Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Maniac on March 13, 2001, 07:22:00 AM
-
I see it everyday here people claiming that an WWII arena here wont work here. Their main argument is : Look at AGW look at all the whining...
Guess what, the ones complaining over at AGW still got their MA as an option, they djust cant drag anyone from the WWII arena into the MA, thats why theres so many complains and post about "shut down the WWII arena".
Regards.
------------------
AH : Maniac
WB : -nr-1-
-
Flew in the WW2 arena, didnt like it there, wont like it here or anywhere else I go. WW2OL is altogether a different story.
Leave that stuff for a HA amd scenarios.
Yeager
-
Maniac, they were all hollering for a historical 2 sided war arena too. And they got it. And they piss and moan about the number imbalances, sidwswithing and Uber plane loyal players. So it is a most appropriate comparison.
So WB's doesn't have an MA any more? Just an HA and a WW2A?
-Westy
-
Load balance the numbers, make it so you have to PAY perks to move sides, or give a perk bonus to the outnumbered side. all of these ideas have NEVER been tried (as far as I'm aware of).
Call it a defectors fee or something similar.
Maniac, the old timers will continue to slam you and say "read this link" (pointing to a DIFFERENT sim, without perks), "it's been done before", "it wont work" etc.
Apples to Oranges! <S!>
Mox
[This message has been edited by Mox (edited 03-13-2001).]
-
don't know if it will "work" or not. some people will stay in AH or WB no matter wht you do to it but... WB is cheap now and the numbers instead of increasing are slowly decreasing.
If AH went "historical" most would stay and a lot would stay and squeak. One thing is certain tho...
Historical matchups are lopsided and boring. They limit plane choice and the variety of fights is cut to allmost nothing. Sure you can come up with ways to "force" balance and add even more animosity but you can't do anything about the obvious.... Historical matchups are dull, vanilla ones. Even the slowest witted among us learns the 3 moves required in Historical matchups.
lazs
-
Indeed WB still has its MA but no one uses it...
Stop saying it wont work and setup the arena, then we will se if it works or not. I do understand the ones who are frightened by another arena setup, it will empty the current MA in an hour or so.
------------------
AH : Maniac
WB : -nr-1-
-
aniac, the old timers will continue to slam you and say "read this link" (pointing to a DIFFERENT sim, without perks), "it's been done before", "it wont work" etc.
Mox, NO ONE has modelled or implemented a side balancing tool in ANY of the online sim/games I've played. They have ALL done the 2 sided war thing and it does not work well at all.
There is a difference between asking for what has been shown not to work from asking for somehting that has a feature never done before.
So if you want to piss folks off by calling them names and dismissing thier opinion based on fact and long term experience then just f&ck off. Or post to hear yourself talk because you'll soon have alot of people just plain old ignoring you soon enough as you apprrantly only want to dictate and mock, not discuss and listen too.
Maniac, so no one uses it and those that do want to dictate to those who are not by trying to have the WW2A shut down? Jesus, that's pathetic.
And conversely those who use the WW2A piss and moan about it - unless they fly Allied of course.
Yup. Maniac knows what he's talking about. We need a WW2A!!!! <snork>
-Westy
[This message has been edited by Westy (edited 03-13-2001).]
-
What can one say lol (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
AH : Maniac
WB : -nr-1-
-
WBs has suffered a great deal as a result of the ww2 arena. I could feel it when I was there and I read it daily on AGW.
Its a result of a inexperienced crew running things at iEN. They will grope the learning curve and learn how not to screw up as time goes along.
LOL
Yeager
-
LOL
-
Its true!
L@U
goofy goo!
-
Skybax, you're needed on home turf!
ICEMAN KILL THE WW2A (http://agw.dogfighter.com/agw//Forum3/HTML/018855.html)
Now I am lol
-Westy
[This message has been edited by Westy (edited 03-13-2001).]
-
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum1/HTML/007882.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum1/HTML/007882.html)
No I`m the one LOL, he he.
AH, WB, 2 color, 3 color, 4 color, MA, HA, WWIIA, axis / allied, free-for-all arena....
...... always will have unbalance # "at times"
Squads, times zones, poor sportsman like conduct, and so on.
ALL 27/4 practice arenas will have these issues.
Only organized events have # control.
Its not the sim, its not the arena set up, its the players.
That simple.
Listen to the BS all you want, think what you want, its clear cut.
-
"ts not the sim, its not the arena set up, its the players."
I'm well aware of that. Very much aware of that. You come over here and poke your head in to snip. I just went over there and brought back to this discussion an example of the same stink in response. Difference is I'm doing it here, where I am a customer. you're not. Once again you're playing the WB/AGW net cop and blindly rushing the defense of WB's with one of your typical knee jerk reaction posts. I think you chose the wrong handle. Don Quixote is more appropo, eh?
Funny you should use Wegaman's post as an example. "lol" at *you* once again.
-Westy
[This message has been edited by Westy (edited 03-13-2001).]
-
Originally posted by Westy:
Mox, NO ONE has modelled or implemented a side balancing tool in ANY of the online sim/games I've played.
Ok now that we all agree on this we don’t need to bring up all these other games up, agreed?
Originally posted by Westy:
They have ALL done the 2 sided war thing and it does not work well at all.
I agree. I’m not asking for a specific number of country’s, I’m talking about a restriction/load balance of the numbers, it really doesn’t matter how many countries if they all are load balanced. I don’t think we have enough players to get crazy with the countries.
Originally posted by Westy:
There is a difference between asking for what has been shown not to work from asking for somehting that has a feature never done before.
I also agree. You admitted above that the restrictive number feature has never been done. I think we are on the same page so far…
Originally posted by Westy:
So if you want to piss folks off by calling them names and dismissing thier opinion based on fact and long term experience then just f&ck off. Or post to hear yourself talk because you'll soon have alot of people just plain old ignoring you soon enough as you apprrantly only want to dictate and mock, not discuss and listen too.
Here’s where you lost me… I’m not dismissing anyone’s opinion nor calling anyone names. I’m sorry if you took offense to me using the word “slam” but isn’t that exactly what you’re trying to do to me? Westy I got nothing personal against you, and you shouldn’t take this thread personally it’s like the other 3 or 4 threads active on the board now.
Leph, Dingy and several others have all brought up some very good ideas as to penalize people for ganging. We all know the ganging will never go away unless something is done about the numbers, be it restrict sides, give perk bonuses to the underdogs, decrease perks for the gangbangers etc.
I believe the majority of the players would like to have somewhat even teams and the only way to do something like that is make it so gangbanging is detrimental to your stats/perks/scores or restrict the defections (side swapping w/o a set of checks and balances) etc. I believe most of us agree that gangbanging is promoted in the current MA and will never go away if it’s left up to the honor of the players.
Mox
-
If a system is created that prevents me from flying with my squadronmates I will be pissed!
Other than that I could care less what anyone does.
Yeager
-
Originally posted by Yeager:
If a system is created that prevents me from flying with my squadronmates I will be pissed!
Yeager
I'm sure this is one thing we all agree on!
Mox
-
Mox,
Personally, if I did not have the option to fly whatever damn country I wanted to at any given time (barring side switches within 12 hous) my money would go elseware and a lot of others would follow. You've mentioned this idea in other threads and I'm not saying it'll work or not, I'm just stating that you won't be seeing your average moose anymore.
Same goes for any 'perks' for being on one side/switching to another. Any restraint on who I personally choose to fly with and *poof*, cya.
As for the bonus for a gangbanged side? Sure - but the best way to do it would be to make perk planes cheaper. Otherwise people will switch over, grab the points, and log. (then switch back in 12 hours)
Hey lazs, let me get this straight. You hate a historical matchup. You hate fighting a plane worse or better then yours. You hate the perk system because it promotes better planes.
Soo... in your perfect sim, would we all be flying Hawgs with fields that couldn't be closed? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
What *you* enjoy might not exactly be what everyone else wants.
-
You are wrong. In fact you are so wrong I'm not even going to add "IMHO". I can recall a trial war-weekend on AW3 where we ran the arena circa 1941 across the English channel. Loads of players signed up as Jerries to fly the fw190(a3), in the certain knowledge that it was better than the Spit V. My Squad flew Spit V's. What surprised all of us, including the Jerry players, was that an intelligently flown *squadron* of Spit V's shat all over the Fw's - in a large combat.
So... I find historical matchups *far* from dull, and frequently surprising!
Fidd
Originally posted by lazs:
Historical matchups are lopsided and boring. They limit plane choice and the variety of fights is cut to allmost nothing. Sure you can come up with ways to "force" balance and add even more animosity but you can't do anything about the obvious.... Historical matchups are dull, vanilla ones. Even the slowest witted among us learns the 3 moves required in Historical matchups.
lazs
-
unless you fly a (choke) "historical" squad with all that entails... your squad will indeed be broken up by a historical arena. All the fun squads like MOL, BK's etc. left WB because we couldn't fly the planes we wanted to unless we flew against each other. Plus... Historical matchups are for the brain ded, lazy or skilless or... simply hidebound Walter Mitties. The fights are so boring and same same that you give up far more than you ever gain.
Now, there may be ways to "balance" out the numbers or the parity of opponents by using draconian methods bordering on ex soviet bloc but.... you can never make the fights interesting and varied. I flew in some of The most balanced days in both numbers and parity of plane set and... Even on those days.... the fights were unvaried and ho hum after a short time. I mean.... your in a spit.... you see a 109.... Gee I wonder what he will do THIS time? The same friggin move as he did the last 3 dozen times?
lazs
-
Originally posted by Moose11:
As for the bonus for a gangbanged side? Sure - but the best way to do it would be to make perk planes cheaper. Otherwise people will switch over, grab the points, and log. (then switch back in 12 hours)
Well how about a percentage bonus/penalty on your total mission perk points based on whether your country has larger numbers or smaller numbers than the other countries? This way, no bonus points are awarded unless they actually FLY for the outnumbered team.
This doesnt do anything for true gangbanging which is going to be difficult to address but it does address arena imbalances which has become quite a problem.
-Ding
-
Originally posted by lazs:
<snip major negativity>
Goodbye Laz! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-Ding
-
With my piece said to Sky bax and with Mox and I understand each others pov better - my strong rrmaek to him was on the basis of the other three topics discussing this same subject I'm out of this one. Lazs, I've agreed with you ALOT in the furnball vs the Armchair Napoleon discussions but you've taking this topic to a personal level that I don't want to be involved with it anymore.
Good luck. May the best idea(s) win.
-Westy
-
MA is driven by points mentality, thats why people change sides to gang bang the other side..plain and simple. 2 sided historical arena will 1. instill a sense of loyalty into people and make them less likely to switch sides for point purposes. 2. We have a large luftwobble community that i'm sure will fly axis most of the time just as I will surely fly Allied most of the time as well as the multitude of british pilots we have. 3.I wanna know what it was like and this is as close as I'm ever gonna get. I've flown these mmog's since aw dos and I've been in plenty of scenarios, but they are few and far between and myself as well as many people here would like to have a crack at more historical matchups and settings.
I'm not saying change the ma into a wwii arena all of the time, but how bout 1 week a month alternating europe 1 month and pac another.
Now people start to whine about some of us forcing them to fly our way...that logic's a crock of toejam because as it is now we all have to fly a free for all ma populated by a bunch of ho'ing laser chogs. I aint sayin' we should change it permantly, but hey, give the rest of us a shot at playin' a 2 sided more historical wwii setup...it's only fair.
As an aside,... now, I dont know bout all of you, but for me the ma can get damn boring after awhile and if it wasnt for the frequent updates I prolly would have stopped logging on long ago. 2 sided wwii setups are also a good way to keep things interesting if done on a time frame of say 1 week a month. Like some of the other guys have mentioned a full time limited plane set wwii setup would get a bit confining after awhile. But, again, it's time for the historical crowd to have a chance at flyin' the way we'd like...it's only fair.
CRASH
[This message has been edited by CRASH (edited 03-13-2001).]
-
moose... how do you get that I only want an arena with all uncaptuarable fields and only the hog available? Either you have not read anything I have ever written and so you are talking out of your butt or..... you have read what I have written but are just to stupid to comprehend or.... you have read and comprehended what i have written but you are (ahem) "intentionally missrepresenting" it. Perhaps there is another explanation? At this point..I can only assume that your handle was aptly chosen.
I believe that ther is a large chunk of planes with differing abilities that are equally capable. We actually had this in 1.05 What I want and have allways said is.... the most choice and parity along with the very best FM's and gunnery. When you add planes of obvious superior abilities into a "fair" arena you skew things. Perk won't make that better just less obvious. I would like the (viable) choice of flying early war planes unmolested by far superior late planes. I would like for what passes as "strat" in this game to have not quite so drastic affect on the fighter game and the casual "fun" player. "you cannot take off from this field" or you can only take 25% fuel" are not messages that a lot of people like to get if they are not interested in participating in the "strat" portion. Likewise, being forced to fly only planes of either allied or axis against only those of allied or axis, does not appeal especially during the more lopsided "historical" eras. some enjoy the "ebb and flow". Others do not.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs:
We actually had this in 1.05 What I want and have allways said is.... the most choice and parity along with the very best FM's and gunnery. When you add planes of obvious superior abilities into a "fair" arena you skew things. Perk won't make that better just less obvious.
Lasz, the way I read this, you seem to contradict yourself. First you ask for the most choice and then you want parity by restricting the planes which fly in the arena. It seems you do not want perk planes because they skew the arena, yet I have yet to see this. As a matter of fact, I think perk planes are enemy magnets. I have not seen perk planes molesting the arena mercilessly and I havent seen people who used to fly the C.202 or Zeke stop.
In truth, I have yet to see the so called perk planes dominate the arena as it has been predicted.
I like the perks.
-Ding
-
As a nik dweeb, my fears have been put to rest. You still have to fly the things. In the hands of a lot of people, there not that perky. I won a turn fight with a 202 last night. I was in a Tempest at the time.
I have had 10 kill sorti,s in my nik.
All were perk planes.
[This message has been edited by easymo (edited 03-13-2001).]
-
dingy... i don't see the contradiction. 1.06 released about 4 new planes that have shifted the arena to a very late war focus. adding those four planes has made the bottom 10 not viable. using the "perk" system masks this somewhat but the fact remains that even if you are someone who likes the bottom ten planes and are good in em... you have a 2-3 times better chance for survival if you simply click on one of the more capable new planes. These bottom ten didn't have as bad a K/D ratio before and planes like the spit are relegated to meat on the table. soo...
The new planes have made for less choice plus... they make it very difficult to add early war planes. there are many early war rides that would be fun and have parity with each other but the shift is away from them and into the very narrow late war focus. perk cannot fix this.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs:
dingy... i don't see the contradiction. 1.06 released about 4 new planes that have shifted the arena to a very late war focus. adding those four planes has made the bottom 10 not viable. using the "perk" system masks this somewhat but the fact remains that even if you are someone who likes the bottom ten planes and are good in em... you have a 2-3 times better chance for survival if you simply click on one of the more capable new planes. These bottom ten didn't have as bad a K/D ratio before and planes like the spit are relegated to meat on the table. soo...
The new planes have made for less choice plus... they make it very difficult to add early war planes. there are many early war rides that would be fun and have parity with each other but the shift is away from them and into the very narrow late war focus. perk cannot fix this.
lazs
The perks are only slightly more powerful than the late war monsters like the 109G10, P51D, F4U1-C, Nik that were already in the game. Put a Tempest at a slight altitude disadvantage to a P51B and odds are it will die. The Ta152 can climb to outrageous alts but it still has to come down to fite.
I will agree that its difficult for a Bf109f or a C.202 to survive in the arena now but it was difficult to survive in one of those before the new release.
My point is that the shift to the late war planes occured well before this release. As such, the new perk planes and other late war planes like the Dora and La7 add more variety in the late war fite.
Now quit being a malcontent.
-Ding
-
ding... exactly... Thanks for proving my point. There will allways be "some" emphisis on the best/latest planes in an arena. Now that there is some competition for the late war planes..... they are all that is really viable.
If, By "quit being a malcontent" u mean "stop complaining that the gameplay has shifted to very late war only and cut the bottom out of the plane set while destroying any chance of gettin new early war planes" then my answer is.....No.
lazs
-
I didn't care much for WWII Arena when I flew it. It was still the same old furball, same old fantasy map, and the same old silly strat. Except I had to change sides if I felt like flying a different plane.
But with the more complex strat in AH and the mission planner creating large historical missions, it might work here, who knows.
Like WB though, the planeset here is not balanced. There is a shortage of axis bombers and we have the additional problem of ground vehicles. We'd need an allied tank, an axis light AA vehicle, an allied heavy AA vehicle, and an axis half track for starters. Throw in He 177, Betty, Peggy, Il-2, Tu-2, and we might have us a ballgame. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 03-14-2001).]
-
As a long time WB pilot... going back to the CK beta, I just started flying AH due to horrible WB connects making unplayable. Basically... after getting aclimated I LOVE AH. It blows WB 2.xx away.
With WBIII out in beta, I figure in a couple of months its highly likely that WB will catch up to AH and the mostly graphics/features ect stuff in AH that currently give it a huge edge will be be negated.
If the two games become equal again and WB has a WWII arena with historical matchups and a RPS.... Im gone back to WB.
The only thing I dont like about AH is the all late war planeset, 3 country setup fantasy land ect. I know there are tons of valid arguments and valid solutions that have been tried for both historical and fantasy setups... Im simply saying that to get my few bucks a month... its the WWII arena everythings else being the same.
Now when WWII Online comes out if its even 50% of what they are shoot for, im a goner from WB and AH!
Fang
JG26 (err in WB at least)