Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: WhiteHawk on April 08, 2002, 01:18:56 PM
-
Keep wanting to try out a different format. Keep looking at
combat theatre. It seems there are always <12 people in there.
Not nearly enuff to warrant any kind of organized and sustained action. Hmm, guess CT is a failure eh?
Then I started to wonder, maybe the idea isnt a failure.
I come to realize that the problem MAY be--
bringing an established population to a new idea may be
much more difficult than bringing a new idea to an established
population. The population being the MA, the new idea being CT.
So i would toss up the idea for discussion.....
How about throwing a CT format into the MA terrain
rotation. i.e. TEMPORARILY suspending the BISH Knite rook
format for, say, an allied-axis CT format.
When one side is defeated, back to the, BISH KNIGHT ROOK-
baltic terrain (or whatever) rotation.
Not trying to wreck anybodys fun, but I think that this,
or differnt 'spices' for the MA would keep AH from stagnating.
If the idea is approved by the population, then it stays in the
rotation, if it sux then ti goes.
( This may give the LW vs The allied pilots a chance to
slug it out, inside the squared circle, instead of the BB's.)
:)
-
-
Hasn't the customer obviously spoken?
Are you refusing to take "no" for an answer?
If the people in the MA want to fly in an arena like a CT, they have a CT in which to fly. That they don't speaks volumes, doesn't it?
I like the CT. I fly there. I don't see it as a failure, just something different.
-
Gee, this looks like the 12 people who use the CT dictating how the average of 450+ other player need to play huh. That's real fair, obviously that 12 know SO much more about how the larger group need to enjoy the game.
I agree, the numbers indicate the desires of the majority of players.
-
I guess that is the question Kieran..would it be offering
people something different, or forcing something different on
the people? CT is a failure as a seperate theatre, as u say,
the customer has obviously spoken.
But lets not call it Combat theatre.
Its basically a HTH arena, with a limited planeset, and
u cant shoot friendlys.
Ok..my next question..Where are the events at???
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Gee, this looks like the 12 people who use the CT dictating how the average of 450+ other player need to play huh. That's real fair, obviously that 12 know SO much more about how the larger group need to enjoy the game.
Looks to me like that was whitehawks suggestion. Why do you imply it's the "12 people in the CT's dictating it" ? Why you guys turn the MA/CT thing into a goodguy/badguy WWF tag team event is beyond me.
Originally posted by Maverick
I agree, the numbers indicate the desires of the majority of players.
You're right on this one though.
-
Actually, our numbers have been significantly better than that at times and sometimes worse. There were about 30 on last night for a while, and I've seen close to 60 at peak times during some set ups. It is definitely a minority when compared to the MA, but I have it on good authority that HiTech doesn't consider it a failure by any means. He's generally happy with how things are going, and doesn't expect it to rival the MA in popularity (at least not for a while;)). He understands the dynamics we are fighting against, as well as other factors like limited planeset and terrains.
Now that I've defended the CT (hey, what did you expect from me?:)), back to the suggestion above. The reason the CT was opened was to provide a more quazi-historical environment for a small but loyal (and vocal) group of players that wanted a choice to compliment the MA, not to replace it. While I don't think your suggestion would kill AH, I've a feeling it would alienate more players than it pleased. And I'll take 12 players in the CT over 300 in the MA anytime:D. I rarely want for "sustained action" while playing there, though admittedly I fly during peak US times, as a rule. Give it a try!
Sabre
CT Staff
-
axis vs allies is the problem. While at first galnce an "historical" setting seems really cool and immersive... Anyone with even a rudimentary grasp of WWII knows that there were very few periods of parity and variety. That translates very poorly to a .... GAME.
The only real time for parity is BOB and it is very limited for planeset. Not for everyone. the nuimbers in the CT went up tho during BOB times.. a no brainer.
Having said that... You could increase numbers in the CT by simply shutting down the MA. WB did it and they increased the "historical" numbers.. course numbers as a whole went down the dumper and have never recovered.
Having nightime in the MA or having the MA closed increases CT numbers. Electro shock would probly work too as would death threats or threats against family members of players who insisted on playing in the MA.
lazs
-
>Hasn't the customer obviously spoken?
Absolutely. The above would be completely unacceptable to me. I would prolly close my account for as long as it was setup that way to make my preferences clear to HTC.
The CT serves 2 important functions:
1. Its provides an excellent crucible to develop and refine techniques and tools for eventual us in scenarios. Scenarios are where its really at, but the CT gives an excellent chance to try out various maps and configurations and plane sets so that when it comes time for a scenario, Everyone has a better idea of what works and what doesn't. Its a scenario proving ground.
2. It provides a place for people who only want to fly that setup to go without having to screw around with the MA setup. Its provides a shield for HTC agianst the realism nazis. They can go there and do whatever they want. Keeps them out of the MA and off HTC's back.
As long as the CT continues to serve the above functions, it will never be a "failure" in my eyes.
I find the implication that "the MA population is just too stupid to know any better and if it was just crammed down their throats they would thank us for it later" rather insulting.
I'd wager that a majority percentage of the MA players have participated in one or more scenarios. We know exactly what historical maps, historical match ups, and limited plane sets are like. I'd further wager that a large percentage have even tried the CT at one time or another. I have. Its not my cup of tea. In my opinion, it suffers the worst of both types of play. It doesn't have the organization, clear sense of purpose, and detail of a scenario. It also doesn't have the freedom, vitality, excitement, and down right chaos of the MA. Its somewhere in the middle. But thats OK. I think its servers other purposes as I've stated that justifies its existence. But it is, and always will be a side show.
Regards,
Wab
-
Yes sabre, I have tried it. And I love the format. I cant
figure why so few few people fly it. Except for the roots
of just about everyone are in CT. (Squads, wingies, etc.).
And I go there, fly a mission, then people start to
switch sides to even things out. And that kind of wrecks
the feeling that, i believe, was intended.
Unfortunatley, my times of flying are 2:00am-3:30am
weeknites and some weekend peak times. Most of the
time there arent any in CT. Sometimes there are 12.
Like I said, I dont think its the idea thats failing.
Its competing against an established, well liked, familiar
arena (MA). thats the problem, and the answer, if there
is one, or if there needs to be one, is going to be difficult.
-
The answer is simple, on your own behalf and on your own time, go out and find like minded individuals so you can have as much fun in the CT as the 400 other people do in the MA.
It's not difficult, doesn't require a math degree and best of all, only requires word of mouth.
The answer is staring you square in the face. I've played the CT, a few times it was fun. Other times I left for the MA. The only way to get more people in the CT is to find more people who like those kinds of setups. Obviously forcing the MA people into the CT is not the answer, because they prefer the MA.
-SW
-
WhiteHawk,
I understand where you are coming from.
and agree to the point that there are many folks out there who do not realize what they are missing.
But it doesn't matter if those folks make up 1% or 50% of the MA. Forcing such a huge change on the MA crowd would be a disaster and tick people off.
The best thing that you can do to help the CT is to fly in it. The more people that are logged in, the more likely it will be for others to join.
eskimo
-
I fly in the MA and the CT for different reasons and, frankly, because both are available. I'm funny, I like options. I can eat an apple from one hand and an orange from another, and I don't feel compelled to turn an apple into an orange to make the orange taste last longer. ;)
As to switching sides, of course I will switch sides if the balance is 12-3. What point would I have for being there if I didn't? Believe it or not, a 6 vs 6 fight is a pretty good balance, and I'll take 12 in the CT anyday. In reality, I prefer that to the MA fly into the horde, die in a few turns chaos at peak hours.
I need my elbow room. :D
-
Here's my take:
I'd love to play more in the CT - the only reason I don't is because there are usually less than 10 people playing. If there were more people playing, I'd play more in there as well.
It's a viscious circle :(
Kuben
-
Don't know if you should say CT is a failure. That's kinda strong. No it doesn't have 300+ pilot in it and IMO that's a good thing for the folks that hang in CT. Lots of times I've flown in there with numbers in the 30-40 range and that's a nice little battle going on.
I fly both CT and MA. I like the CT for the AvA matchups and smaller, more focused crowd. I like the MA for winging with my squaddies. Usually just depends on my mood.
Drano
-
Originally posted by lazs2
axis vs allies is the problem. While at first galnce an "historical" setting seems really cool and immersive... Anyone with even a rudimentary grasp of WWII knows that there were very few periods of parity and variety. That translates very poorly to a .... GAME.
The only real time for parity is BOB and it is very limited for planeset. Not for everyone. the nuimbers in the CT went up tho during BOB times.. a no brainer.
Having said that... You could increase numbers in the CT by simply shutting down the MA. WB did it and they increased the "historical" numbers.. course numbers as a whole went down the dumper and have never recovered.
Having nightime in the MA or having the MA closed increases CT numbers. Electro shock would probly work too as would death threats or threats against family members of players who insisted on playing in the MA.
lazs
lol this did make me chuckle :)
-
There are few of us that remembers begining of AH ....
Max numbers on MA was 30 to 60 player`s....
And i got to say that we had less planes, no GV`s and CV`s..
less people, but we had a lot of fun...
Most of that great people that started on AH beta are already gone from AH comunity.. but they are not forgoten !
-
Most of that great people that started on AH beta are already gone from AH comunity.. but they are not forgoten !
Oh yeah? Name them! :D
-
Bee from JG/2
FunkedUP 308th
-
Let me explain why I do not love CT.
I have intensive and arcade expirience in MA. I know, that in a real world panzers do not use warp engine to cover 20 miles in a second, and ports do not construct fleets every 10 minutes, but I take it as a part of a game, as I take it that pawns can become queens in chess.
If I really want an imersion I go for scenarios, because their multiframe and team playing makes me want to sirvive, and go home alive. They give me a feeling of beeing in the real plane, shooting other real planes... Roleplaying, by other words.
CT has little of first, and little of second. Not enough to be first or second. It is worse MA than MA, and worse scenario than scenario. I come there for action, but get few, I come there for immersion, but has it broken in minutes.
It is all IMHO.
Fariz
-
I don't fly in the CT for two reasons:
Ganging. 3 against one feels worse than 10 against 30. Don't know why, but it does.
Perk points. I don't mind having to build up an account, but when I pop in two weeks later to see a plane set up that interests me; it enrages me to see my perks gone.
-
Good point seeker.. losing my perks every rotation is aggravating. I don't care about scores, i do want to fly the rides i like.. and they are usually perked.
as for only 12 guys on?? you guys crack me up. the only planes i give a damn about are the ones i'm killin or the ones that are tryin ta kill me. every thing else is just draggin the frame rate down. 12 is just fine. the one or two i'm engaged with, the other 9 or 10 don't freakin matter.
-
don't you mean the 2 or 3 *with* you enganged (yeah, i spelled it this way deliberately) *on* me, hang?
;)
-
Originally posted by Fariz
Let me explain why I do not love CT.
I have intensive and arcade expirience in MA. I know, that in a real world panzers do not use warp engine to cover 20 miles in a second, and ports do not construct fleets every 10 minutes, but I take it as a part of a game, as I take it that pawns can become queens in chess.
If I really want an imersion I go for scenarios, because their multiframe and team playing makes me want to sirvive, and go home alive. They give me a feeling of beeing in the real plane, shooting other real planes... Roleplaying, by other words.
CT has little of first, and little of second. Not enough to be first or second. It is worse MA than MA, and worse scenario than scenario. I come there for action, but get few, I come there for immersion, but has it broken in minutes.
It is all IMHO.
Fariz
Fariz,
You are one who needs to give it more of a chance. You will be surprised. I see you have logged 3 hours in the CT in the past 3 months. The CT can be dull at times, but it can also be even more intense than the MA. There are times that you can spend 80% of your time engaged in good fights, and there are times that you can really see what was so great about a particular plane, that is when it is fighting it's true advisary.
Give it more time bud.
eskimo
-
don't you mean the 2 or 3 *with* you enganged (yeah, i spelled it this way deliberately) *on* me, hang?
Well, hell; yes! Damn son, didn't you learn anything [/i] in all those tours in the MA about furrball poaching, gang banging, vultching or how to camp?
...or how to poach the poachers?
:cool:
-
Originally posted by Asmodan
There are few of us that remembers begining of AH
Most of that great people that started on AH beta are already gone from AH comunity.. but they are not forgoten !
OH I dunno about that.
I've been here since beta, and still reconize quite a few "old" hands.
Then I see alot of new faces as well.
Both arenas have good and bad about em.
I like the CT's smaller feel and almost non-existant "kiddie" chatter. (read that as profanity and disrespectfullness)
I like the MA for it's massive furballs.
In the words of the immortal Peter Paul;
"Sometimes ya feel like a nut, sometimes ya don't, Almond Joy's got nuts, Mounds don't!"
-
Depends on what you set as the "threshold" for failure, doesn't it?
For example, most nights the TA has more people in it than the CT, but not a whole lot more. So is the TA a failure?
People are clearly having fun in the CT and some prefer it to the point of exclusivity. Do you think those people would call it a failure?
I guess it just depends on your personal standards and goals.
I must say, however, that the one thing that struck me as truly funny was this concept:
If the overwhelmingly vast majority of people won't willingly come out of the MA to play in the "altered world" of the CT then the solution is to FORCE them into it....
.... rather than possibly making a few changes to the CT to ATTRACT them to it.
Or am I way off base here? Perhaps there are some more folks.. in good numbers.. that might find the CT much more attractive if it offered a few more MA features?
Nah, I must be crazy... sorry to interrupt. :)
-
Originally posted by milnko
In the words of the immortal Peter Paul;
"Sometimes ya feel like a nut, sometimes ya don't, Almond Joy's got nuts, Mounds don't!"
That's just great, thanks Milnko. I can't get that song out of my head now.
-
But Toad, we humans have an amazing ability to ignore the obvious if it suits our needs. ;)
This comment is not directed at the CT staff, only the people proposing forcing CT characteristics on the MA.
-
I am not sure, I haven't kept count, but this might be the 4th time somebody has suggested that the MA be shut down and the CT rammed down everybodys throat so they can be educated.
If you dont mind, I will stay with the MA, so I can jump in, get in quick fights, and have some instant gratification. :)
Dago
-
Why are the same people consistantly the ones dishing out the most toejam? Who exactly do you think you are? Unless youre paying more than what the rest of us are - $15 US, please keep your comments in the "contructive" category - otherwise its a waste of both your time and ours.
-
But Saur, who gets to determine what is constructive?
The proposal as stated was untenable, as has been proven by another sim. To state the MA is becoming stale flies in the face of the fact the numbers are growing. The CT numbers seem stable. Which arena appears to be serving the people what they want? Which arena needs to be changed to draw more people?
The answer is obvious, isn't it?
I don't happen to be in the "The CT is a failure" crowd. I think it is fun and serves its purpose. What I don't support for one second is forcing anyone to fly there, or any arena like it, that doesn't want to. If that is toejam, then yeah, I will keep saying it. I'm just a member like you, that's who I am.
"Constructive" doesn't mean I have to agree with you. In fact, I will always be an outspoken advocate of not forcing others to do as you would have them, unless the structure of the event is designed from the outset to do so (such as snapshots, scenarios, and TODs). The sim has enough desktop Napoleans, no reason to give them real power.
-
frustrating eh kieran?
The CT is not more realistic than the MA it just has some features that a few dozen people can't live without. Those features come at the expense of action and gameplay and variety and parity sooo.....
The rest stay away. There can be pockets of realism, good gameply, parity and variety in the CT but they are rare and all those things are free and assured in the MA at allmost all times.
The CT does serve a purpose... it provides a place for those who want axis vs allied to go and screw up an arena without affecting the rest of us. For that I am grateful as I am sure HTC is. In that respect the CT is a resounding success. Until.... some socialist comes in here and claims that we need to shut down the MA for our own good.
lazs
-
Having a CT is better than not having one. Some of you people need to get squeak slapped. Shut up already.
Relax, its just a game.
-
I wish the MA had some of the CT terrains....oh.....sorry..... .carry on.
-
Based on the success of the Sports Illustrated "Swim Suit Edition" I suggest that HTC sponsor a CT Bikini Squad.
Perhaps pink FW's, special squad logo's (collect them all) and a first class lounge in the towers. With the new VOX feature we could chat up the birds.
-
Originally posted by Toad
.... rather than possibly making a few changes to the CT to ATTRACT them to it.
Or am I way off base here? Perhaps there are some more folks.. in good numbers.. that might find the CT much more attractive if it offered a few more MA features?
Nah, I must be crazy... sorry to interrupt. :)
But that's been done. There was a lot of effort put into pulling the Main arena crowd into the CT a month or so ago. I scoured the CT bulletin board looking for the most desired things that pilots wanted in the CT. There were 4 items that were very popular among these pilots.
1. Two sided Axis vs. Allies
2. Reduced radar.
(but not greatly reduced) enough to easily find a fight, but not so much that you can see the enemy taking off from a rear field. We found the compromise to be 40 miles bar radar range, 10 miles on dot radar.
3. Shorter icons.
We have a choice of short (3.0) or long (6.0) range. We set icons to short range
4. New terrains.
I drew up what I needed for this setup, sent it to Nuttz, and he had Perdonia finished in one week. Which BTW is a first class terrain with all MA-like strategy elements, GV spawn points, etc. It is actually a MA terrain with two sides. Excellent tiles, immersive.
These 4 things are what people have been clamoring for for a long while. Sure, there are some of those that some people don't care for, but they are a compromise between the historical/realism crowd and the MA gameplay aspect.
The first week I ran this, we kept 50-70 in the CT during prime time US time. It was looking up for the CT. We were happy.
Here's that setup. (http://events.hitechcreations.com/CT_Setups/setup2.htm)
A few weeks later it ran and it was back to the 15-30 pilots. Towards the end of that week it just fell off.
The problem? The problem IMO is you have to have an arena primed with 40 or more pilots in order to attract even more pilots. Most pilots think the CT is empty with 20 pilots in it. They won't log in. If there are 40 pilots in the CT, more pilots tend to want to fly there. If there are 60 pilots in the arena, well, even more are likely to fly there. It's kind of like a snowball effect. I believe this is the biggest problem I ran into with the Perdonia setup.
Another thing is people just tend to like the main arena. Everything goes in the main arena, this is very appealing to a lot of pilots. Many pilots have no reason to click on "Combat Theater" if they were having a blast in the main arena with their squad the night before. Therefore some pilots are simply never going to fly in the CT. That is a factor we have to deal with too.
Their is a 128X128 terrain that will run in the CT this friday. It is small and has action everywhere (Nuttz built this beauty). The CT team hopes the easy to find action will bring more people in. I am off the CT staff for now but I hope they find the formula that will work.
Believe me it's not as simple as people make it out to be.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
The CT is not more realistic than the MA it just has some features that a few dozen people can't live without. Those features come at the expense of action and gameplay and variety and parity sooo.....
The rest stay away. There can be pockets of realism, good gameply, parity and variety in the CT but they are rare and all those things are free and assured in the MA at allmost all times.
The CT does serve a purpose... it provides a place for those who want axis vs allied to go and screw up an arena without affecting the rest of us. For that I am grateful as I am sure HTC is. In that respect the CT is a resounding success. Until.... some socialist comes in here and claims that we need to shut down the MA for our own good.
lazs
Then you got old fellas like lazs who should be off fishing somewhere, but instead they're sitting at home on their PC. Doing what? contributing anything? helping?
No.
Just the usual trolling guys half his age, trying to piss em off, getting reactions. Don't you feel so much better than us lazs? Aren't you just a little old for this stuff?
Go take your geritol old fart.
-
Originally posted by hblair
But that's been done.... I scoured the CT bulletin board looking for the most desired things that pilots wanted in the CT.
Respectfully, I disagree.
What you did was essentially ask your CURRENT client base (the folks that already play in the CT) what they "most desired".
Obviously, that current client base is relatively small, about the size of the client base using the TA. My point is simply that perhaps you didn't look in the right place for your answers.
As I posted a while ago (I think in the CT forum), if you are truly looking to induce more players to switch from the MA to the CT, I think you will have to make the MA intially[/i] much more like the MA and introduce future changes slowly and progressively.
This is all my opinion, of course, but here's what I see in a nutshell:
1. The CT was created to serve as a place where AH players themselves could actually implement their "dream" arena setup within the confines of the game code.
2. Various ideas and formats have been tried, none of which ever drew much interest from more than about 5-10% of the player base on any given night. (Comparing MA attendance vs CT attendance)
3. This percentage of participation is apparently insufficient to the point that it draws appeals from the CT supporters, similar to the one that started this thread, to "force" other players into the CT environment.
4. Rarely, if ever, does one see a CT "proponent" say:
"Yah know what guys? Maybe what the few of us like is nowhere near what the vast majority of the player base desires. Maybe, if we TRULY want more participation, we should make a few changes back towards the MA environment and see what happens. Maybe we should try:
- Axis V Allied
- New terrains
and just leave the rest of the stuff totally the same as the MA.
Then let's see if people come over. If they do, THEN maybe we could just add ONE thing at a time, like "shorter radar" and see if the numbers hold up for a few weeks. Maybe then we could find something that a significant number of players would support."
...But that never happens. There seems to be some inviolate CT characteristics that are not open to change or even much discussion. Perhaps these are the things that keep the majority of the players in the MA?
Of course, I recall in one CT thread a guy that made the point that he didn't want MORE players in the CT. He thought about 30-40 players was ideal. So you're never going to please everyone are you?
My bottom line? The CT was given to those who wanted "something different" to use as they see fit to implement their ideas and suggestions. The idea that ANYONE should be FORCED into the CT from the MA is simply ridiculous and, to me, somewhat offensive.
The CT crowd has its own sandbox now. If the rest of the kids in the schoolyard don't see the brilliance of its sandcastle architecture there's two possibilities:
The rest of the kids are simplistic morons that really don't understand "fun" (the CT "innate superiority" elitism argument)
or
The CT really isn't as good a "game" as the MA (the "just look at the numbers" argument).
Pay your money and take your choice... please, can we just drop the "FORCE 'em" threads. ;) (I know YOU aren't in the "force" camp, HB)
-
Originally posted by Toad
4. Rarely, if ever, does one see a CT "proponent" say:
"Yah know what guys? Maybe what the few of us like is nowhere near what the vast majority of the player base desires. Maybe, if we TRULY want more participation, we should make a few changes back towards the MA environment and see what happens. Maybe we should try:
- Axis V Allied
- New terrains
and just leave the rest of the stuff totally the same as the MA.
Then let's see if people come over. If they do, THEN maybe we could just add ONE thing at a time, like "shorter radar" and see if the numbers hold up for a few weeks. Maybe then we could find something that a significant number of players would support."
...But that never happens. There seems to be some inviolate CT characteristics that are not open to change or even much discussion. Perhaps these are the things that keep the majority of the players in the MA?
[/B]
With the exception of the radar range being at 40 miles, which BTW extends past the closest enemy fields, you can't tell any difference looking at CT bar radar vs. MA bar radar upon entering the arena. It shows up the furballs well. It is very easy to find a fight with 20-30 (or more) pilots in the arena.
The only other thing that is noticably different is the short icons. I personally have heard no criticism of this while in the CT, even when there was 70 ppl in there.
Do you think if we ran this setup again with long icons and unlimited radar the CT would fill up?
-
Ok, now stay with me on this. If all the folks that said "I would fly in the CT if the numbers were higher" would fly in the CT, the #'s would, by definition, be higher. And as the #'s got higher the lemmings would notice and before you know it the MA AtTiTuDe would prevail and spoil it for the rest of us elitist bastages.
Nevermind
GronK
-
there are always more ppl in the "easy" rooms vs the "realistic" rooms in a game ... any game.
I say make MA even easier (no cockpit view, reduced FM) and CT even harder (smaller maps with very limited dar) - separate the men from the boys :)
-
The CT isn't "my baby", so I have no "ownership" feelings...
... and the MA/TOD/Scenario stuff fills up my dance card to the point that I don't have enough free time to participate in all the AH activities I'd actually like to do.
So, that being said....
If I were king, yeah, I'd put in an Axis V Allied plane set and use the MA maps and the new CT maps in a continuing rotation. In other words, a CT that was the same as the present MA except for Axis v Allied planesets and some additional "new" maps.
Then I'd announce the changes far and wide, loud and clear in the forums, on the banners and in the MA (well, muted a bit in there ;) )
Then I'd put my feet up on the desk and not make any changes for about 3 weeks.
If no one came, I'd be forced to consider that perhaps Axis V Allied or the new maps themselves were the problem and I'd eliminate one of those and try again.
If LOTS of people came, then I'd add one thing... radar or whatever.. and again wait and see.
But that's just me and I'm real patient. :)
The problem you guys are trying to work through is that you've made a lot of changes and few people showed up. There's so many different things that you really don't know why people aren't coming in droves. Might be one thing, might be two things might be the combination of lots of things. So all is speculation and while folks speculate, the arena still languishes with respect to numbers.
As I said, though, it really isn't my concern... until somebody makes the routine "Let's MAKE 'em play OUR way!" post. ;)
-
I think Toad makes a lot of sense. Whether or not you agree with the particular suggestion forwarded, the concept is sound. Sending folks from one extreme to another is jarring, whether we admit it or not. A gradual introduction might not be bad.
I like CT because it is two-sided, and you are faced with roughly historical opponents. I like the fact it is smaller. I like the atmosphere, and don't miss all the open channel nonsense. It doesn't have to rival the MA to be a success, contrary to popular opinion.
That said, what's wrong with generic Axis vs Allies? Rolling plane set? Rolling maps? Sure, not totally historic, but you are starting down the path, and at least eliminate the Spit vs. Mustang fights. These are compromises that might make the CT more palatable for folks, if indeed that is a pressing need.
Don't ignore the success of the MA; people keep talking about how they want an alternative to the MA, yet they log right back into it every night. The alternative is there, it's what people asked for. It is all too obvious this alone won't bring the people in until some concessions are made- just like the *gasp* MA the people so loathe.
-
makes sense to me.
-
I don't know why I dont fly in the combat theatre.
In warbirds the HA was the only place I wanted to fly, to me the MA was a waste of time with its unrealistic setup and unrealistic plane matchups and long range icons.
but,
playing in a main arena since beta screws with your mind a bit I guess. now the same things I used to despise in arena settings seem to have somehow become preferable.
now I like the challenge of facing so many combinations of different aircraft. more is better. the limited planeset of the CT (ie: hurr,spit vs 109e,110c) just does not hold my interest at all.
I like the stupid awacs because i am ussually too lazy to check my 6 so i just look at the clipboard and watch for bandits and givemyself radar vectors to the evil doers.
I like the quick travel times to get to the fight in the MA
the real reasons the CT will never have more than a few people who only fly there and not the MA is because the MA delivers so much more diversity in planes, dogfights, strat, ground battles and number of players.
-
The CT area was really hard to get going in the beginning. Limited planes that don't support the "ideal" allied vs axis is one problem. HTC is adding planes and this will shortly be a non issue.
Second is the maps. The maps were not designed for a 2 sided war and some were quickly redesigned and added, and quite frankly some just didn't cut it.
Perdonia was the first map designed for a 2 sided war, and I though it had some success. Still with the lower numbers IMO Perdonia is still to big for 30 players to have fun, 60-200 sure but not 30.
Tunisia will debute this weekend ( I think) It's a much smaller map 128x128. It has everything that the MA has (strats) It has CV groups, small DE groups for scouting, and a Battle group for hunting. Theres trains, barges and truck convoys to destroy. Ports and feilds by shoreline have SHore batts. The ground vehicle asaults are more than abuntant. There should be something for everyone. Hopefully this map will satisfy a broader player base, the furballers, the ground pounders, the carrier guys, the jabo'ers, buffers ( although I hope it's only meduim bombers) Osty jocks, and the mission guys. Attacking "Rommels" defensive line is "white knuckles" and gives me the feeling I have flying senerios. This should be enjoyable to many. I tried to incorporate the GV's back into the game balance with air support. Comms between Ground and Air will definately help and will be much needed.
I'm sorry for whoever posted that the MA should be shut down to force people in the CT. MOSTLY everyone that flies the CT don't feel this way or in any way "elitist" I fly the CT, and fly the MA and have fun in both.
So stop by and visit this New map ( already posted on the HTC main page) This map was built to have fun, nothing more, nothing less. So check your attitudes at the door and bring SUNSCREEN!
NUTTZ
-
Toad, Kieren, seeker, sounds good. Some of what you bring up we cannot do (like doing something other than axis vs. allies)
Having a full-time axis vs. allied arena would be worth giving a go in my opinion (just my opinion). If it were left alone for a long period of time it might just be discovered.
-
Toad,
Maybe good advertising? I dunno. If there isnt at least
25 people in CT it will dwindle to 0. Thats the point I was
trying to make at the top of the thread. How many people
dont fly CT because there are too few people in there?
1, 10, 15, what if there were 250 that didnt come over just
because there is only 12 people in there. If thats the
case, then somebody has to figure out how to prime the pump.
No, shutting down MA is not the way, I suggested a CT
format rotate in the MA as a trail??? I can see why this is not
popular either. And definatley people threatening to
cancel subscription speaks very loudly.
(Its ironic, these same arguments took place at AW.
the same people who threatende to cancel if AW
changed anything, didint bat an eyelid to bail when they
saw people moving to AH)
Fact is MA is AH. that is the fact. Without MA, AH dont thave the
revenue to continue. I just think we (MA) should be open to
small experiments so the MA can grow. I wouldnt mind
a little variety. ( please dont tell me to go elsewhere,
I pay $15 bucks a month too)
-
NUTTZ
thanks for the smaller map
-
.. I don't ever tell anyone "what to do" with their subscription fee.
Experiment?
Sure.. that's why we even have the CT.
MANDATORY Experiment? Altering the MA to cater to what is obviously a very small percentage of the player base "thinks they want THIS week" on a rotating basis?
No way.
The MA is a "tried and true" product line that the vast majority of players log into every night because they know what they want and they know what they'll get. Standardization, consistent product, no surprises. It is clearly the "preferred" product here.
When I've only got 90 minutes to play, that's what I want. I'd be major p*ssed if I logged in for the only 90 minutes I was going to get to play all week and suddenly it was "Experiment" time in the MA and some boring setup was being forced on me.
Offer experimental stuff in experimental venues.. like the CT. Those in search of something different will find it if they truly seek it.
Or is that too fair for ya? ;)
-
Originally posted by NUTTZ
I'm sorry for whoever posted that the MA should be shut down to force people in the CT. MOSTLY everyone that flies the CT don't feel this way or in any way "elitist"
Agreed. We'd like to have more of you in there, but only because you WANT to be there. By definition, those who identify more with a chess piece than a country (you know who you are), those who insist on flying with their squads (you know who you are, too) and those who demand the right to fly a particular plane (we know who you are) are not happy in CT, and probably never will be. There are no issues of skill, or tactics, or courage involved in picking the MA instead of the CT. Different strokes for different folks, and all that.
But I'll bet you 'd enjoy it more if you spent more time there.
- Oldman
-
hblair... for a fat bald guy you are pretty free with that 'old fart' stuff. Bet I got more hair, less fat than you and can whup you in arm wrestling even without geritol... not that that matters eh?
soo.. Now that we got that out of the way, what do you think of my opinion? Ah hell... just respond to toad it's really the same thing. I don't really care if the CT ever get's any numbers as allied vs axis is pretty boring but you can lessen the boredom and sticker shock if you wish to increase numbers. Look at the things you are doing in there.... You are setting up fantasy terrains with fantasy planesets and substitutions... you have "What if scenarios" constantly... And this is "realism"?? This is the immersion that you guys tout?? You have even less realistic features than the MA and for what?? Allied vs axis? So that you can get people to fly and fight in an allied vs axis arena that will allways lack parity and variety buy virtue of being..... allied vs axis.
If allied vs axis is the holly grail then you need to do as toad and (ahem) "others" have suggested and simply keep all the MA settings but with allied vs axis... go from there. let the endless arguements about side balancing comence.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
hblair... for a fat bald guy you are pretty free with that 'old fart' stuff. Bet I got more hair, less fat than you and can whup you in arm wrestling even without geritol... not that that matters eh?
LOL .. old fart, new ones are pretty bad too :D
-
I bet you weigh less too lazs. Looking at the pictures I've seen of you I'd say you weigh 130 lbs. What's that prove?
Still armwrestle? Haven't done that since high school but hey maybe we can hook up and you can beat me someday. That might make you feel better about yourself. I'm all for it.
All that other stuff you typed about the CT has no merit You don't participate in that arena, you don't know what it needs.
-
the CT is not a failure. the people are.
the CT requires a higher attention rate than the MA. pilot workload is higher.
in general people always take the path of least resistance. the MA is that path.
ever since the inception of the CT in Warbirds or AH, the flux of masses is always easy to diagnose....when the arena is opened we see a flux of people checking it out followed by just a few diehards playing all the time.
the CT is a success in my book and i hope they keep it.
-
>the CT requires a higher attention rate than the MA. pilot
>workload is higher.
:rolleyes:
-
well gee hblair... you sound picked on and self rightious now huh? Insults just aren't as fun when people respond eh? Oh, not that it matters but i weigh around 185. should probly dump 10 pounds tho... don't want to get flabby like you eh?
lazs
-
lol lazs, when have you ever made a post without an insult involved? Are you seeking justice now? :)
And if it doesn't matter about your weight don't post it. You think we care what you weigh? What are you, a woman?
-
Ol' Laszie got the same problem as the midget in the nudist colony. Keeps sticking his nose in where it don't belong. :D
-
Toad for President!
Seriously, you hit a lot of the things I've been trying to express right on the head.
hblair, I know you do a lot of work on the CT, and it seemed to me you were taking all your suggestions from those who already frequented the CT. You'll never lure new blood into the CT if you are skimming for ideas only from those who hang out there, or in the CT forums.
Right now the biggest selling point the CT could brag about is new maps. SO many folks are tired of the same 4 in the MA right now. Plus, with a 2 sided war, those whining about a constant gang-bang can be put to rest.
I'll try the CT out tonight to see what's new. I'd like to see Nuttz's new maps, too!
-
Well, last night the CT had some great F6F vs. Zeke action. The fleet was off our port, we defended against high waves of organized and well-flown F6Fs in strike formations. Later, a fleet battle ensued, intertwined between base captures. It had everything the MA could have offered except the useless whining on open.
-
Actually Lepaul, my setups were the most MA-like of any that have been run, and were done that way to try to get the MA crowd to give it a look. I think what I did was about as MA as you're going to get without going with long icons.
-
>>It seems there are always <12 people in there.
Not nearly enuff to warrant any kind of organized and sustained action. Hmm, guess CT is a failure eh? <<
I realize there is more to this first post but, the opening coments (above) are compelling.
If there are 12 people consistently flying there, that means there are 12 paying customers having fun...failure? I don' theen so;)
For sustained and organized action well, when I last looked there is already a place for that, the Main Arena. I understood the concept of the CT was developed to satisfy the desires of some, to also provide an alternative arena with alternative terrains, and customized modeling to satisfy those who wished that kind of environment.
What is there to advertise and why? Is it to get over 400 per night in there to tax the over burdened servers? Or is it to get a majority of pilits to fly in an environment which some have decreed as more realistic?
For me, I don't fly there because the few times I have, I got ganged by a stream (read conga line) of 6 or more fiters; no different than the MA, and in the MA, I could at least get to see them from a longer way out :D Sure I got some kills but, I get them in the MA too, and there are usually more countrymen in on an effort.
My connection in there was just as unstable as it is in the MA, and there are more targets in the MA than there are in the CT.
So for me, I am one who likes having an alternative arena but, I like where I regularly fly too.
And btw, who says AH is stagnating?
-
Originally posted by Kieran
Well, last night the CT had some great F6F vs. Zeke action. The fleet was off our port, we defended against high waves of organized and well-flown F6Fs in strike formations. Later, a fleet battle ensued, intertwined between base captures. It had everything the MA could have offered except the useless whining on open.
Yes, it did. To me, that was the essence of the CT - just as when we had Battle of Britain. It's about as close as you can get, in an on-line sim in 2002, to working your way back in time. Made me think of Sakai's account of his fight over Iwo - Zekes v. Hellcats. Great stuff. Wish we could bottle it and pass it out to those who think CT is for old ladies.
- Oldman
-
>>I find the implication that "the MA population is just too stupid to know any better and if it was just crammed down their throats they would thank us for it later" rather insulting. <<
While I am lagging a bit in this thread, I didn't read that implication anywhere. While I have noticed there are self styled elitists in this game, I didn't see this implied.
What I saw implied and stated, is a guy getting tired of the game he is playing...pfft! Maybe he needs some time away; happens to all of us at times I guess.
Or, if he wants something different, then perhaps he should go over to the CT and spend some time there, instead of trying to determine what is good for all because it may be just the ticket for him.
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
Fariz,
You are one who needs to give it more of a chance. You will be surprised. I see you have logged 3 hours in the CT in the past 3 months. The CT can be dull at times, but it can also be even more intense than the MA. There are times that you can spend 80% of your time engaged in good fights, and there are times that you can really see what was so great about a particular plane, that is when it is fighting it's true advisary.
Give it more time bud.
eskimo
Eskimo, that is what I do :) Come to CT, play for 30 minutes, borred, go away. I will give it more tries, may be it will change. :)
Fariz
-
In the days which marked the beginning of the end for Air Warrior, there was a new version developed and implemented (AW2) It was to be the answer to what supposedly all AW'ers wanted and the embarkation from AW-DOS and AW4W; it was an ungodly mess. The beta ran for 8 months and it was free. This meant there were hordes of dweebs and children; most of em flew the relaxed version (9 g turns and you never stalled or spun out). Many old hands of the FR (Full Realism) crowd turned our noses up at it and continued in 'our arena". The numbers were much lower than the numbers in the AH CT arena. We would switch sides to even out numbers and knew everyone who flew there. We even helped any new person who came there to fly; it meant potential new numbers for our brand of the game (FR).
It took some getting used to fly it but, most came to find it was better than RR.
Then the Kesmoids decided they wanted to go corporate and got bought up by a succession of suits and continued to ruin the game. The FM became a joke, and anyone could fly it without any learning curve at all. The rest of the story is history.
My point is, I don't want to see anything similar happen here. This is a damn fine game/sim as it is. And I have been here long enough to adopt a sense of ownership; its my game.
On the BBs here everyone has an opinion, which is great. It's only when an opinion is rendered that has as a clause that, 'there is something wrong because I see it that way, and everyone else is daffy if they don't'; that I get defensive and at times offended.
I would suggest that an opinion is just that and the right of anyone but, if you think your opinion is what will save the game, thats when I would suggest you check in to see a psych. in his 'happy place' to talk things over.
-
Originally posted by Ozark
That's just great, thanks Milnko. I can't get that song out of my head now.
Then my work here is done.
Hi Ho Silver AWAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYY!
-
Thats a very good point Don. Why try to advance an excellent product. Don, would you still be flying AW1 or would you
be flying AH today if AW1 was still running and the same as it
was 10 years ago? Gimme a break.
AW had thier feet kicked up on their desks. They told
thier paying customers' If u dont like it, go elsewhere' knowing
full well there was no where else to go but $2/hr WB's.
(And I did try WB's)
In my opinion, and it is just my opinion, AH is still a baby,
and has to grow. Maybe tinkering woth the MA is a bad idea,
i dunno.
Maybe a better question for this thread is
Where does AH go from here? or is this the ultimate?
I wouldnt mind tooling about in a 109e-4 without getin
blasted by a 700mph La7. I guess i just lust for the
classic matchups, occasionally.
:(
-
Toad
Sorry, I wasnt directing the second half of that earlier
reply to you. Just to those who feel thier $15 empowers them
to speak for 400 or 500 other people.
-
Originally posted by WhiteHawk
Toad
Sorry, I wasnt directing the second half of that earlier
reply to you. Just to those who feel thier $15 empowers them
to speak for 400 or 500 other people.
Almost as bad as someone feeling their $15 empowers them to impose on other people.
AKDejaVu
-
I came up with an idea that may help the CT increase its numbers (if that is indeed what is desired), though I am not sure how practical the implementation of it would be. I was thinking that a map that was more or less split into thirds may work. One third would be early war ETO (i.e. BoB), another third would be mid/late war ETO, and the last third would be PTO.
This would give fans of the different theaters an area where they could fight in somewhat historical match-ups without having to wait for their favorite theater or time-frame to pop up. The main reason I haven't tried the CT very much is that I am not that much of a fan of the ETO. Until recently, that is all that was in the CT. This last week, if you have dropped in or read the CT forums, you will see that the Axis pilots were squeaking about the planeset (which I partly agree with some of what they were saying). Didn't exactly make for a good time.
-
Mathman: I've heard that idea proposed before (may have been Lazs, to give him his due). My first reaction was that too many people would stray "off the reservation" and ruin others' fun. Then I though, "Hey, just use a 512x512 map and make it five or six sectors of open water between the reservations." I think something like this could be tried in the future at some point, but were faced with a variation of the "I'd fly in the CT if more people were in there" syndrome. We don't have enough people on-line regularly to run multiple areas; the action would be spread out too far, I'm thinking. On the flip side, would doing this kind of set up actually bring in more players? Would it raise the player density up to keep it on par with what we see in the single-theater/era set ups we use now? I don't know.
I'd suggest you hook up with a terrain builder and put your heads together to layout such a terrain as you suggest. Nothing fancy to start with; just a basic layout with fields, spawn points, and strat. You could call it "West World" (anyone remember that movie?:)). Then we can look it over and see how it might workout. I'm not opposed to exploring new ideas...I just don't have the time to work on this with the other projects I've got going on.
-
math and sabre... yep, an "area" arena would be great for any arena. I would of course, prefer it to be in the MA where the planeset is not limited by the axis vs allied thing but any place to fly early iron unmolested by mid late and perk planes is a start. I don't think it will work all that well in the CT tho due to the limitations of axis vs allied. you will simply have three lopsided areas instead of one. still.... an improvement... early war could be fun despite the limitations.
and hblair... I don't think everyone cares about my weight. you are the one who was trying to guess it. I just figured that must be an important thing to your kind so I gave you the info.
lazs
-
I dont think that that is the answer. I dont really like the idea. If you are going to do that, why not just have separate arenas, one a CT for early war, one for mid war, one for late war etc. The answer is obvious, if you split up the current CT crowd even further you would only have a tiny handful of people, if any, in each of those arenas. If you had the same map, but with sections for pre, mid, and late war, all that would accomplish is to split up the few people that are playing into different areas of the map. The CT as it is now, usually only has action in one or two focused areas. For example, in the "fire in the sky" setup, which is playing now, the allies usually are all in the same area trying to take one Japanese base. The Japanese side, naturally gravitates towards that base to defend it. So usually, all 12-20 people that are online are in the same area. At least this has been the case when I have played, which is mostly at night on the weekends. A split map would split up those people with a few in the late war section, a few in the early war section etc.
I dont consider the CT a failure, in fact I much prefer it to the MA most of the time. I still play in the MA plenty too, since it is fun as well. However, I prefer the more historical nature of the CT (just always get this guilty feeling when I shoot at a B-17 from a P-51 lol). I do wish that more people played the CT, it would be nice if we had at least 30-40 people online most of the time. I dont advocate forcing it on the MA though. Let people play where they want to play. I do think that there are a lot of people in the MA that would like the CT better though if they gave it a try.
The CT needs some slight tweaking that in my opinion would probably increase the numbers at least a little. The different setups each week are an excellent start and I have really enjoyed them. However, I think that slightly smaller maps would be better, and I am happy to see the announcement that some are forthcoming. I also wish there was a way to completely eliminate the 3rd country from the map, and redesignate the sides as Allied, and Axis instead of Rooks/Knights/Bishops etc. The CT should make every effort to stay historically accurate within reason. I dont think that the BoB setups should have field capture enabled, and there should be a way to remove the CVs from the BoB map. On the other hand, if its a scenario set on the Eastern front, field capture should be enabled. I think the type of person that likes to play in the CT is easily annoyed by small unrealisms, I know I am. Its not a big deal but it makes it a lot more enjoyable for me. I know that most people dont feel this way and thats fine. I am just grateful that HTC provides a CT for those of us that like a little more realism. I know its just a game and it will never be completely realistic but the closer it is to realistic the better I like it, thats just the way I am.
I know I know, I am a nerd, but I have always been this way. Even when I was a kid, I was fanatical about realism when we were playing. One time I got in trouble with my parents because some of my cousins and I were playing soldier, and we were pretending it was the Civil War. We only had a few toy guns that were civil war era enough to suit me, so we ended up being one gun short. We had a rifle that was bolt action, but I refused to allow it, since they didnt have bolt actions then! My cousin complained and my parents made me allow him to use the bolt action. They told me to "pretend" it was a muzzleloader. The very thought! I could pretend that it was 1863 and that we were surrounded by 1000s of imaginary soldiers but not that a toy rifle was a muzzleloader! lol
I was probably only about 12 or 13 at the time, and you can see the old realism streak is just as strong today, 15 years later. :)
What a geek huh.
-
ya know durr... I am just curious.. really.
How is it that one type of "realism" weighs so much more heavily to you than another? I mean, plane substitutions and fantasy maps and what if scenarios don't seem to bother you but fighting a 51 against a B17 does?
As for "area" it is hoped I believe that with more choice, more people. Changing setups all the time seems to please you but for some CT aficianados this is a bad thing. Any fight that does not involve a 190 or a 109 or a pee 51 or whatever is one to simply avoid. An area arena would give these folks a 24/7 place to fly if they wished. I really don't know how it would shoke out numbers wise in the CT but if CT folk can side balance then they could certainly "area" balance". Perhaps during low numbers hours some areas would be deserted.. no big deal.
lazs
-
Actually I dont really like plane substitutions either, especially when they arent necessary, like the substitution of the C.202 for the Ki-43 in the current setup. I understand that in some scenarios it is necessary to substitute the C-47 for Ju-52 or something so that the Axis can have a transport but why allow the C.202? It didnt end up being that big of a deal of course since nobody was using it.
I also prefer historical maps like Battle of Britain, Battle of Midway (when we get the planes for it of course), and so on. I like what-if scenarios though sometimes. In fact, like I said, I still log plenty of time in the MA just because it is plain fun. One of my favorite books about WW2 airplanes is by Captain Eric Brown. He has a book called Duels in the Sky that compares aircraft against each other. He rates planes against each other and I used to always think it would be interesting if there were a simulation where you could test a Spitfire against a P-51 for example, and see which one is better. Here in AH we have that in the MA. For most of my playing time, though, I prefer the historical matchups, being the history and realism fan that I am.
Once again, do not construe anything that I say as me trying to impose my style on anybody else, since I recognize that I am in a very small minority. I am just weighing in with my opinion. And again, I like the fact that the CT gives me the option of an alternative to the MA. It would make me really sad to see the CT go away. I just wish that there were enough people that liked the CT enough that I wouldnt have to be forced to playin the MA most of the time simply becuase there arent ANY players in the CT. Like right now, I just logged off and the number in the CT was exactly 0. I had fun in the MA though, and I look forward to the weekend when there will be enough people in the CT to play.
-
Originally posted by Fariz
Eskimo, that is what I do :) Come to CT, play for 30 minutes, borred, go away. I will give it more tries, may be it will change. :)
Fariz
Fariz,
Try this, every time your about to log into the MA, log into the CT first. Spend 1 or 2 minutes looking for a good sustained fight. If you don't see one go to the main. This is what I often do.
See ya in both arenas,
eskimo
-
Durr: Actually, I never enabled the C202 in the CT this go around. It may be listed in the MOTD though; I don't recall editing it out when I uploaded it. The only subs are the ground vehicles (Japanese build the DC-3 under license before Dec 7, and continued to produce them, as I recall). Otherwise, all the aircraft represented in "Fire in the Sky" flew against each other (or at least were in theater together) at one time or another, though possibly as earlier or later varients. The great thing about having two arenas is you can choose to fly in either, as the mood strikes you.
I just don't understand why that seems to bother some people. Some insist on ridiculing the CT, those who play there, and those that support it as a worthwhile option for some paying customers. It's almost as if they have some personal stake in trying to turn people off of it and make it fail. It's like, even though they have what they want, they can't be happy if someone else does too. It's kind of like the whole tax cut debate in the US between liberals and conservative. Conservatives put forth a tax cut that benefits all tax payers, but liberals attack it because "the rich benefit more from it than the poor." Hence, no one gets a tax cut. Dumb!
That's why I started the other thread, "The CT is a success because...", to counter those that for whatever reason want it to fail so terrible badly, and figure if they say it's a failure often enough it will magically come true. Am I a tiny bit defensive about it? Heck yeah! A goodly number of people have put work into the CT or supported it with their patronage. So what if we want to get on the BBS and let the world know we're happy about it and having a good time. Having a choice between two great options is worth celebrating about. I'm sorry some don't feel that way. Life must be very unfulfilling for them.
Sabre
-
"I just don't understand why that seems to bother some people. Some insist on ridiculing the CT, those who play there, and those that support it as a worthwhile option for some paying customers"
Jealousy and exasperation.
Jealousy, because each and every one of us *knows* what's good for every one else; and no one will give us an arena to prove it.
Exasperation, because we know best and you won't listen. Every one of us.
Solution - instead of re-inventing the wheel and trying to see how many you can attract, start with a proven sucsess (the MA), and see how few you drive away with every subsequent step along the way to your goal.
Same view. Different end of the telescope.
-
Warning!
LazsTard Alert!
LazsTard Alert!
This thread is being tardified.and hijacked by a LazsHole-LazsTard.
All value and intelligent thought is being smothered and redirected into mindless-meaningless-tard-blather.
You may now resume an intelligent meaningful discussion.
That is all.
eskimo
-
"Warning!
LazsTard Alert"
Missed you in Sicily, Eskimo.
Could have used you undoubted organisational skillz and situational awareness. There was a whole arena set up just the way you like it begging for a leader.
Some one who really knows what the players want.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
Having a CT is better than not having one.
Which is my take on it. I've flown CT at times, and it's just fine, but most of my time is logged in the MA.
-
durr... yes, i see the problem. in the CT there are a lot of guys who have a lot of different ideas of what realism is and how much realism they are willing to sacrafice in order to have parity and variety and good gameplay. I thnk sabre kinda skews the real picture tho... He acts as tho a group of kind hearted souls all got together to help give everyone a little more choice in AH. That they have been harrassed and ridiculed for no good reason and just want to help...That is true to a certain extent but.... he leaves out the fact that most of those souls were the most vitriholic and mean spirited players ever... Constantly complaining about the MA... Some still do take snide shots at the MA and effect an air of superiority. In the CT they continue to fight amongst themselves even tho they are a very small number.. Imagine the complaining if they had 100 or more in there on a regular basis?
I am a fan of WWII and the era. It was a very important time and facinating to me but...... I read the book. I know how it came out and why. I am not into blasphemous and lame re creations. On the other hand.... I love firearms and prop planes and machinery in general. Just like those pilots in WWII I have allways wondered how a Hog would do against a Spit or a 190 or a lag. I want to see how these planes do against each other. The combinations in a fight/furball are allmost infinite. The CT can't compete in that respect. It can't offer me much. It can't let me even compete in the same plane as my enemy. In the MA I can fly with my squaddies no matter what their favorite plane is... How can the CT compete with that?
lazs
-
lazs- "It can't offer me much. It can't let me even compete in the same plane as my enemy. In the MA I can fly with my squaddies no matter what their favorite plane is... How can the CT compete with that? "
It doesn't try to compete with that. It simply offers an alternative to those of us who are bored toejamless with the FuRbAlLiNg, KiLlStEaLiNg, LeMmInGs in the MA, ( not everyone in MA fits this description, just enough to keep things un-fun) and who appreciate historic matchups. This is obviously not your cuppa, so why do you feel compelled to post on this subject at all?
-
Originally posted by lazs2 4/10/02
I am a fan of WWII and the era. It was a very important time and facinating to me but...... I read the book. I know how it came out and why. I am not into blasphemous and lame re creations
Originally posted by lazs2 3/26/02
I would most likely set up a map with a 1/3 sector "channel" between "england" and the rest. fields would be about 1/2 or a little more from their oppossite number across the "channel".
fields would be destroyed but not captured (nod to strat guys) and when all fields but one were down the war would be over.
MA radar.
MA or slightly shorter icons.
No CV's until a6m2 and F4f are created.
this is how I would do a BOB in the CT using the CT guidlines od allied vs axis. I believe that it would be the simplest setup yet.
Questions?
lazs
Yeah, why give your idea of a good CT setup if, it is, in your words just a "blasphemous and lame" recreation ?
This is what I'm talking about laz, your story takes all kinds of curves and meanders as you make it up. Why not just say what you mean to start with? Either you like the CT or you don't, or does your opinion usually fluctuate like that?
-
"a "blasphemous and lame" recreation !" Created by sordid homersectuals and feelthy fernicators who're all gonna bUrN in hell for it! -- Reverended Lazs (circa 1995-2002)
Westy
edited: tater. tater tater. I wasn't supposed to post again till June. My 'bad' :(
-
Well, tried the CT last night.
Jumped over to A25 to see what was up. Apparently some GVs were rolling into the base and thought I'd jump in. Went into the hangar and saw a whopping 2 aircraft to chose from. P-47D11 and a B26, and if you had perks, a P-38.
Groan.
Flew one sortie and was maced by an M16. Oh if I coulda had my P47 D-30 :(
Asked about the 1 plane thing on Channel One, and it was pointed out we also have a CV, so that adds 3 more airplanes. :rolleyes:
Dunno guys...
A few other guys (of the 17 there at 10pm EST) mentioned to "come back next week" when we have a new map and more planes.
Seems to be a consistent theme in there. Come in, shake head, and asked to come in again sometime later :)
In all fairness, I will, to see the new map. But whoever dreamed up what's in there now is doing the CT a huge disservice.
-
Sweet thread.
-
>>Maybe a better question for this thread is
Where does AH go from here? or is this the ultimate? <<
I'm glad you asked that question
;)
Answer:
Fix the current structure; Begin with the arena servers. Fix recurring bugs on certain maps. Continue development on scenario offerings; structure and scheduling.
There is no wisdom in pushing a river; it has a tendency to flow by itself.
I see no point in ballooning the population without an efficient server with which to handle the population. Stick to the basics, get it right first before moving on.
Btw, this is not the ultimate, not yet, but it has certainly established a fine foundation so far.
Finally, why worry yerself with such matters? It seems the answers to your questions have already been considered and are attended to by the creators of the game/sim.
-
Touche Don :)
I have learned a good leason in this thread, I believe i was
wrong to suggest change. And I guess there are always
gonna be paying customers who fight against any changes.
Reguardelss of a CT rotation in MA or a even a technological
change of some kind. And youre right, why try to go for more
customers when they have trubble accomadating the ones they
have now. (I personally have very little problems with AH), but
I do hear complaints.
I guess the final outcome really lies in the imagination and
creativitiy of HTC staff. And I cant complain about that.
Everything i always wished AW had, AH has, and more!!
AKDejaVu,
I was always careful to make sure I was just voicing my opinion.
Some felt it ok to represent 400 MA people. I am a MA people
and i can speak for myself. I wouldnt rebel against attempts at
variety. that is my vote. I guess I just cant get the picture.
-
hmm.... a triffle out of context there eh hblair? I was asked what I would do to set up a BOB in the CT that would be fun and attract players. I used the limitations set up by the CT staff namely, axis vs allied. Certainly it would be a lot more fun to have an early war "area" that wasn't axis vs allied. I have remained true to my opinion throughout. I believe that even you can see that and are being a little dishonest here. Where is the 'wandering all over' that u attribute to me??
lepaul... you have kinda hit on the main flaw of the CT. Too many guys look to it as a panacea. The setup you describe sucks but, to a few.... it is the only one they like. next one will be the same. A few will be in love with it and the rest will avoid it or complain and wait for the setup tailored to them.
I hear talk of people going to the CT because of the "furballers" in the MA and then..... CT folks come in here and try to lure us in with the fact that, of all things...... They are putting fields close toghether and maps smaller!!! The very things that I have been called dweeby furballer over when I suggest them in the MA.
They ask for "realism" but think nothing of fantasy maps and fantasy planesets and substitutions and fantasy tactics and goals.... They have way more than their share of milkrunners and.... gangbanging or attacking from advantage is not unheard of....
To top it off.... they add a perk system!! What in the hell has that got to do with realism and immersion???? Where was there a "perk" system in WWII??? Poor ol Boyington flew some of the most outdated and worn out -1a's in the pacific. With "realistic" features like "perk planes" who needs the CT?? WWII as everquest.
So really.... what is the realism in the CT??? anyone?? it appears to be simply... axis vs allied (unless they need a substitution).
friendly helpful folk??? maybe at first but... that's wearing thin as a lot of these guys aren't getting their way or.... getting the "atta boy's" they crave. As can be seen... they are getting a little thin skinned about it too.
lazs
-
and westy.... yes, of course.
lazs
-
LazsHole.. lol.
couldn't resist
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I have remained true to my opinion throughout. I believe that even you can see that and are being a little dishonest here. Where is the 'wandering all over' that u attribute to me??
On the one hand you say the CT style of arena is "blasphemous and lame" yet you practically live in this forum and on occassion give your input on what you think would work in the CT. Yet you feel the CT is "blasphemous and lame"?
Why would you be so obsessed with something you feel is "blasphemous and lame" ?
Yeah, you're consistant. Consistantly wavering.
-
Originally posted by WhiteHawk
I have learned a good leason in this thread, I believe i was
wrong to suggest change.
If I had written what you wrote in your first post, that isn't the lesson I'd take a way from this thread. :)
I might take away the idea that anyone can suggest anything they want to suggest on the board. Many such suggestions have been implemented in the game, in fact.
However, such a person should be realistic enough to know that some people will disagree, particularly if the "new suggestion" is to force other people to do things they don't really want to do.
Very few people enjoy being "forced" to do anything, in my experience anyway.
There's nothing wrong with suggesting new ideas and there's nothing wrong with posting in opposition to new ideas. It's just debate, that's all. No big deal.
At least it gives HTC an idea of how some of the players think about some ideas.
Thanks for posting!
-
roadkill hblair.. tell the truth. My statement about what would work in the CT was in direct response to a Thread in the CT forum that was titled something like "how would lazs set up a BOB" or some such. I was directly asked for my input. Probly five guys asked for it before I wrote a word. I don't give a crap if you fail or not but it seems a waste of a perfectly good arena. It would be nice f it were a viable arena choice for more of us. I flew in the CT for a tank of gas or so and never saw a soul tho. Probly not like that all the time but.... why bother to find out? At best I will have a fight that has less variey than any I find in the MA.
some of the maps aren't set up for "no action" playing but they have close fields and are more like what I have asked for in the MA.... They get ruined by plane choice limitations and side imbalance tho.
The best arena still consists of 3 countries and no allied vs axis drearyness.
BOB is by far yur best shot at attracting people. It is one of the few eras where there is parity and action. Keep the fields close and don't perk anything and run the damn thing for a month and you will pick up numbers.... some of which will stay.
lazs
-
So you're for a 3-sided Battle of Brittain with all planes available for all sides? We have a main arena that has all that, but with a more practical terrain. Why don't you fly there?
That's the most idiotic idea I've ever heard of, and I've been reading your posts for a long time. What's next? maybe we could do a 6 sided attack on Pearl Harbor next month?
And don't get upset. I'm just little old bald harmless hblair.
-
Eeek
I agree with Lazs in part of his reply to me.
Look, without getting in the middle of a pissing contest between 2 skunks, I'll just say that for anyone jumping into the CT from the Main is really in for a disappointment. At least with the setup I saw.
Its a vicious cycle in that CT. Come in, don't see many players, etc etc...told to come back when new map XXX is out or new planes are out....come back, and told to come back in the future when XXX and XXX are implemented.
I keep coming back and going away :p
But I do wanna see these new maps you guys have been buzzing about. I'm not much into the Historical Scenario thingies...but I am pretty worn out on the same 4 maps in the Main Arena.
I'd go on about the things the CT could offer that might draw folks out of the Main...but that's fallen on deaf ears in the past....lol
As I said, I'll keep checking it out....
Lazs: Hope you had a fribulator handy when you read I agreed with you :eek:
-
Originally posted by LePaul earlier in this thread
I'd go on about the things the CT could offer that might draw folks out of the Main...but that's fallen on deaf ears in the past....lol
Originally suggested by LePaul on 12/06/01
.......Perhaps someone with Nuttz's talent can make a fantasy map that isnt available in the Main Arena...and offer players things in the CT they can't have in the Main arena.......
......Yea, Historical Arenas do sound fun...sometimes. But from my point of view, I'd abandon the Main Arena in a heart beat if all the planes were available in the CT with more realism tossed in.....
Posted by hblair on 2/21/02. (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=45968&highlight=perdonia)
Deaf ears huh?
-
All I can say is that I log into the CT first, fly for a flight and see what is up. Most of the time I can find a fight in the same timeframe I could have in the MA. But hey, that is the time I fly, not anyone else.
Logged in last night and the number was 37. It was fun for me, and that is all that matters where I sit. I don't worry too much about the terrain, the plane choice, or who is doing what, I simply go to the low side and fly.
Let's not make this harder than it needs to be. Both sides have offered good ideas where I am concerened, and if you separate the personalities from the discussion you can see it. Of course, as long as it's fun to me I will fly no matter what they set up, and for me at the moment the arena is funner than the MA.
-
>>I have learned a good leason in this thread, I believe i was
wrong to suggest change. And I guess there are always
gonna be paying customers who fight against any changes. <<
Whitehawk:
I don't believe you are/were wrong for suggesting change at all.
;) However, you did make some pretty controversial statements:)
As I have written in this thread, I'd rather see the staff's time spent getting this game/sim as near to perfect as possible before moving on. For me, that means the way the game works ie. connections, voice comms etc. We have damn near 500 pilits on and a large percentage of em can't stay connected, experience weird and everpresent lag and other things, that don't have to exist. I'm not fighting against changes, not if they are any good and would enhance the game/sim but, why not change those ever present problems that make the thing go first? Then address some of the more qualitative things like arena preferences and types of planes etc.
I'd like to fly and fight and have a dead on shot actually hit it's mark without getting lost in cyberspace. I'd also like to fly in a scenario frame that isn't going to take me 6 or 7 hours to enjoy. ;)
If you increase the customer base and attempt to sell them a piece of crap, then the customers will leave. So, IMO fix the thing first in its time, then move onto other aspects of the game to tweak.
-
"So you're for a 3-sided Battle of Brittain with all planes available for all sides? We have a main arena that has all that, but with a more practical terrain. Why don't you fly there?
That's the most idiotic idea I've ever heard of, and I've been reading your posts for a long time. What's next? maybe we could do a 6 sided attack on Pearl Harbor next month?
And don't get upset. I'm just little old bald harmless hblair.
__________________
hblair
The ASSASSINS"
No wonder you have so much trouble understanding your peers in the CT. You can't even understand what I am saying and I am pretty obvious.
The MA with a 3 country war and no allied VS axis is by far the best idea I have seen in a sim so far. The CT is limited (it would appear) by the dreary axis vs allied ball and chain. Working within that arena killing parameter is difficult. The more other arena killing "features" you add the worse off you will be.
Give me an area within the MA for early war planes only and no axis vs allied and I will pick it over a CT BOB setup anyday (field distances being equal).
"We have a main arena that has all that, but with a more practical terrain. Why don't you fly there? " I have no idea what you mean by that one... Where do we have a place (much less a BOB) in the MA for early war planes to fly unmolested by later and even perk planes? And... I do fly in the MA. What exactly do you mean?
Sheesh.... you guys were handed the BOB planeset on a platter with no other viable place to fly em and you still can't get people to play. Yet.... you take credit for the increase in numbers even tho you know the increase came from the planes themselves and... features that you would normally call "dweeby' like closer fields, furball friendly. When I went to get on the BOB in the CT what did I find? The fields close to the action were closed. I would have had to fly a sector and a half in a slow early war plane on a map with no dot dar and no player density... Sheesh.... u guys could destroy steel ball bearings with a rubber hammer!
lazs
-
Make up you mind Lazs! Your worse than my mother in law! Changing your tune every 10 seconds...looks like your on the same path as you were in Warbirds, getting chased out of the community with your tail between your legs. Shoo! Go away! Ya bother me boy! ;)
-
Lazs, you're all over the page again. This is the first I've heard of an early war MA from you. Make up your mind woman. You're worse than a politician. Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder too. Noone can critique your ideas without you gettin bent out of shape. The lazs arena is a stupid idea.
-harmless lil old bald hblair
-
I know when I chase something down in the current arena pretty much what it is by color.
If it's silver, it must be a P38 or Ki61- and it is easy to tell by the red tail of the Ki-61.
If it's green, it is probably Japanese- except for the P47, which has the white ring on the nose.
If it's blue, it's American.
This would not be possible without Axis/Allied. It has its time and place.
Edited for clarity.
-
Originally posted by hblair
Posted by hblair on 2/21/02. (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=45968&highlight=perdonia)
Deaf ears huh?
You're reading em, but the CT has 3 planes for me to chose from.
-
"Make up you mind Lazs! Your worse than my mother in law! Changing your tune every 10 seconds...looks like your on the same path as you were in Warbirds, getting chased out of the community with your tail between your legs. Shoo! Go away! Ya bother me boy!
__________________
VMF-323 ~DEATH RATTLERS~ MAG-33
VMF-323 Website
MAG-33 Information
Another hobby "
well... this is interesting.. ripsnore, i left WB with no fanfare no tearfull goodbye speech or indignant "i quit waaaa..." speech. I simply moved over to a sim that had the features I wanted and..... I waited till they fixed the FM in 1.04. I waited till all the good features in AH outweighed the good features in WB. And as for bothering you.... who really cares? everything bothers you. You are allways on the verge of tears so far as I can tell anyway. Some of your emotion choked drivel is pretty darn silly. I think you (and the rest of us) were best served when your sig was larger than your posts.
lazs
"Lazs, you're all over the page again. This is the first I've heard of an early war MA from you. Make up your mind woman. You're worse than a politician. Sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder too. Noone can critique your ideas without you gettin bent out of shape. The lazs arena is a stupid idea.
-harmless lil old bald hblair"
hblair... you prove my point and I'm sure it isn't lost on people who read this board... How you can say that I have never mentioned an early war area in the MA is beyond me. Are you on drugs? are you off em? Read what I write or don't read what I write but if you don't then don't comment on it. I hesitate to say that you are lying but what else can I think (other than the drug thing or some other chemical imvbalance)? You claim that this is the first time you have heard of an early war "area" in the MA from me? In other posts you claim that it wouldn't work. What wouldn't work?
oh... like the "harmless lil old bald hblair" thing. Very original. Hard to believe that you came up with it.
lazs
-
Oh yeah, here we go with the area arena huh laz? The truth is, you're for a little bit of everything. You mentioned earlier that you were for seperate main arenas, now the idiotic "area" arena mess again. Why would someone want two or 3 seperate periods of the war flying in one arena seperated from each other when they could just have 2 or 3 seperate arenas?
Oh yeah, I forgot, you're for that too. Today anyway.
BTW, no drugs here. That's for geniuses with nazi tatoos. :)
-
Give it a rest. :(
Success or failure of the CT is in the eye of the beholder.
If lazs sees it as a failure, fine, let him see it that way. No skin off my back whether he likes it or not. He is entitled to his opinion.
If others see it as a success, especially the guys in charge of this show, namely HTC, that's great, too.
Get in the arenas and off the BBS, guys! Helluva lot more fun for ya there! I'm still struggling with learning to fly with rudder pedals and this X45, so there's an easy nit target for ya in the AH skies!
-
I have allways said that seperate arenas don't work (as they have been done so far) and that one large arena with seperate areas would be one workable solution to the plane parity problem. We have seperate arenas now and they are acting the same way they allways have... one is full and the others are all but deserted.
The ability to stay in touch with the "community" while in one big arena but flying any different era of ac in an "area" of parity is... very apealing to me. I have mentioned tho that with seperate arenas a very good thing would be to be able to toggle between maps so that you could easily see what was happening in every arena without leaving one and signing into another.
oh... and I am no genius but I do have an SS tatoo from many years back.... I don't do drugs tho (unless you count two days after open heart surgery). not sure what the three things have in common.. did yu have a point?
lazs
-
Look past your nose laz. You don't even take into account the growth of the community. We have this thing called the radio buffer that would be rolling 90 mph with 500 pilots in the same arena. Then you have the potential for whining. "This plane should be in the early war area!"
Why in the world would you have 3 different different periods of the war in the same arena, yet seperated from each other, all using up the same resources but not at all interacting except on the radio? That's retarded.
BTW, there were 50-60 pilots in the CT friday and saturday nights using older planes that were not handed to us on a *platter*. ;)
-
hblair-
Why in the world would you have 3 different different periods of the war in the same arena, yet seperated from each other, all using up the same resources but not at all interacting except on the radio? That's retarded.
Ol' lazs got his late war 'merkin iron all fueled up with drops ready to go vulch the "early war" zone. We're onto you Lazs, give it up! :p
-
An simple test would be fun :
Try this :)
1. Rename the Main Arena to "combat theater", keep the setup as it is.
2. Rename the Combat Theater to "Main arena", keep the setup as it is.
Result : At the end of the month 2/3 of the player base will be in the renamed Combat Theater, djust because its called "main arena".
Its all about the "Sheep mentality" :) people log into the arena wich has the most numbers.
Regards.
-
"Why in the world would you have 3 different different periods of the war in the same arena, yet seperated from each other, all using up the same resources but not at all interacting except on the radio? That's retarded. "
Because if they're not flying actively against each other, how else do they interact? Yet even that limited interaction is greater than the amount of interaction between the two camps at present.
We had something like Laz's suggestion in AW; it was called fighter town. It didn't suit every one, was implemented but left undeveloped (like so much of AW); but went a long way towards resolving the conflict between players differeing of needs and wishes. One would hope ten years later software and arena sophistication would rise to the point where such an concept could be buit upon and improved instead of being ignored and/or re-invented from the begining all over again, all over again.
As such, it would appear to be merely a matter of terrain design, but that would of course mean that both (or all) areas within the same arena would (at present) share the same arena settings; as I don't believe there's any way to shorten Dar range in only (for example) the top left hand corner of the map.
It's a relatively simple argument to prove. It needs only a terrain, terrain set up and a server.
-
At fighter town Buffs and goonie were disabled, and people flew buffs and goonies from other fields, IT WAS A FREAKIN NIGHMARE!!!!!
NUTTZ
Originally posted by Seeker
"Why in the world would you have 3 different different periods of the war in the same arena, yet seperated from each other, all using up the same resources but not at all interacting except on the radio? That's retarded. "
Because if they're not flying actively against each other, how else do they interact? Yet even that limited interaction is greater than the amount of interaction between the two camps at present.
We had something like Laz's suggestion in AW; it was called fighter town. It didn't suit every one, was implemented but left undeveloped (like so much of AW); but went a long way towards resolving the conflict between players differeing of needs and wishes. One would hope ten years later software and arena sophistication would rise to the point where such an concept could be buit upon and improved instead of being ignored and/or re-invented from the begining all over again, all over again.
As such, it would appear to be merely a matter of terrain design, but that would of course mean that both (or all) areas within the same arena would (at present) share the same arena settings; as I don't believe there's any way to shorten Dar range in only (for example) the top left hand corner of the map.
It's a relatively simple argument to prove. It needs only a terrain, terrain set up and a server.
-
"At fighter town Buffs and goonie were disabled, and people flew buffs and goonies from other fields, IT WAS A FREAKIN NIGHMARE!!!!! "
Which part of "undeveloped" flew over your pointy head?
You're just squeaking 'cos the terrains already giving you headaches :)
Bring Fighter Town to Aces High!!
-
Hell no, I love a challenge!!! 3 different planeset could be built into 1 map AND be made so they couldn't Possibly cross paths. ( very simple 30K mountians and 800MPH winds at 28K) I'm just stating My beliefs of AW Fightertown, Which I flew in. Half the time the fields were closed due to Buffs and captures by people who wanted to ruin others fun. There STILL are people that would do this today. I understand what you said about after all this time somebody should be able to accomplish a "fightertown"
We do have a "fightertown" now, It's called the DA. Again I understand laz's post that this takes people from the MA. IMO it's a simple click and less than 10 seconds to jump areas. Also it's really easy to annouce to people you'll be going there. I really can't see the benefit of Putting all the different eggs in one basket.
NUTTZ
P.S. My head isn't really that pointy ( from certain angles)
Originally posted by Seeker
"At fighter town Buffs and goonie were disabled, and people flew buffs and goonies from other fields, IT WAS A FREAKIN NIGHMARE!!!!! "
Which part of "undeveloped" flew over your pointy head?
You're just squeaking 'cos the terrains already giving you headaches :)
Bring Fighter Town to Aces High!!
-
"We do have a "fightertown" now, It's called the DA."
Ah yes, the DA, AH's red haired problem child.
You know, one thing that Laz and the strat types agree on is that most people are mindless furballers. Seeing that, you'd think that the DA's lack of use would point to one of two things:
1) Laz is right, and the DA's lack of use underlines the fact that a seperate arena cut off from any interaction from the rest of the player base is an unattractive proposition.
2) Laz is wrong, and it's only the arena settings which prevent the DA from being the most over used arena we have.
Personaly, I think it's a combination of both - no interaction and a poor choice of settings, but then I've never, ever seen any interest what so ever in developing or promoting the DA from any one. If there's an application form for the job, point me at it.
-
If there's an application form for the job, point me at it.
Seeker, just send an email to HTC (Pyro, would be my suggestion) and ask him. Just do me a favor, and take Lazs with you :D.
Sabre
P.S. I think it's time to let this thread die. It's waaaaaayyy past the point of constructive discourse.