reasonable to me.
:salute
[Edit: Well #4 is maybe a little iffy. I'd have think about it more, but that would require math and it's the weekend.
And I'd prefer the second option in #6 for the same reason I think having plane icons is actually more realistic to account to the lack of resolution of current display technology.]
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Ramesis on December 29, 2019, 04:21:55 PM
I think this topic is somewhat related to the general discussion topic of "why have some many people have left". What I am suggesting here for the most part isn't necessarily meant to bring in new players, but more or less to retain existing players. 1. Maps are still far to large. With the max players online at any given time being no more then 150, I think 60 total bases ought to be the max size allowed for a terrain. 2. Battleships need to be kept far enough out to sea where they can not pour direct fire into an enemy field. Allowing players who sit in guns to shut down a field with no risk is de-incentivizing upping a jabo or buffs. 3. Remove Vbases, and ports. Vbases ought to be replaced with a modified small airfield with 3 Vhh, 1 Fth, and 1BMH. Task groups ought to be assigned to a standard airfield like they were in OZkansas I think. 4. Add punitive measures to negate ganging. Lets say you have countries "A", "B" and "C". If country "A" has 10% of "C"s bases and 0% of "B"s, and country "B" has 13% of "C"s base and 0% of "A"s then at which point country either country "C"s base should be un-capturable for 15-20 minutes or country "A" and "B" need to have a substantial ENY penalty. 5. remove icons for aircraft under 45 feet. 6. Remove half of the tress or re-implement gv icons. 7. Remove the ability for damaged gvs to instantly repair themselves from a box of supplies maybe add a recovery vehicle and a 30 second repair time in its stead. 8. Allow gv'rs who are in the command position to be killed by strafing 9. Give dedicated GV killers, ie, the Ju87g and Il2 storch vision.
For the most part
-1
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: The Fugitive on December 29, 2019, 05:27:34 PM
I think this topic is somewhat related to the general discussion topic of "why have some many people have left". What I am suggesting here for the most part isn't necessarily meant to bring in new players, but more or less to retain existing players. 1. Maps are still far to large. With the max players online at any given time being no more then 150, I think 60 total bases ought to be the max size allowed for a terrain.
Agreed, but are you going to spend the next 3-6 months building a new small map?
Quote
2. Battleships need to be kept far enough out to sea where they can not pour direct fire into an enemy field. Allowing players who sit in guns to shut down a field with no risk is de-incentivizing upping a jabo or buffs.
How about when a ship starts hitting anything at a base it starts flashing the base and town to alert people of incoming fire.
Quote
3. Remove Vbases, and ports. Vbases ought to be replaced with a modified small airfield with 3 Vhh, 1 Fth, and 1BMH. Task groups ought to be assigned to a standard airfield like they were in OZkansas I think.
Each Task group needs a port other wise youd be swapping Task groups every 15 minutes.
Quote
4. Add punitive measures to negate ganging. Lets say you have countries "A", "B" and "C". If country "A" has 10% of "C"s bases and 0% of "B"s, and country "B" has 13% of "C"s base and 0% of "A"s then at which point country either country "C"s base should be un-capturable for 15-20 minutes or country "A" and "B" need to have a substantial ENY penalty.
I always thought making country "A" switch to take a base from country "B" after capturing 2 bases from country "C" would work nice to slow the ganging. It would also help break up the "hordes" as the horde must stay together even when switching fronts.
Quote
5. remove icons for aircraft under 45 feet.
Quote
6. Remove half of the tress or re-implement gv icons.
yes please
Quote
7. Remove the ability for damaged gvs to instantly repair themselves from a box of supplies maybe add a recovery vehicle and a 30 second repair time in its stead.
or limit the number of supplies that can be layed out at once
Quote
8. Allow gv'rs who are in the command position to be killed by strafing
add make shooting from the commanders position not possible.
Quote
9. Give dedicated GV killers, ie, the Ju87g and Il2 storch vision.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on December 29, 2019, 05:35:20 PM
Agreed, but are you going to spend the next 3-6 months building a new small map?
With respect, I fail to see how that is his job.
HTC allows us the option to make maps, but the responsibility for providing them ultimately rests with the company. After all, MONOPOLY doesn't come without a board.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on December 29, 2019, 05:49:02 PM
I always thought making country "A" switch to take a base from country "B" after capturing 2 bases from country "C" would work nice to slow the ganging. It would also help break up the "hordes" as the horde must stay together even when switching fronts.
I seems to me that if you start doing this you completely negate the "proposed" advantage of 3-sides; The possibility of two sides forming an alliance and agreeing to concentrate all attacks on the larger side currently winning.
That falls completely into the ebb and flow argument. Now you would be forcing them to fight each other equally to their common enemy.
The complex 3-way dynamic turns in to rote lock-step, doesn't it?
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: guncrasher on December 29, 2019, 06:27:02 PM
Remove icons at certain alt kind of takes a bit from some of us. It's already hard at least for me to see planes at tree top level. All I see is an icon.
semp
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: The Fugitive on December 29, 2019, 06:53:19 PM
HTC allows us the option to make maps, but the responsibility for providing them ultimately rests with the company. After all, MONOPOLY doesn't come without a board.
Agreed, but would you rather have HTC spent that time building a map, or working a any number of other things?
I seems to me that if you start doing this you completely negate the "proposed" advantage of 3-sides; The possibility of two sides forming an alliance and agreeing to concentrate all attacks on the larger side currently winning.
That falls completely into the ebb and flow argument. Now you would be forcing them to fight each other equally to their common enemy.
The complex 3-way dynamic turns in to rote lock-step, doesn't it?
It will be that much harder for one country to get that far ahead.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on December 29, 2019, 07:30:04 PM
It will be that much harder for one country to get that far ahead.
I'm still confused a bit:
First nothing about your plan prevents numerical imbalance. So it's already quite common for one side the get twice as many players as either of the others. Someone just recently posted a screenshot of a common example.
Wouldn't what you are suggesting destroy ebb and flow because:
1. You can't form alliances any more. Every team has to attack the other in predictable locks step. Right? wouldn't that lead to less interesting dynamics?
2. It is possible each of the smaller teams must take a base of the larger team next, but the larger team have enough numbers to block them. So couldn't you have a deadlock condition? Each of the smaller teams can't take their next needed base from the larger team, yet they aren't allowed take any other?
3. Wouldn't what you suggest create bizarre tactics like once team A takes a base from team B, team B is now free to temporarily remove all forces from the A-B front because they are not allowed to attack again until after they've take a base from team C?
It kind seems to me you are going the long way around the barn to create a pseudo 2-sided arena. You're starting with 3-sides and forcing each side to alternatively pretend it's only two sides and ignore the third side. You'd just be throwing in a bunch of extra complexity and create additional perverse states.
In my opinion, 2-sides with aggressive ENY and side limitation if necessary, would make a lot more sense.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: The Fugitive on December 29, 2019, 07:54:33 PM
First nothing about your plan prevents numerical imbalance. So it's already quite common for one side the get twice as many players as either of the others. Someone just recently posted a screenshot of a common example.
Wouldn't what you are suggesting destroy ebb and flow because:
1. You can't form alliances any more. Every team has to attack the other in predictable locks step. Right? wouldn't that lead to less interesting dynamics?
2. It is possible each of the smaller teams must take a base of the larger team next, but the larger team have enough numbers to block them. So couldn't you have a deadlock condition? Each of the smaller teams can't take their next needed base from the larger team, yet they aren't allowed take any other?
3. Wouldn't what you suggest create bizarre tactics like once team A takes a base from team B, team B is now free to temporarily remove all forces from the A-B front because they are not allowed to attack again until after they've take a base from team C?
It kind seems to me you are going the long way around the barn to create a pseudo 2-sided arena. You're starting with 3-sides and forcing each side to alternatively pretend it's only two sides and ignore the third side. You'd just be throwing in a bunch of extra complexity and create additional perverse states.
In my opinion, 2-sides with aggressive ENY and side limitation if necessary, would make a lot more sense.
Well we are never going to see a two sided war so we can forget that, comparing to that or wishing for that.
Side "A" has the numbers. As it is today they attack country "B" rolling base after base taking up to 50% of their fields (resent screen shot). Team "B" is over whelmed for the duration. Team "C" goes after team "A" helping evening the side.
With my setup "A" must attack "C" after taking 2 of "B"s bases. "C" knows the attack is coming and sets up a defensive front forcing a battle to take the base they need. Mean while team "B has a chance to recover and attack team "A". "A" having the numbers is now fighting a 2 front war.
Even should team "A" capture a base from "C" they now have to decide to continue to hit "C" or switch back the taking "B" bases. Have you ever been part of one of those hordes that roll base after base? They spend 5 minutes asking which base is next? The whole horde wont always move together again slowing the attack. Teams "B" and "C" can continue to attack "A", the team with the numbers.
Raising ENY faster might help, but there is already a bunch of players who leave due to ENY as it is. This way they can still do what they want to do.....roll bases..... but with them having to switch fronts every few bases it will slow them down, give the defending teams a break, and eventually break up the horde.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on December 29, 2019, 08:06:06 PM
Well we are never going to see a two sided war so we can forget that, comparing to that or wishing for that.
Yeah, that's what they keep trying to tell me. ;) But if he won't accept a clean, simple solution like that, I can't possible see him accepting something like this. :D
Also, even though the team with twice the numbers might not be able to take your base yet, surely he could be flattening your hangars and radars and factories and HQ right? They just can't capture? Or are the hangars and strats invulnerable when it isn't your turn to be attacked?
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on December 29, 2019, 08:10:18 PM
Side "A" has the numbers[...]As it is today they attack country "B" rolling base after base [...]Team "B" is over whelmed [...]"C" goes after team "A" helping evening the side. [...] "A" must attack "C" after taking 2 of "B"s bases. "C" knows the attack is coming and sets up a defensive front [...] Mean while team "B has a chance to recover and attack team "A". "A" having the numbers is now fighting a 2 front war. [...] Even should team "A" capture a base from "C" they now have to decide to continue to hit "C" or switch back the taking "B" bases. Have you ever been part of one of those hordes that roll base after base? They spend 5 minutes asking which base is next? The whole horde wont always move together again slowing the attack. Teams "B" and "C" can continue to attack "A", the team with the numbers.
[...]
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Chris79 on December 29, 2019, 08:21:46 PM
When I started in 2013 AH was an entirely different animal. If I started fresh today there would be absolutely no way in hell I would have hung around after the first 2 weeks. Aside from the basic learning curve there is not enough action in my opinion to hook someone in.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Chris79 on December 29, 2019, 08:25:15 PM
Agreed, but are you going to spend the next 3-6 months building a new small map?
How about when a ship starts hitting anything at a base it starts flashing the base and town to alert people of incoming fire.
Each Task group needs a port other wise youd be swapping Task groups every 15 minutes.
I always thought making country "A" switch to take a base from country "B" after capturing 2 bases from country "C" would work nice to slow the ganging. It would also help break up the "hordes" as the horde must stay together even when switching fronts.
yes please
or limit the number of supplies that can be layed out at once
add make shooting from the commanders position not possible.
I believe in the old Ozkansas map the task groups were tied to an airfield instead of a port. With so few players on and how easy it is now to pork aaa strat and kill a few ack guns at a Vbase or Port, there are just not enough people on to baby sit a field for 1 hour plus.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on December 29, 2019, 08:26:42 PM
When I started in 2013 AH was an entirely different animal. If I started fresh today there would be absolutely no way in hell I would have hung around after the first 2 weeks. Aside from the basic learning curve there is not enough action in my opinion to hook someone in.
Man, you should have seen it in 2002-2004.
Our planes could blot out the sun!
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Oldman731 on December 29, 2019, 08:32:31 PM
So this one immediately drew my attention. I thought, "Yes! If you're that close to the bad guy, you should have to track him visually, not by red neon signs!" But then someone interpreted it as 45 feet AGL, and I thought, "Ah, so that people can do sneaky things."
If it's the first, I'm all for it. If it's for the second, I'm not.
- oldman
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Chris79 on December 29, 2019, 08:32:50 PM
Case in point for #4, in 9 hours not one base has changed hands between 2 countries. As taboo as the whole 2 country war topic is, it is essentially what we have on most days. It sucks being the gangers and the ganged. I would think after years of hemorrhaging players something would have been done to address some of the more obvious issues. By the way those issues are not the economy, a coral reef, or jack the ripper.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Chris79 on December 29, 2019, 08:35:31 PM
So this one immediately drew my attention. I thought, "Yes! If you're that close to the bad guy, you should have to track him visually, not by red neon signs!" But then someone interpreted it as 45 feet AGL, and I thought, "Ah, so that people can do sneaky things."
If it's the first, I'm all for it. If it's for the second, I'm not.
- oldman
I was referring to the new player proximity icon dar. It should operate in a similar fashion as standard radar, if you are low enough ie 45 feet not to show up on dot dar, then you should not be able to show up on icon dar.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Oldman731 on December 29, 2019, 08:38:45 PM
Case in point for #4, in 9 hours not one base has changed hands between 2 countries.
Well, you're just seeing the astounding, magical, ebb and flow powers of 3-sides. That's why we couldn't possibly try 2-sides, because we would be giving up all that magic! ;)
Yes, I'm going to Hell. :devil
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: guncrasher on December 30, 2019, 01:47:04 AM
Well, you're just seeing the astounding, magical, ebb and flow powers of 3-sides. That's why we couldn't possibly try 2-sides, because we would be giving up all that magic! ;)
Yes, I'm going to Hell. :devil
so you complain about 2 countries ganging up on 1. so that basically makes it a 2 sided war, so how is that working out of you?
semp
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: ccvi on December 30, 2019, 02:55:11 AM
Idea instead of 4: tie rebuild time to the number of fields owned. If one country owns only half as many fields as at start of the map rebuild time is twice as fast. When country is down to very few fields it requires increasingly well-coordinated attacks to capture even more of their fields.
It doesn't stop the gangig directly (two countries can still fight the third), but the effects on fields owned are reduced, and as such adds an incentive (easier targets) for the two countries to fight eachother.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: hazmatt on December 30, 2019, 04:10:36 AM
What about giving the country getting ganged nukes that cost like 1000eny points to deploy? I don't know of any other ww2 sims with nukes...
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Mister Fork on December 30, 2019, 07:56:45 AM
Agreed, but would you rather have HTC spent that time building a map, or working a any number of other things?
It will be that much harder for one country to get that far ahead.
He has the vision for how he expects the game to work. To me that makes him the ideal person to make maps to suit it. He invented the game, too, so I imagine his ability to crank out a map is better than anyone's.
Besides, other than two sides, tweaks to ENY, etc. I can't honestly think of anything I want him to work on. The game itself seems okay. It's the way action is generated that's lacking.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Chris79 on December 30, 2019, 08:11:40 AM
so you complain about 2 countries ganging up on 1. so that basically makes it a 2 sided war, so how is that working out of you?
semp
Well, the Bish got ganged until about 9 or so then it was the knits turn for the ole gang. Not that I was proposing a two front war per say, but imagine this. Current situation, 2 countries ganging one country, 98 vs 47, the current game mechanisms do absolutely nothing to dissuade such game play. Hell, I’ve seen one country pushed all the way to their un-capturable bases in both fronts. With a 2 front war, if it was 98 vs 47 the country with 98 will be hording with P40E’s and HE111s. With my proposal, the country that’s getting ganged gets the ability to counter attack or reorganize.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on December 30, 2019, 08:12:10 AM
Case in point for #4, in 9 hours not one base has changed hands between 2 countries. As taboo as the whole 2 country war topic is, it is essentially what we have on most days. It sucks being the gangers and the ganged. I would think after years of hemorrhaging players something would have been done to address some of the more obvious issues. By the way those issues are not the economy, a coral reef, or jack the ripper.
:rofl :aok
That's funny stuff.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Chris79 on December 30, 2019, 08:12:23 AM
He has the vision for how he expects the game to work. To me that makes him the ideal person to make maps to suit it. He invented the game, too, so I imagine his ability to crank out a map is better than anyone's.
Besides, other than two sides, tweaks to ENY, etc. I can't honestly think of anything I want him to work on. The game itself seems okay. It's the way action is generated that's lacking.
This
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on December 30, 2019, 08:19:52 AM
Well, the Bish got ganged until about 9 or so then it was the knits turn for the ole gang. Not that I was proposing a two front war per say, but imagine this. Current situation, 2 countries ganging one country, 98 vs 47, the current game mechanisms do absolutely nothing to dissuade such game play. Hell, I’ve seen one country pushed all the way to their un-capturable bases in both fronts. With a 2 front war, if it was 98 vs 47 the country with 98 will be hording with P40E’s and HE111s. With my proposal, the country that’s getting ganged gets the ability to counter attack or reorganize.
Exactly. Let them horde in Camels and Fokkers while I slay them in my Mustang.
It would also get those EW rides out of the hangar.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on December 30, 2019, 09:06:33 AM
To me that makes him the ideal person to make maps to suit it. He invented the game, too, so I imagine his ability to crank out a map is better than anyone's.
Wow you really do not understand skill sets.
HiTech
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on December 31, 2019, 11:43:39 AM
When was the last time you stepped up and added anything to the game?
You ever run a Scenario? You ever make a terrain? You ever skin a plane?
Besides, I thought you said you were quitting a last year. Didn't you say your last month was like ...10 months ago?
:rolleyes:
You are offering your time and labor to embarrass hitech. He already said no to a two sided war. It's childish to keep bringing it up every other day.
But you are right, I can't skin a plane or lead a scenario or create a map.
But I have helped in other ways. Donated parts, some with free shipping to other players, let a couple of guys I didn't know stay at my house when I found out they're out on their luck. Paid subscriptions for others for a few months.
And I did quit, but my wife said I drive her crazy, so she tells me to go play that stupid game. She actually flies sometimes, she likes bombers.
semp
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on December 31, 2019, 02:51:16 PM
You are offering your time and labor to embarrass hitech. He already said no to a two sided war. It's childish to keep bringing it up every other day.
But you are right, I can't skin a plane or lead a scenario or create a map.
But I have helped in other ways. Donated parts, some with free shipping to other players, let a couple of guys I didn't know stay at my house when I found out they're out on their luck. Paid subscriptions for others for a few months.
And I did quit, but my wife said I drive her crazy, so she tells me to go play that stupid game. She actually flies sometimes, she likes bombers.
semp
Mind-reading and name-calling again, Semp? You're better than that, aren't you?
Besides, the only person who can embarass Hitech is Hitech. His skin is way too thick for anyone else to do it, believe me (otherwise he would not have been able to deal with all this for so long).
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on December 31, 2019, 04:34:45 PM
You literally have no sense of humor. I guess I should show compassion for a handicapped person. It must be totally miserable to be you.
So, she can't stand you either. She has our condolences. :rolleyes:
Well as a Canadian born of Jamaican descend, with German, Spanish and raramuri blood that speaks with a southern accent. I have no sense of humor, I blame the German part of me.
As for my wife, she agrees with you.
so if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go to my office and rethink my l life.
semp
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on December 31, 2019, 05:17:42 PM
Well as a Canadian born of Jamaican descend, with German, Spanish and raramuri blood that speaks with a southern accent. I have no sense of humor, I blame the German part of me.
Lack of humor isn't genetically defined, it has to be practiced life-long starting at a very early age to get it right.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: guncrasher on January 01, 2020, 07:31:34 AM
Offer still stands. As many 2-sided maps as you want. Free labor just sitting here waiting to be utilized.
:D
:bolt:
This would be the one of the largest problem with the game currently, but ive brought it up several times in the years of the decline of players and gameplay here, and was told the basic concept didnt work 20 years ago without ENY, and other possible tweaks to make it work. Good luck with that. I wont waste my time trying to have that conversation with someone who doesnt listen. Its probably about the only thing that will save it.
Id guess a lot of people come here, and leave after they see the dead sea called our clipboard map.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on January 13, 2020, 09:20:57 AM
This would be the one of the largest problem with the game currently, but ive brought it up several times in the years of the decline of players and gameplay here, and was told the basic concept didnt work 20 years ago without ENY, and other possible tweaks to make it work. Good luck with that. I wont waste my time trying to have that conversation with someone who doesnt listen. Its probably about the only thing that will save it.
Id guess a lot of people come here, and leave after they see the dead sea called our clipboard map.
Well, at least you finally have some AH3-optimized Lightnings to fly around like Lefty Gardner.
:bolt:
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on January 13, 2020, 10:48:53 AM
This would be the one of the largest problem with the game currently, but ive brought it up several times in the years of the decline of players and gameplay here, and was told the basic concept didnt work 20 years ago without ENY, and other possible tweaks to make it work.
I'll have to take people at their word that it totally didn't work 20 years ago. There was also no ENY system 20 years ago, so I don't know if the analogy still holds. Also, I would have to ask, respectfully, is the current system working to your satisfaction? If so, then disregard. Everything is awesome. If not, perhaps it's time to consider some alternatives.
However, I divide the argument against into two categories:
1. It can't possibly be made to work for some magical game-play reason that may or may not still be valid 20 years later.
2. The assumption of 3 sides is so intertwined into every line of code though out the system that it would be extremely high risk and effort to change it to be able to configure between 2 and 3 sides formats, at this late stage.
I'll accept #2. I'm a realist. Sometimes base assumptions are made at the beginning of a project that lock you in. Keep that option open on the next game. ;)
:salute
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on January 13, 2020, 10:52:30 AM
I'll have to take people at their word that it totally didn't work 20 years ago. There was also no ENY system 20 years ago, so I don't know if the analogy still holds. Also, I would have to ask, respectfully, is the current system working to your satisfaction? If so, then disregard. Everything is awesome. If not, perhaps it's time to consider some alternatives.
However, I divide the argument against into two categories:
1. It can't possibly be made to work for some magical game-play reason that may or may not still be valid 20 years later.
2. The assumption of 3 sides is so intertwined into every line of code though out the system that it would be extremely high risk and effort to change it to be able to configure between 2 and 3 sides formats, at this late stage.
I'll accept #2. I'm a realist. Sometimes base assumptions are made at the beginning of a project that lock you in. Keep that option open on the next game. ;)
:salute
Two sides seem to work great in FSO. Yeah, sometimes the balance is off, but the MA would have tools to correct that somewhat.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on January 13, 2020, 11:02:08 AM
Two sides seem to work great in FSO. Yeah, sometimes the balance is off, but the MA would have tools to correct that somewhat.
I was going to mention that. And the planned Combat Tour was of course going to be two sided. However, those don't make a good argument because they are carefully curated and not open sandbox.
I can't say 2-sides would be guaranteed to work. However, with the advent of additional tools like ENY, I don't think it can be trivially dismissed. What you might lose in "ebb and flow" (which I see plenty of in 2-sided games like Battlefield), you might gain in concentrating the much lower numbers and reducing time-to-action to a level that may seem more appealing to today's market. And making sure that there is never a great fight on one front, that 1/3 of the players are excluded from.
However, it very well might be not logistically feasible at this point. Life is hard.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on January 13, 2020, 11:03:21 AM
I was going to mention that. And the planned Combat Tour was of course going to be two sided. However, those don't make a good argument because they are carefully curated and not open sandbox.
I can't say 2-sides would be guaranteed to work. However, with the advent of additional tools like ENY, I don't think it can be trivially dismissed. What you might lose in "ebb and flow" (which I see plenty of in 2-sided games like Battlefield), you might gain in concentrating the much lower numbers and reducing time-to-action to a level that may seem more appealing to today's market. And making sure that there is never a great fight on one front, that 1/3 of the players are excluded from.
However, it very well might be not logistically feasible at this point. Life is hard.
I have confidence in Hitech's ability to make it work. I don't think logistics are the barrier.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on January 13, 2020, 11:16:05 AM
Two sides seem to work great in FSO. Yeah, sometimes the balance is off, but the MA would have tools to correct that somewhat.
sounds like a great idea, two sides work on fso and scenarios. let's try in in there ma. let's plan all week to have objectives and make sure there's furballs for 2 hours on Friday night. let's make sure everybody registers so we can have even numbers.
i see no reason why it shouldn't work in the ma.
semp
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on January 13, 2020, 11:32:12 AM
sounds like a great idea, two sides work on fso and scenarios. let's try in in there ma. let's plan all week to have objectives and make sure there's furballs for 2 hours on Friday night. let's make sure everybody registers so we can have even numbers. i see no reason why it shouldn't work in the ma.
semp
Me either, with ENY and the ability to switch sides it should work great. Will be lots of action that any player can get to without being ignored like the current setup.
:aok
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on January 13, 2020, 11:32:51 AM
And Main has ENY. Neither side can guarantee what the outcome would be.
What do we know?
Player peaks number were often around 185 in 2018. Player peaks number were often around 130 in 2019.
It is entirely possible that numbers will be consistently down below 100 by this time next year. 100 players is a big psychological threshold. I'm not sure what happens when players start seeing the numbers never getting above 100, but it seems scary to me.
Scary enough that I'd be willing to roll the dice and start taking larger risks to change the trend, if it were me. Simply riding out the current trend leads to an inevitable mathematical conclusion. The status quo should really be the only unacceptable option.
$0.02.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on January 13, 2020, 11:40:01 AM
sounds like a great idea, two sides work on fso and scenarios. let's try in in there ma. let's plan all week to have objectives and make sure there's furballs for 2 hours on Friday night. let's make sure everybody registers so we can have even numbers.
I'm not the one posting almost everyday about how we should switch to a two sided arena. even after being told no, more than once by the only person that has the power.
and yet here you are...
semp
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: guncrasher on January 13, 2020, 12:09:47 PM
Me either, with ENY and the ability to switch sides it should work great. Will be lots of action that any player can get to without being ignored like the current setup.
:aok
so you finally realized it.
semp
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on January 13, 2020, 12:09:52 PM
I'll have to take people at their word that it totally didn't work 20 years ago. There was also no ENY system 20 years ago, so I don't know if the analogy still holds. Also, I would have to ask, respectfully, is the current system working to your satisfaction? If so, then disregard. Everything is awesome. If not, perhaps it's time to consider some alternatives.
However, I divide the argument against into two categories:
1. It can't possibly be made to work for some magical game-play reason that may or may not still be valid 20 years later.
2. The assumption of 3 sides is so intertwined into every line of code though out the system that it would be extremely high risk and effort to change it to be able to configure between 2 and 3 sides formats, at this late stage.
I'll accept #2. I'm a realist. Sometimes base assumptions are made at the beginning of a project that lock you in. Keep that option open on the next game. ;)
:salute
I couldnt argue with #2.
#1 is just hot air.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on January 13, 2020, 12:50:43 PM
I still think you could do a "patchwork" two-sided by simply disabling one side and adjusting ENY to compensate. A third of each map would be no-man's land but that doesn't matter. I have no idea what other things have to be factored but I am confident in Hitech's ability to make it work.
However.................the judge has made his ruling on this one...............so it's really a waste of time to discuss it any more.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on January 13, 2020, 01:06:52 PM
However.................the judge has made his ruling on this one...............so it's really a waste of time to discuss it any more.
I agree.
The problem is, even a rather tame alternative of a slightly smaller 3-side map, with slightly fewer bases, with slightly shorter distance between bases to decrease time-to-action, and Semp still throws himself on the ground flailing his arms and legs shrieking we are trying to destroy the game.
So I guess there is nothing left to do but ride out the status quo, wherever that trend leads to.
Good luck with that.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on January 13, 2020, 01:11:58 PM
The problem is, even a rather tame alternative of a slightly smaller 3-side map, with slightly fewer bases, with slightly shorter distance between bases to decrease time-to-action, and Semp still throws himself on the ground flailing his arms and legs shrieking we are trying to destroy the game.
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl The visual of that is funny I have to admit.
Quote
So I guess there is nothing left to do but ride out the status quo, wherever that trend leads to.
Good luck with that.
Yeah. Sad but true.
(BTW, I was wanting to send you a PM but it bounced. FYI.)
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: CptTrips on January 13, 2020, 01:19:15 PM
It's not against the rules to quote someone his own words back to him.
I find it quite funny that the very thing that has me on a borderline PNG has been bandied about by dozens of people on this forum since it was originally posted and nary a complaint was to be heard.
Getting a PNG will suck because I won't be able to post my work on skins, so I certainly don't want one, but in the grand scheme of life there are worse things that can happen I suppose.
(As for rulebreaking, it's all about the fancy custom title in one's profile. When you have one of those the rules do not apply equally--and that's been pointed out by plenty of people here over the years besides me.)
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: guncrasher on January 13, 2020, 02:16:01 PM
It's not against the rules to quote someone his own words back to him.
I find it quite funny that the very thing that has me on a borderline PNG has been bandied about by dozens of people on this forum since it was originally posted and nary a complaint was to be heard.
(As for rulebreaking, it's all about the fancy custom title in one's profile. When you have one of those the rules do not apply equally.)
but you didn't quote, you made up a quote, then tried to justifying by making up another quote.
semp
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on January 13, 2020, 02:19:54 PM
but you didn't quote, you made up a quote, then tried to justifying by making up another quote.
semp
Quit lying.
I did NOT make up the quote. And when I was told it was not said I posted it with a link. I was then told that wasn't what was meant. Well, if that wasn't what was meant then something should have been said the dozens of other times it has been repeated by many on this forum. Honest misunderstandings are just that.
Stop trying to bait me.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: FLS on January 13, 2020, 02:23:17 PM
You're picking one instance that wouldn't have triggered the warning so that you appear the victim. With all due respect you lack self-awareness. Consider the political content in the shoot down thread as a more likely last straw leading to a final warning.
I tried to warn everyone twice in that thread. I'm not a moderator, I'm just trying to help everyone enjoy the game.
Stick to game content and avoid arguments for a while. :aok
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on January 13, 2020, 02:26:42 PM
I think we all have bigger fish to fry than arguing over every little thing.
Cheers.
Way to back peddle. Surprised you haven't receive a perma-ban a long time ago. All you do is skirt around the edges, then play dumb when a thread get's locked. One that you have derailed. Good riddence.
Coogan
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: FLS on January 13, 2020, 02:50:01 PM
It's better if we all play nice and don't lose people on the forum or in the game.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on January 13, 2020, 02:50:33 PM
Way to back peddle. Surprised you haven't receive a perma-ban a long time ago. All you do is skirt around the edges, then play dumb when a thread get's locked. One that you have derailed. Good riddence.
Coogan
1) I am not backpedaling. I'm just worn out with the constant arguments on here over every SINGLE thing. It's old.
2) What have I ever done to you? Not a thing.
3) I don't know what riddence (sic) is.
4) You're the one attacking me. I barely even recognize you. Perhaps you need to take a look at what you just wrote and check yourself.
Title: Re: ENY/Gameplay Modification
Post by: Vraciu on January 13, 2020, 02:51:22 PM