Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Toad on June 06, 2002, 01:27:49 PM
-
I am out of the other thread. I'll be happy to discuss the design here, however.
From the other thread:
Origninally posted by Pongo
Never heard of handycaping in a game Toad?
Never heard of a game where the sides by design are the same size?
I dont like Mandobles idea from a game play stand point..but all this righteosness about someone haveing to win someone having to lose without any consideration of the likley hood of that happening is a bit unusual.
It would be cool if the game could isolate all the non perfomance related issues and only be won by the better flying side..But like the war it imitates, ours is a war of brute attrition. The larger side wins. Period. And then they are awarded for being larger.(and having a sence of urgency) It seems to move arround with the AKs who is the largest though so there is some variety at least...
Handicapping: Yes. it's common. What would be uncommon, however, is handicapping AFTER the game began I think. For example, horses are handicapped before a race by adding weight to carry. It'd be pretty unusual to stop the horses and add or subtract weight half way through the distance wouldn't it?
Now we have a different situation anyway: a 24/7 persistent game that basically it began when the arena first opened. There never was an "equal" starting point for any side, nor did HTC design it for an "equal" starting point. The game began and just rolls on from there without pause. People log on and off at will.
One could consider a reset a pause, however. Theoretically, one could auto-balance the side after a reset but then as the 24/7 gameplay continued and people logged on and off the balance would change again. As I mentioned before, unless you include some sort of non-voluntary auto-balancing action by the Host, you never will have "equal" sides in all probability.
Bottom line though is that handicapping a never-ending 24/7 persistent arena game seems impossible to me.
Righteousness: It isn't righteousness on my part. I certainly didn't intend that. It's merely common sense. All games in which score is kept have winners and losers. That's the whole point of keeping score, isn't it?
AH keeps score by awarding "perk points" to a side that accomplishes a certain task. "Owning" the most bases at the time that one of the other sides basically loses all theirs. At this point, the game is considered at an "end", although after a brief pause to change maps the 24/7 persistent arena returns and the party goes right on.
Without this "win/lose" design concept, what would the point of capturing all the enemy bases be? What would happen to the "strat" portion of the game? Would there be anything necessary other than Lasz furball concept?
It's obvious that the game is designed to have winners and losers. It's inherent.
So there isn't any righteousness involved at all. It's just a fact that someone wins and someone loses. It's the point of the struggle, the point of the whole design. The game is designed that way so there is always a strong likelihood that some side will do that in some period of time. The periods of time vary depending on the particular map and the desire of a particular player base to achieve a reset.
Additionally, the larger side does not always win. There are two clear examples of this situation.
Example 1.
I think all of us have been on when "our" side was numerically superior to either of the other two sides. However, due to a lack of "leadership" :) or perhaps desire "our" side just doesn't seem interested in "world conquest". People are just out furballing around and ignoring the "conquest" aspect. Sooner or later one of the other two sides achieves a reset.
Hasn't everyone seen this over the past year?
Second example: Side X has 130 players, Side Y has 130 players, Side Z has 150 players. Ah! Perfect balance!
Unfortunately, Side X is fighting Side Y with only 30 players. Side Y is fighting Side X with only 30 players.
Poor Side Z! Their brave 150 are engaged on two fronts against 100 enemy players on both fronts! It's 150 V 200!
Side Z eventually loses, despite being numerically superior.
How would one "balance" the sides in example 1?
How would HTC "balance" the sides in example 2?
So, it really isn't a simple question, IMO.
The gameplay is designed by HTC as a persistent 24/7 arena where some side eventually wins and some side eventually loses. The resets are merely a brief pause in non-stop action.
HTC, by design, allows players to switch sides at will (there are reset perk point award restrictions, however. Of course, these restrictions only affect those who actually care about perk points.)
Lastly, doesn't the fact that the side that flies the "best" can still lose the war mimic the oft sought after "realism"?
Your turn.
-
Toad
Saying that any attempt to ballence the weak side equates to not wanting a win is a bit of a stretch.. It equates to wanting a ballenced game.
I really dont want to get into the ways that you could tell somone is in the bucket but discussion about what you might do to allieviate the sitation if the server did detect it is certainly valid.
The game is for fun. Anything that enhances the fun for a good chunk of the players is worth discussing I think.
-
Multiply perkies by the ratio of enemy/friendly icons visible at the time of the kill. That might make gang bangs less attractive (at least to perk potatos).
-
Here's my newest idea combined with an older idea I had:
1. Create an additional Logon screen. This screen should have some basic Arena statistics as follows:
Number of players
Numbers on each team
Roster
Bases owned by team
Field status
Strat status
Other information that should be included would be:
Map Name
Date, time and winner of last resest (5 past)
Other relevant data (brain starting to hurt)
To enter the arena have a click to fly as ....knight/rook/bish.
2. Give a small perk bonus (5-10) for anyone who enters the arena on the side with the lowest numbers. One bonus per day.
Once you enter the arena the die is cast, hard to study map and make the call as to wether or not its worth the effort to change sides. HT can make it an informed decision.
Not a carrot and stick, but a carrot and some information.
F.
-
>>Multiply perkies by the ratio of enemy/friendly icons visible at the time of the kill. That might make gang bangs less attractive (at least to perk potatos).<<
Now this is a compelling notion.
I mean, I flew a sim not too long ago where ganging was a regular occurence, hehe I flew on the side that was ganged the most :)
The pilits on our side would jeer at our nmez in the other two countries and, we actually got used to the ever present disparity in numbers. Every now and then we would gather together and oppose the other two countries. And, just like here in AH, we would start out attacking the one country, and then the other would attempt to milk us as we did so. We had enough organization to then attack both countries, and we were usually successful :) Not much different than here.
What is interesting about the suggestion above; it would then penalize or tax :) those who would take advantage of the unfortunate situation the country in the tank was facing. Or, those who would take advantage of overwhelming advantage simply to get easy kills for the points.
I don't care for the perk potatos, they usually have poor skills and no sense of what I consider ..honor. But, the fact is they pay to play too. So, why not make em pay a lil extra for being low life, panty waist, living in the darkest, fetid cesspools of the game, who wanna come out only when it is to their advantage? :D
Make em pay a price for ganging and getting their temporary countrymen dead due to killshooter, by flying in front of them to get the all important kills .
Hehe, yeah I like it a lot :D
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Toad
Saying that any attempt to ballence the weak side equates to not wanting a win is a bit of a stretch.. It equates to wanting a ballenced game.
I don't believe I have said that. If something was taken that way, it is a misinterpretation. "Not wanting a win" is something I don't believe I've even mentioned.
I've just said that the game is not designed for "balancing player numbers." It's a persistent 24/7 arena/war that has been going on for years. No attempt was ever made, as far as I know, to ensure that the teams had equal numbers. The very world-wide nature of the game, the 24/7 aspect and the demographics of the player base are biased against "equality" IMO.
In short, it's designed for one team to win and one team to lose.
Im sure everyone wants to win. However, in any basic appraisal of game design it's pretty standard that only one "side" is going to win. There's few shared trophies in the gaming world.
So, as numbers ebb and flow on a side, victory or defeat becomes both possible and perhaps inevitable. It's designed this way.
Beyond that, we've all seen cases where one particular side has numerical superiority and LOSES either through inept tactics (and I'm no "general".. do what you like to do!) or because the other two numerically inferior sides use the famous "gangbang" tactic.
Originally posted by Pongo
I really dont want to get into the ways that you could tell somone is in the bucket but discussion about what you might do to allieviate the sitation if the server did detect it is certainly valid.
The game is for fun. Anything that enhances the fun for a good chunk of the players is worth discussing I think.
Well the impetus for our discussion was based on needing "To counteract the lack of players in one country" or "inferior numbers" if you will. The server can easily detect a side with inferior numbers but once again there's more to human behavior than that.
Side X = 150 Side Y = 150 Side Z = 90. Obviously, Z is suffering a "lack of players".
So, some new idea is implemented and Z gets access to 12 buff formations that no other team has.
Unfortunately, Y and Z are BOTH attacking X with all their forces.
Where's the balance? Did Z need the 12 buff formations?
That's just one imaginary scenario of course. But it should be obvious that having the server determine "balance" is going to be far more complex than just looking at logged in numbers of players.
And complaints? The "balance determination" programming arguments will make previous Flight Model, gunnery model, damage model flamefests look like Girl Scout marshmallow roasts. IMO, of course.
-
I guess to each individual gamer the game has a length starting when they log on and ending when they log off. Ideas to make it fun no matter which county tbey log onto might have value. I dont think that some kind of ballance things that make it harder and harder to win as you get closer to winning makes sense..and lots of "ballance" ideas will amount to that.
But if 70% of the players are rooks or would be captured by the rooks if they bailed at a given instant..then the rooks are being oppressed..and maybe the UN should step in.
maybe a post reset concesion. Like the guys that got reset get a fortress area of the map or something. It would aleviate the need to ballence MA maps... Or the country that got reset gets 15 miniutes of flight time befor others can log in...lol
-
OK, my game starts when I log in. I log in and my country is down to three fields, all of them capped and under heavy attack.
What device can we implement that will make it fun for me to log in?
By the same token, I log in and my country needs to capture just one or two more fields to win the reset. We have the numbers; the reset is inevitable in a very short time.
Now, I'm not a big fan of the "100 guys attacking 1 field" concept. In fact, it's pretty boring to me.
What device can we implement that will make it fun for me to log in?
That's the problem with the 24/7 persistent environment; continual change. That's also the benefit, if you look at it with a different attitude. Neither of those situations will endure for very long under the present system. The reset will occur and the war begins anew.
Any sort of balance device will, of necessity, make it harder and harder to win for the agressors. After all, that's what the goal of a "balancing" device would have to be. I think we both agree here and we both see the problem.
Give the reset team a 15 minute alt advantage? I think that'd be funny, myself. Things would be in "scramble" mode for quite a while. I'd probably enjoy that on either end.
However, will the "average" player just logging in for the first time that night appreciate being at a severe alt disadvantage for quite a while? Will that make it more fun for those guys?
I think you and I see a lot of these things the same way.
I also think that you and I both know the "balance" idea, while theoretically desireable, is going to be extemely tough to implement at best and maybe impossible.
I think that is why the game is designed the way it is. Simply because continual balance is not achieveable in a 24/7 persistent world-wide game arena.
I did enjoy the discussion though and I appreciate the lack of heat. It can be done. ;)
-
I think the game is like it is because it works and is succesful and would take alot of time to change in ways to make the people in the bucket feel better about it.
I like it as it is. But there is no harm in discussing alternatives..Not much left to fix in this game..we are getting down to the short hairs...
-
Welfare comes to mind.
Just as in life, it's not always fair. How folks deal with this reality varies greatly.
You have those who want a handout due to adversity, and will not make much of an effort to achieve in life, because they no longer have to.
There are those who live each day, not taken back by adversity, they just make adjusments in their lives and keep on living.
Then there are those who work twice as hard to overcome the adversity, walking away with the satisfaction along with the benefit of their extra effort.
Some believe in the premise that anyone who has risen to the top should be brought down to the levels of others, in an effort to find equality...share that wealth.
The percieved MA inbalance is similar in many ways...some want every aspect to be equal and balanced...have HT build an equalizer into the game...an unchallenging and vanilla existence.
Others, just play...oblivious to the heated concerns of a few, just having fun...Ignorance is bliss?:)
Then there are those who reach down deep, get a little pissed off, and go to war looking for your head the entire way.
If the Bishops had more fields when the war starts or late war rides while others rode the early stuff only, then I would agree, that would be unfair. As to numbers of players and the quest for parity, if that were to become the norm, then life in the MA would mirror an existence similar to that of living in an old folks home...Salisbury Steak on Monday's, Spaghetti on Tuesday's along with endless reruns of Cacoon. No thanks.
I hope HT leaves it alone...it is inherently natural and fluid. It will come around to all of us:)
-
Some believe in the premise that anyone who has risen to the top should be brought down to the levels of others, in an effort to find equality...share that wealth.
Ah hah..
Playernumbers aren't wealth, it's a horde.
A better comparison is this: In a schoolyard a bunch of weakdicks are mobbing the newcomers daily. Now which would be the right thing to do, join the mobbers or defend the weaker side?
By rude's and other bish's definition the correct thing is to join the 'intellectual wealth' of the concentrated stupidity of the mob.
[edit] oh and the guy who goes to defend the weakest gets called a communist/socialist also, it's unamerican to go against the crowd (have some balls) right?
I know well why most bishs are against side balancing - they know they can't hold a candle to their enemy if the sides do balance. All the weak material gather there to hide in numbers.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
I know well why most bishs are against side balancing - they know they can't hold a candle to their enemy if the sides do balance. All the weak material gather there to hide in numbers.
(cough) bullsh*t (cough)
-
Well, we were all insult-free and flame-free there for a while anyway.
Ripley, does this mean you decided to un-ignore me despite my arrogance and whatever else you hurled at my reputation?
:D
-
Heck I placed you on my buddy list Toad!
I mean, how could I miss classics like how you tried to explain player imbalance with remarks to chess. How someone in a game must win.. LOL. Ever watched cricket? Nevertheless..
In a game of chess both sides start with equal numbers of characters and also an equal chance of winning. The best player wins, not the one that took 20 extra bishops from another board - even though this seemed to be your logic.
Somehow (even with both players starting with the socialist commie bolshevik welfare {rude can add some more} setup of 1:1 characters) there's often a winner and sometimes a stalemate. You see Toad, in a game of chess there are sometimes no winners or losers, both players just get their game and fun. Most importantly neither side holds unfair advantage and the game result gets determined by the skill of the player, not the handicap.
-
Point 1: Cricket is for pasty English types.
Point 2: Chess and AH have little in common (no guns or chutes in chess).
Point 3: You are all retarded.
Point 4: I read little of this thread, yet I could write the cliff's notes on it.
Point 5: Shut up and fly (slowly, level, and in front of my guns)
You are all excused. Please disperse immediately.
SOB
-
Mr. Ripley, did you ever meet anyone who sat down at a chessboard and said "Let's go for the stalemate, eh?" No, they sit down to play for the win.
Stalemates do happen, of course. Sort of like when we spend 6 or 7 days stuck on the Mindinao map. Everyone always seems to love it when that happens, don't they? Nothing but "oh, goody! another day on Mindinao!" A good side-balancing "force-you-to-fly-the-way-I-think-you-should-fly" mechanism could extend everyone's enjoyment there, don't you think?
But I digress.
Unfortunately, Mr. Ripley, AH was NEVER set up to start from an "equal" opening position. It never offered the assurance of an equal number of characters nor an equal chance of winning for any of the sides.
Rather, it was set up as a constantly changing, fluid environment where the fortunes of a "country" might ebb and flow depending on hour of the day, day of the week, success or failure of that country's attempts to dominate and whether or not the Superbowl was on. Amongst other random numerous factors, of course.
Perhaps this is not an environment in which you can be comfortable. It may not be possible for you to accept the design of the game as a fluid environment as the developer's intended design.
As Rude pointed out, some people can deal with adversity and some people can't.
Despite your somewhat constant, strident cries that the Bishops are "always" way ahead on numbers, the vast majority of the player base and the vast majority of those who read this BBS know that your position is simply incorrect. They know that every country has it's "day" and than no one country continually has an overwhelming numerical advantage. In short, every AH player deals with adversity on a routine basis. Some can handle it, some can't.
If you are looking for a "equal" starting position and a place where "neither side holds unfair advantage and the game result gets determined by the skill of the player, not the handicap." may I suggest the various Scenario type playing opportunities that AH offers? I must advise you, however, that there are often arguments over whether or not the Scenario set-ups have equal starting positions without unfair advantage.
Still, you are far more likely to find what you are apparently seeking in a Scenario environment.
Or perhaps you should try the Dueling Arena. There you can match aircraft and fuel loads and duel 1 V 1. In the DA, it's as close to certain as you can get that the "result gets determined by the skill of the player, not the handicap."
So you can see that AH does offer options that will give you what you apparently desire so ardently.
You most certainly won't find it in a persistent 24/7 unlimited log in/log out Main Arena IMO.
In your honor I am going to start taking a screen shot of the Roster when I log in and log out each time I intend to play for more than an hour.
I'll save those and perhaps caption them in the event any country got reset while I was on. Then the next time you decide to go on a "Bishops" rant, I'll post the series. Might provide a bit of objectivity.
And I would like to thank you for bringing your invective, slurs and general distemper to this thread. After you posted your opinion of my character in the other thread, it provides a revealing example, I believe, of your character.
Ta-ta, old chum!
-
I know!
How about there's only ONE country and we play Civil War? ;)
Or alternatively, all bases are neutral and squads with 10+ members get a field assigned to them at random at the start, those not in squad can "move" to that field and fly out of it as "guests". Then we can play "War of the Little Kingdoms" hehehe.
-
Originally posted by SOB
Point 5: Shut up and fly (slowly, level, and in front of my guns)
-
Mr. Ripley, did you ever meet anyone who sat down at a chessboard and said "Let's go for the stalemate, eh?" No, they sit down to play for the win.
Did you ever meet a person who put a double number of characters on his side to ensure he wins?
Unfortunately, Mr. Ripley, AH was NEVER set up to start from an "equal" opening position. It never offered the assurance of an equal number of characters nor an equal chance of winning for any of the sides.
I agree, but when things go out of hand they go out of hand.
As Rude pointed out, some people can deal with adversity and some people can't.
I flew the majority of time at 2:1 disadvantage, fought 10:1 on some occasions and came out with a better than 3:1 k/d ratio. It just gets frustrating in the long run to always see the next enemy line up after the other, not even a chance to win the strat part. Toad do you think its a good setup gameplay wise to let the other side grow over double in size disabling the others of any remote chance of winning? It's not a competition anymore, it's not strat anymore it's one sided milkrun missions and gangbang. The conspiracy theory of yours (two smaller on one bigger) practically never works because people go to path of least resistance. That means both the bigger countries hit the smallest one for easy captures.
may I suggest the various Scenario type playing opportunities that AH offers?
You may suggest but I'd like to play more than once a week in a reasonable setup. Probably as I said H2H is a better solution. It's for free too.
Or perhaps you should try the Dueling Arena. There you can match aircraft and fuel loads and duel 1 V 1. In the DA, it's as close to certain as you can get that the "result gets determined by the skill of the player, not the handicap."
Been there, done that.. DA is not an arena with constant fights as you know.
In your honor I am going to start taking a screen shot of the Roster when I log in and log out each time I intend to play for more than an hour.
I'd like that, thanks. However as you have said yourself, the problem is not occuring during your timezone, only mine. I hear stories how rooks actually outnumber bish sometimes (not by 2:1 of course) and win resets. You have to realise that the different timezones are like different arenas, a problem in other may not be a problem for you. It's no use to the other zone if the other side has the situation reversed - they never get to play there.
And I would like to thank you for bringing your invective, slurs and general distemper to this thread. After you posted your opinion of my character in the other thread, it provides a revealing example, I believe, of your character.
Now this discussion is already much better, you have softened your views a little (probably because you see I damn well am not alone with this opinnion) and left out the :D after every remark. WTG!
Edit: I logged on 9AM local time and it seems the imbalance switched from bish to knight, only this time knights didn't have more players than the two others combined - this was the setup which repeated itself for weeks and weeks.
-
Today at 9AM.
-
Hmm, the Rooks have the most crowded fields !
-
lololol we knights with the numbers ????
What the hell did i miss some fun in the last week or did Photo shop his work:D
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
I agree, but when things go out of hand they go out of hand.
That is part of a 24/7 perisistent world-wide arena. It is the "nature of the beast". As it was in AW DOS, WB, FA and here as well. There were no artificial "balancing" mechanisms in those games either IIRC.
Given what has been suggested on this BBS so far, I seriously doubt any "balancing" mechanism will ever be included. Simply because they would cause more problems than they would solve.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Toad do you think its a good setup gameplay wise to let the other side grow over double in size disabling the others of any remote chance of winning?
Actually, I (along with probably every other AH player) have experienced the numerous trials and tribulations you mention in this portion. However, I have never let those situations and circumstances either keep me awake at night or alter my interest in playing the game. I don't worry about it. If the bish are getting walloped.. and they do get walloped with good frequency when I play... I still play. If I've managed to set aside time for entertainment, I use it. I enjoy all the situations AH offers, be it an chance to go on offense or a need to play defense.
So do I think it's a good setup gameplay wise? I think it is neither good nor bad. It just is. I take it as it comes. The bitter with the sweet. Or, if you prefer, the bitter with the sour.
Sorry, the things that obviously bother you just don't bother me.
Now say a doctor told me I had advanced Coronary Heart Disease. THAT would bother me. Getting ganged by the Rooks and Knights? Pah. Just another night in the arena. As a bonus, a target-rich environment at no added charge! :D
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
You may suggest but I'd like to play more than once a week in a reasonable setup. Probably as I said H2H is a better solution. It's for free too.
Well, then I suggest you patronise the H2H opportunities. Simply because what you seek is not and never will be (IMO) available in ANY 24/7 persistent air combat arena from any provider. I don't think it can be done. Scenarios that start every hour or two.. yah, that might work. 24/7 persistent unrestricted log in/log out? Nope, not IMO.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Been there, done that.. DA is not an arena with constant fights as you know.
It does, however, offer the "balance" you seek. I guess you'll have to decide which you value more. Because I think the situation is mutually exclusive in this type of game.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
I'd like that, thanks. However as you have said yourself, the problem is not occuring during your timezone, only mine.
Ah, finally. You admit your previous "bish ALWAYS have the numbers" diatribes were in error. Thank you.
It was as if you were looking through a keyhole and telling everyone you could see the entire planet.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Now this discussion is already much better, you have softened your views a little (probably because you see I damn well am not alone with this opinnion) and left out the :D after every remark. WTG!
It isn't I who have changed. :D :D :D :D
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Edit: I logged on 9AM local time and it seems the imbalance switched from bish to knight, only this time knights didn't have more players than the two others combined - this was the setup which repeated itself for weeks and weeks.
You're not going to start "knight rants" now are you? :D :D :D
-
>>In short, it's designed for one team to win and one team to lose. <<
I don't mean to be a stickler here but, the above is inaccurate. There are 3 countries, therefore one team wins and the other two teams lose. It is what the other two teams do to each other that determines the ganging which occurs in the arena.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
I know well why most bishs are against side balancing - they know they can't hold a candle to their enemy if the sides do balance. All the weak material gather there to hide in numbers.
Thanks for reminding me exactly why I fly for the Bishops. The knits are blinded by their perceived superiority over others simply because a great many of them fly planes with '0', '1', or '9' anywhere in the name and the rooks just cry too damn much. :D
-
>>Some believe in the premise that anyone who has risen to the top should be brought down to the levels of others, in an effort to find equality...share that wealth. <<
Mr. Ripley:
This isn't a discussion of politics or social strata;) and should in no way be equated with other much more serious topics.
This is a game man, and those that play it, do so in their own way. Those who would gangbang and switch sides to get perkies will always do that.
-
>>the rooks just cry too damn much. <<
Yer so full of crap yer eyes are brown. Keep yer limp wristed, pantywaist comments to yerself:D
The only time a Rook cries in my circle is when there aint enuf of you bishits left to kill;)
Thanks for the reminder of why I fly Rooks :cool:
-
Originally posted by Don
>>the rooks just cry too damn much. <<
Yer so full of crap yer eyes are brown. Keep yer limp wristed, pantywaist comments to yerself:D
The only time a Rook cries in my circle is when there aint enuf of you bishits left to kill;)
Thanks for the reminder of why I fly Rooks :cool:
See what I mean? There they go again. :D
-
Don that text that you quoted from my post was a quote or rude's post. He is the one who is calling everyone a commie for the slightest reason.
If the bish are getting walloped.. and they do get walloped with good frequency when I play... I still play.
Bish may be walloped but are you walloped 100% of the times you log on? I bet not.
Ah, finally. You admit your previous "bish ALWAYS have the numbers" diatribes were in error. Thank you.
I suggest that you read the past conversations more carefully. I never suggested anything of the like. Quite the contrary I've stressed that this happens on my timezone and I have no knowledge of the hours when I'm at sleep.
You're not going to start "knight rants" now are you?
Toad I'm not sure if you're a bit thick or just want to aggravate; in any case I should clarify furthermore that I'm against any country having a 2:1 or worse advantage over the other. ANY COUNTRY that includes rooks where I play.
During those 2-3 times that I've seen rooks bang others and I have been online, I have taken an active step and moved to the side of the banged country.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
I know well why most bishs are against side balancing - they know they can't hold a candle to their enemy if the sides do balance. All the weak material gather there to hide in numbers.
Yes, this and other comments made by you certainly sound as if they are carefully targeted and specific to the Euro timezone. :rolleyes:
I am, of course, "a bit thick." After all, I'm a bish. You've already repeatedly explained just exactly what flying for the bish makes me and all other bish... as you did in the above quote. You've said it enough; it must be so.
But then I'm not so thick that I fail to understand the implications and realities of a 24/7, persistent, 3-sided arena with a world-wide playerbase.
I've thickly played AW, WB and FA before this. They found no way to find perfect balance in their Air Combat.
However, I admit I've never done very many other 24/7 persistent arena Internet games of other types.
Tell me, how do they balance the sides exactly equal in those Quake, Doom, Counterstrike, Wizard & Warrior type games?
Ripley: During those 2-3 times that I've seen rooks bang others and I have been online, I have taken an active step and moved to the side of the banged country.
Awwwwwww.. and it seems like only yesterday you were saying "Chivalry is dead in AH".
Did Yankee or Ronni, the Fair Maidens of AH, send you a scarf to wear streaming from your helmet after this sacrifice for the good of all? :D
Seems odd that on the apparently few occasions that you had to be on the side NOT being overwhelmed, your own "Rooks Triumphant" opportunity so to speak, you switched sides to participate in the same situation you are continually complaining about here.
Perhaps you just like being the underdog?
*
The MA is a fluid environment that is in constant flux.
If this is not your "cuppa", do yourself a favor and de-stress your life. Because I'm near-certain it isn't going to change, no matter how many times you post your dismay. You haven't offered any solutions that wouldn't cause more problems than they address. That isn't your fault.. there just isn't a solution. The same situation existed in AW, WB and FA.
Beyond that, on a scale of 1 to a 100 with 100 being a SERIOUS problem.. this problem in an online computer game charging $15 per month is a negative 5,376.
Perhaps that's why it's so hard for me to "feel your pain". You can't enjoy AH because of the design of the MA? The solution continues to stare you in the face.
Tell you what. Call HiTech at the office and have a heart-to-heart chat with him about this. I'll pay your next month's AH bill after that. If you're still interested in AH.
After all, why tell US of your sorrow? WE can't do anything about it.
HT can IF you can convince him.
Go to it laddie!
-
Toad you're the one that constantly personalises an issue that I've stressed over and over being a general one.
When I'm talking about bish, I'm talking about the bish that play during my time. You know that well, you're just trying to twist everything I say into something else. That doesn't work quite that way Toadie.
All FPS games I've played have had a built in limit that prevents a big imbalance in playernumbers.
Beyond that, on a scale of 1 to a 100 with 100 being a SERIOUS problem.. this problem in an online computer game charging $15 per month is a -5,376.
Where do you get that serious life-threatening problem all the time? Can't you fathom I'm talking about the gameplay? I know, it's another attempt of yours to twist my original text in effort to aggravate and flame me.
I'm very confident that if this situation I've been seeing continues a long time, something will be done about it. Simply because it kills the fun for the other half of the arena that aren't on the gangbanging side. Not good business.
Toad if you think fights can't be won on fair terms or countries overrun others on 1:1 odds, it's your own problem. MA doesn't need the dweeby gangbang mentality to have field takes and action - that is proved every time odds even up and the field takeovers stop being sole (insert gangbang country here) property.
After all, why tell US of your sorrow? WE can't do anything about it.
On the contrary. There are about 200 bishop players that could well do something about it. The world doesn't spin around your bellybytton Toad. Come to think of it, why do I even bother replying to you? You seem to have no clue whatsoever. My issues have nothing to do with you, yet you seem to take anything I say very personally. Go figure.
Originally posted by Toad: I am, of course, "a bit thick." After all, I'm a bish.
You see, not only you can take words out of context in order to make the other say reverse things.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Toad you're the one that constantly personalises an issue that I've stressed over and over being a general one.
Au contraire. I don't see this as personal at all.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
When I'm talking about bish, I'm talking about the bish that play during my time.
Look at your first post in this thread. It's a generic slam against all Bish. No mention of timezones or specifics. Just "bish". Your other posts in other threads are essentially the same.
Now, explain how everyone reading the BBS should automatically know what you mean.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Toadie.
Ah! The diminutives come out! Well, substitute whatever you have if rational thought is too much for you. :)
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
All FPS games I've played have had a built in limit that prevents a big imbalance in playernumbers
Reallly? How did that work in the other 24/7 persistent flight sims you've played? What was the mechanism?
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Where do you get that serious life-threatening problem all the time? Can't you fathom I'm talking about the gameplay?
It's gotta be serious.. it's all you talk about it seems. :)
Really now.. repeat after me... "it's just a game". :D
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Simply because it kills the fun for the other half of the arena that aren't on the gangbanging side. Not good business.
Yeah, I've noticed that most nights it's dropped from about 495 two months ago down to 485 or so now.
I also noticed the huge clamor here on the board supporting your position. An uncountable horde. :D
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Toad if you think fights can't be won on fair terms or countries overrun others on 1:1 odds, it's your own problem.
I don't have a problem. It's YOU that has a problem. :D
Fair fights, odds, etc. are immaterial to me. It is what it is. That's how a 24/7, persistent, unlimited log in/log out arena IS; it is what it is. I simply accept what IS and play the game.
I don't care how landgrabs are made. I don't think there is a "chivalrous" way to take a field. I don't think there is a "chivalrous" way to defend a field.
I don't think a "fair fight" is going to happen in an open arena with 500 players in it unless you are real lucky and find an empty sector for a moment. Even then one of the combatants will either have a "better" plane or more alt or more E or some advantage. That's just the way it is. The MA is NOT a dueling arena.
I seriously doubt anyone would dream that the odds will be exactly 1:1 when they enter a Main Arena, a furball or a base defense or base attack. Most are way more grounded in reality than that.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
On the contrary. There are about 200 bishop players that could well do something about it.
Oh, there's probably somewhere in excess of 3000 players that could do something about it. If only they would see the light and play the way you want them to play. :rolleyes:
Haven't I seen you somewhere before? Well, someone just like you then.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
My issues have nothing to do with you, yet you seem to take anything I say very personally. Go figure.
No, again I tell you I have nothing personal against you. I DO have something impersonal against all folks who try to tell someone else to "play the game the way I say to play the game."
There's plenty of Supreme Leaders here that will tell you what plane to fly, how to fly it, what shots you should or should not take, how to engage, how not to engage, how to mount an attack, who to follow into battle, which mission you MUST join and, lately, how you should switch sides every 30 seconds to balance the sides. As if we all don't get enough of that cr*p in real life.
So, I assure you, it isn't personal at all.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
You see, not only you can take words out of context in order to make the other say reverse things.
You've been slamming bish in every thread in this vein for a week or more. Basically every chance you get.
Are you saying that you've changed your opinon or saying that you didn't mean what you said?
Now: Again I offer.
I will pay your July subscription fee of $15 USD AFTER you call HiTech <(817) 251-1540> and discuss this problem with him. I think you will gain an incredible amount of insightful information with regards to the gameplay of AH if you do. HT is one smart dude in case you've never stopped and thought about it.
You may even provide him with information that will make him smarter.. who knows. You may give him an idea and you'll become famous. Perhaps they'll name a "Chivalry" arena after you or something.
AFTER you talk to him, post me a note in this thread. I'll call and confirm your call HT and then I will have them bill me for your July fee.
Can't beat a deal like that can you? Or are you afraid to talk to him?
-
Lets remember, that this is an evolving game.
Toad, what worked 6 months ago was for a game with 250 in the arena. They dynamics of 450 players vs 250 players are very much different.
The number mismatch might not be a problem that is that will go away. I'm fed up and it is effecting my view of the game. It is effecting many others.
Lets discuss ideas and work for solution.
Toad, frankly I find your tone to be counter-porductive. It is harsh, abrupt and rude. If I find you in the arena, I'll shoot you down.
-
Well said Killjoy, I'll promise to do the same..
Reallly? How did that work in the other 24/7 persistent flight sims you've played? What was the mechanism?
I thought we were talking about FPS as in first person shooter games. There the server forces players to even up sides - joining the bigger side that has up to 40% advantage is simply not possible. Probably wouldn't work directly in AH though.
Look at your first post in this thread. It's a generic slam against all Bish. No mention of timezones or specifics. Just "bish". Your other posts in other threads are essentially the same.
I thought we had been doing this discussion earlier, actually your post was a continuation to an earlier one. I stated very clearly my stand on this issue. Either you have a short memory or a very selective one.
I'll disregard the rest of the post and just make a simple question to you:
Can you really see any reasonable justification for one country to have 2:1 advantage over the others on constant basis? [edit] Notice to Toad, only a certain timezone in question, arena fluctuation with time as previously proved does not affect single players nor does the countries in question stay the same in comparison to numbers with the change of timezones.[/edit]
I'm sorry but I just can't see any.
Despite your accusations Toad I'm not the one telling people how they should play the game. I'm just saying that in my opinnion the fun factor would generally speaking be higher if the other side wouldn't have a ridiculously large advantage over the rest.
I'm all for a reasonable difference in numbers, lets say 50% for example.. But when it goes near or past 100% and stays that way, I can't call it a competition anymore but a one-sided slaughter.
If you don't see arena balance as a problem and generally don't care about the numbers, why do you spend so much of your time making counterarguments to my posts, which do not seem to affect you in any way?
Oh and btw keep those $15 I don't need you to tell me what to do or not to do any more than I need you to pay for my subscription. I'm pretty sure HT monitors these discussions anyway and has already looked into the dilemma. As previously said, he has been thinking of restricting squad rotations to prevent constant fluctuation of numbers in the arena (which naturally are the main cause of the lack of balance also.)
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
I thought we were talking about FPS as in first person shooter games. There the server forces players to even up sides - joining the bigger side that has up to 40% advantage is simply not possible. Probably wouldn't work directly in AH though.
Ah we agree! It wouldn't work.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
I stated very clearly my stand on this issue. Either you have a short memory or a very selective one.
Well, one of us does. Should I go clip all your Bish diatribes and post 'em in one place so you can see how many are Euro time specific? :d
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Can you really see any reasonable justification for one country to have 2:1 advantage over the others on constant basis?
Justification? This isn't a question of justification. It is simply the way the game is designed.
It is what it is. I don't assign morality to it; it is.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
If you don't see arena balance as a problem and generally don't care about the numbers, why do you spend so much of your time making counterarguments to my posts, which do not seem to affect you in any way?
To remind you that not everyone agrees with you of course!
BTW, nice "stacked" poll you put up there. :D Love the replies too, don't you?
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Oh and btw keep those $15 I don't need you to tell me what to do or not to do any more than I need you to pay for my subscription.
Refusing a free chance to describe your position directly to the one man who can immediately change the situation?
I thought so. :D
In fact, I was SURE of it.
******
Killjoy... Please... Please.... mercy sir! MERCY! I have a wife and children! Don't shoot my pixel-plane down on the internet! Mercy!
Hey, I'm not hard to find. Or shoot down for that matter. Just ask when you log in, I'll tell you where to find me. I'm usually in a low furball somewhere either in a -51D, 205, yak or La-5. Bring our friends if you like and hit me 10 v 1. Afterwards, let me know if was good for you too! I promise not to cry on CH1. ;)
It is what it is.
-
Toad what makes you think I'd do anything you tell me to do? You were sure of my response just as I'm sure that you won't stop being bishop no matter how much I dare you to do it. Furthermore as we both know I alone won't make a difference (further making any direct contact futile.) I did however mention the arena balance as one of the reasons why I'm cutting off my subscription for the summer vacation.
I'm raising the discussion here in order to get people to notice the situation and discuss it on a creative basis, something your conservative mind seems to oppose.
Well, one of us does. Should I go clip all your Bish diatribes and post 'em in one place so you can see how many are Euro time specific? :d
Should I clip and post then all the instances I've clarified the fact over and over? I see no reason to repeat it during every single post I make on the subject.
Ah we agree! It wouldn't work.
Yes it wouldn't work mainly because of players like you. That's why I said directly - there has to be another means if you want to create a balance.
.Justification? This isn't a question of justification. It is simply the way the game is designed.
The game was originally designed without profanity filters too, but as the players are human they tend to curse. A filter was created in response to the player related problem. Just as there should be a filter or a carrot that would prevent mass behaviour at its worst.
Now please Toad, as this subject doesn't concern you in any way, leave the people who want to discuss the problems of the game as they perceive them in peace. We all clearly found out your stand on the subject, it has been duly noted and filed
-
Only an idiot thinks that there is any actual "character" that attaches to any of the three synthetic countries, especially given that people immigrate among them all the time.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Toad what makes you think I'd do anything you tell me to do?
I'm raising the discussion here in order to get people to notice the situation and discuss it on a creative basis, something your conservative mind seems to oppose.
I'm not telling you to do anything.
I'm offering you the opportunity to place a $15 call to HT in Grapevine, Texas at absolutely no charge to yourself. I offer this opportunity in the hopes that if you talk directly to the game designer he will be able to explain the situation to you in a way that you can understand. Additionally, there is also the hope that you may have an idea, as yet unposted here, that might be a workable way to achieve what you so clearly desire. I'm sure HT would listen.
But I am not suprised that you have no interest in talking directly to the game's designer, without telephone charge, when you can instead hurl invective at the Bish here to no avail. :)
I'm conservative, eh? The idea that everyone should be allowed to do what they choose to do (since THEY are paying their own bill) in AH is conservative?
The idea that players should conform to a standard of "equality" deemed appropriate by a minority is a "liberal" stance then? :)
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
The game was originally designed without profanity filters too, but as the players are human they tend to curse. A filter was created in response to the player related problem. Just as there should be a filter or a carrot that would prevent mass behaviour at its worst.
The difference being, of course, that a profanity filter is easy to program and has no effect whatsoever on gameplay in a persistent, 24/7, unlimited log on/log off Main Arena.
You have not, to date, proposed ANY solution that would work in ANY similar fashion. Nor has such a device ever been implemented in ANY persistent, 24/7, unlimited log on/log off Main Arena in AW, WB or FA.
But we all wait with baited breath. Surely you will reveal the solution to us? Since you won't be calling HT anyway. :)
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Now please Toad, as this subject doesn't concern you in any way, leave the people who want to discuss the problems of the game as they perceive them in peace. We all clearly found out your stand on the subject, it has been duly noted and filed
Doesn't concern me? I'm a player. Does it not concern all players?
So, anyway, this is a "liberal" approach to open debate? :D
-
No Toad the basic fact is that you are against any change. That's conservatism.
You meticulously deny any problem even though you well know that the situation is much worse for players who play during your sleeping time.
But I am not suprised that you have no interest in talking directly to the game's designer, without telephone charge, when you can instead hurl invective at the Bish here to no avail.
I'm not exactly sure what you're after with this, but let's consider the following:
a) You're daring me to do something like a little child and then calling me chicken when I won't do what you want me to do.
b) I don't know Hitech personally so I have no need to call him personally either.
c) Despite your promises there is no way you could make up the phone costs etc. for me as you don't know anything about me.
d) I will call Hitech if and when I want to, with the answer being I don't want to - e-mail is a much cheaper and effective means of communication when we talk about overseas connections.
e) I already sent an e-mail to HTC where I stated that I will reconsider reactivating my account if the balance situation stays the same when I return from my vacation. If there are many others who will do the same, it won't go unnoticed in HTC. If they don't care about it then it means I'm in the small minority with my opinnion and maybe this game is not suitable for me. That also leads to HT not getting my monthly subscription money.
I'm conservative, eh? The idea that everyone should be allowed to do what they choose to do (since THEY are paying their own bill) in AH is conservative?
I'm paying my AH bill and I'm not allowed to curse in the game. Just aswell HT could choose people are not allowed to do gameplay detrimental decisions like switch to a side which already has way too many players for any kind of balanced gameplay.
The thing you can't understand it seems is that up to a certain point being the underdog can be fun and challenging (be it the situation varies or is not severe in nation) and all sides can have a maximum fun of the game.
But when selfish players who only look at their own interests join the largest side in search of easy kills and protection of the group, they finally cause a situation where the remaining two countries can't effectively fight against the larger country anymore. That means vulch kills for the larger country and a hard time (and frustration in the long run) for the smaller ones.
This Toad is something you haven't realised or even tried to realise during all these dozens of messages we've been exchanging. Your stand is simply that just because you see no problem during your timezone there can't be a problem for anyone else either.
-
I know well why most bishs are against side balancing - they know they can't hold a candle to their enemy if the sides do balance. All the weak material gather there to hide in numbers.
Please....you post's are comical enough as is, now you're gonna start kidding yourself as well?
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
they finally cause a situation where the remaining two countries can't effectively fight against the larger country anymore.
Oh please....stop already. You are only making yourself more foolish one post at a time.
You "smaller" countries didnt have any problem last night pushing us back to our home island in the north and the south. It seems to me that the methods for balancing are already in effect. There is very little action on the knit-rook front.
-
Sling what exact time and what were the country numbers?
Bishops often justify their double numbers by nits and rooks joining forces against them.. That's just an illusion that is on all of the countries. Knights complain about bishrook alliance, rooks complain about bishknits, bish complain about knitrooks.. The truth is that most of the time (resets excluded) all countries hit eachothers. On some occasions though when balance has been 80:80:40 for example, the two larger countries have hit the smallest only in pursuit of a fast reset.
I saw this morning (9:30AM) that bish were on the virge of reset and the playerbase was just about even with 90'ish bish 80'ish knight and 90'ish rooks.
You're still saying that you know something about a time where you never have tried to play. It doesn't matter if two smaller countries ally if the largest has more players than the both combined! Not to mention there is never a 'full alliance' the three countries always fight eachoters more or less.
I just checked again about 10 hours later and the situation in the MA was still evened up!
I'd be really happy if the situation would stay this way.
I hope it's not just for the weekend so that the situation would remain, there is hope afterall.
-
This was last night after the TOD. So it was around midnight central US time.
Dude, my schedule changes around some and I fly at a lot of different times of the day. The only time I ever see it lopsided to the Bish is late afternoon early evening central US time. Then the problem is rectified later when the 'good' rooks show up and start flying instead of crying. You couple that with the alliance they have forged with the Leather Wearing knits and it becomes more difficult for us Bish to gangrape the arena like we do all the time every day for the last 3 years. :rolleyes:
Just keep up the ridiculous diatribe....you will drive more and more people out of your country. Or better yet, fire some of the 'little generals' and maybe your country would be more pleasant to fly for.
-
Sling how often do you fly 4-5 am your local time? Because that's probably when the things I speak of are occurring.
It's so ridiculous to see people accuse me I'm roadkillting, I've given numerous screenshots of the situation to prove it.
Right now the situation seems to be 96-95-89 and if it will remain that way, nobody will have anything to complain about.
Looks like there has been a definate change towards arena balance.
-
Ripley,
Before I answer you last addressed to me, and I will answer it, rest assured, I have a small request.
I see you registered on the BBS under this personna on 05-02-2002.
I believe you have been posting here much, much longer.
Would you please tell me what other name/names you have used while posting here and when you first started playing AH and using the BBS?
It would be nice to know who I'm really "talking" to, don't you think?
Thanks.
: And also, could you tell me the name you fly under in the arena now? And any name/names you've flown in the arena under before this latest one?
Thanks again!
-
Originally posted by sling322
This was last night after the TOD. So it was around midnight central US time.
Dude, my schedule changes around some and I fly at a lot of different times of the day. The only time I ever see it lopsided to the Bish is late afternoon early evening central US time. Then the problem is rectified later when the 'good' rooks show up and start flying instead of crying. You couple that with the alliance they have forged with the Leather Wearing knits and it becomes more difficult for us Bish to gangrape the arena like we do all the time every day for the last 3 years. :rolleyes:
Just keep up the ridiculous diatribe....you will drive more and more people out of your country. Or better yet, fire some of the 'little generals' and maybe your country would be more pleasant to fly for.
Hate to break it to you but I spend allot of time flying early morning to around 10ish U.S. Eastern... in the last weeks (months maybe) Bish are generally very heavy in numbers. Noonish it even's up some, imagine it's the lunchtime crowd grabbing a quick run or two.
If what you say is true..... prime time U.S. is about the only time you can't predict who will have the numbers.
Ripley
I'm all for finding an equitable solution to finding some balance within the MA, but how would you address the various squads and squad alliances? I'm not leaving my squad in order to balance the arena, we'd just as soon remain together with the underdogs than do that. Also, there are a few other squads we like to operate jointly with.. because of old friendships. Unfortunately there are only a couple of squads I know of with any numbers that fly your time zone, the Tokyo Shockboys come to mind (or maybe they are just a few but I always see lots of kills recorded by those guys in the txt buffer), there are a couple of others (and I haven't a clue what country they fly for).
I would suggest Ripley, that rather than try to bring about changes in gameplay by argueing on this board, round up some of your country-mates and force the change on the players. I've seen small mission's, with only a few people completely turn the tide of the great 2 sided gangbang a number of times. Try it. Here, on this bbs.. all you will ever get is people who either don't care, or don't want change.. usually in the form of flames wich will never do anything more than irritate you and make them feel better in some wierd way.
edit[/i] Oh and for what it's worth, it's the Bish getting gangraped in primetime U.S. more often than not... "lately"
-
Burp.
-
Tumor: My suggestions would help also your country, bish, from going into the bucket. I can see no downpoint there..
Edit: It was Tumor not Toad, sorry.
Probably the best way to stop imbalance would be to disable squad rotations to countries which have many players and thus creating imbalance in numbers. To the equal side or smaller side this would be still possible. Second step would be to make new accounts automatically default to the smallest country, that way the country would maybe not get actual help but with time the newbies would grow into backing up the country. Third way would be to modify score multiplier to reflect the increased effort required to get kills at a disadvantage. I know what you have said about the alliances and I have to disagree - it's extremely rare that the smaller country can ally with a larger one. If sides are large-smaller-very small its the very small that gets banged.
In answer to your question above, I originally used my WB callsign mrsid when I posted here at that time UBB gave different screen name and login name so I was under the name of mrripley. Then after switch of computers, e-mail accounts etc. I took first mrsid2 and finally MrRiplEy[H] identitys. I've always flown as mrripley in AH excluding my 2 week trial which was about one year before I finally took a MA account. I flew h2h exclusively.
Edit: In any case, so far so good - sides have balanced after many many months of constant lopsideness. The arena numbers have been good all weekend and I'm really optimistic about the future. Don't really know what has caused this but whatever it was I'm happy.
-
Ahhh... it was Toad lol :D
-
Mr. Sid. OK, Thanks; helps things fall into place.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
No Toad the basic fact is that you are against any change. That's conservatism.[/b]
I am? Gee. So my lobbying for changes to Icons, Trim, Damage model and numerous other items doesn't qualify as "any change"?
Or is it because I don't have a "Crusade of the Week" like some other players?
Or does it not count because I don't continually bring something up ad nauseam until HTC sees my wisdom and changes it?
Or does it not count because I don't make ad hominem attacks against other players when I make my case?
Or does it not count because I don't curse the fools at HTC when I describe my position?
And, one other question: If I'm conservative then will I have to debate people with clever, well thought out replies like these"
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Poor AKiron is totally clueless.. [/b]
or
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H] You people don't seem to grasp the idea of balance.. LOL. Can you really be that retarded? [/b]
in order for you to think of me as "liberal"?
Or are you just trying to show Killjoy2 how rude and arrogant I am when compared to a true gentleman like yourself? :D
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H] You meticulously deny any problem even though you well know that the situation is much worse for players who play during your sleeping time.[/b]
No, I simply realize that continuously variable numbers are merely one characteristic of a 24/7, persistent, unlimited log in/log out arena. I guess either one realizes this or one doesn't.
Beyond that, if you are truly Euro timezone and you see this problems at 0400 CDT in the US then you are seeing them between 1000 and 1300 in Europe. So at midday the numbers aren't balanced? I'm not really suprised. How many people in Europe play at noontime? Is the night time any better? That's when most people play in the US, in the evenings.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
I'm paying my AH bill and I'm not allowed to curse in the game. [/b]
As a true liberal, doe that distress you? And what effect does it have on gameplay for you or anyone else in the arena? GAMEPLAY now. Are you unable to get folks to join missions if you don't curse at them or something like that?
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H] Just aswell HT could choose people are not allowed to do gameplay detrimental decisions like switch to a side which already has way too many players for any kind of balanced gameplay.[/b]
Yes, he could. What device would you suggest he install to keep them from logging off instead then? I mean if you get your wish and HTC implements a device from switching from a low-number country to a side with "too many players", how will you keep that type of person from just logging off?
Again, I know people switch sides to the high side. I just don't see how you are going to MAKE people do what you wish. They always have a choice. Play or not play. But a barrier in to stop them from doing something they want to do and they may just log off. Now the high side team doesn't get an extra player but a low side team loses one none the less. That doesn't improve the odds a bit, does it?
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H] The thing you can't understand it seems is that up to a certain point being the underdog can be fun and challenging (be it the situation varies or is not severe in nation) and all sides can have a maximum fun of the game.[/b]
Well, here's a few things I don't think you understand:
Human Nature is amazingly diverse. One person likes asparagus and another does not, for example.
Not everyone cares at all that sides are balanced. They just log in to play for an hour or two of entertainment and relaxation. They play no matter what the odds are and then they log off and go on with their real lives, dealing with real problems.
Not everyone cares who "wins the war". Take Laz for example. I'm sure he doesn't care a whit what the numbers are as long as he has an open fighter hangar to launch his -1 from.
Not everyone cares to be ordered around by the "generals" to "save the country" in a game.
Not everyone cares to be told how to have "fun".
Not everyone agrees on the definition of "maximum fun". The act of not agreeing doesn't make them "cluess" or "retarded" either. They just have a different view.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H] But when selfish players who only look at their own interests join the largest side in search of easy kills and protection of the group,[/b]
Well, then those nasty beggars should have their accounts cancelled!
After all, you can't have people running around paying for a game for their own entertainment and then have them look at their own interests for Cod's sake! Actually doing what is fun for them! Jeebus! This MUST stop! They either agree beforehand to abide by one person's definition of fun or out they go! [/sarcasm]
Tell me, how do you feel about HO's and chute shooting? :D
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H] This Toad is something you haven't realised or even tried to realise during all these dozens of messages we've been exchanging. Your stand is simply that just because you see no problem during your timezone there can't be a problem for anyone else either.
No, I've not taken that stand. In fact, if you recall I've pointed out that even the moronic, "thick" Bish get ganged during US prime time. I've seen what you are talking about and experienced it myself.
Now here's where we differ... the part YOU "haven't realised or even tried to realise during all these dozens of messages" IMO.
1. EVERYONE that plays or has played AH has experienced significant numerical disadvantage. In individual flights, in attacks on bases, in defense of bases AND IN THE ARENA ITSELF.
2. This is simply because that is the very nature of a persistent 24/7 unrestricted log in/log out arena.
3. So far NOT A SINGLE ONE of the 24/7 unrestricted log in/log out arena ACM games had been able to devise a method of "balancing" sides. Not AW, not WB, not FA and not AH.
4. Lastly, and most importantly, I don't think you realize that playing during a "significant numerical disadvantage" doesn't bother everyone as much as it bothers you. Mostly because these people realize two things:
a) What goes around, comes around.
b) It's only a game.
-
...... and this issue separately.
Ripley
"I'm not exactly sure what you're after with this, but let's consider the following:
a) You're daring me to do something like a little child and then calling me chicken when I won't do what you want me to do.
b) I don't know Hitech personally so I have no need to call him personally either.
c) Despite your promises there is no way you could make up the phone costs etc. for me as you don't know anything about me.
d) I will call Hitech if and when I want to, with the answer being I don't want to - e-mail is a much cheaper and effective means of communication when we talk about overseas connections.
e) I already sent an e-mail to HTC where I stated that I will reconsider reactivating my account if the balance situation stays the same when I return from my vacation. If there are many others who will do the same, it won't go unnoticed in HTC. If they don't care about it then it means I'm in the small minority with my opinnion and maybe this game is not suitable for me. That also leads to HT not getting my monthly subscription money."[/b]
a. I'm not daring you to do anything. I'm offering to pay the telephone charges incurred if you call HT and talk to him about your concerns and suggestions for improvement.
I think that by doing this, you'll engage in a give-and-take discussion on gaming that you will find enlightening. I again assure you that he is one smart guy with respect to his business and his clientele.
I think you'll enjoy it and I think it will help you relax concerning this numbers issue.
b. I've never met HT either. I've talked to him and Pyro many times on the telephone. They're really nice guys, interesting and very, very smart about this online gaming thing.
The fact that I "don't know" them doesn't mean they aren't great folks to to talk to. I'm sure they'll take time out to talk to any concerned customer.
c. So your're saying $15 isn't enough? How much do you need? I'll cover the cost of a 30 minute call, how's that? Don't want an AH subscription? I'll send ya a check or PayPal or whatever. I'm offering you an free opportunity to talk to HT about your concerns. That's all.
d. Well, E-mail isn't as good as talking realtime, IMO.
e. So basically you gave them an ultimatum. If the numbers don't suit your standards, you quit.
Well, that's one way to negotiate.
Let see what happens to subscriptions after 1.10 and the ads running in the various WW2 aircraft enthusiast venues.
My offer to pay for a 30 minute call stands. I think you'll enjoy it if you take advantage of it.
-
actually.... I kinda feel sorry for those guys who "swarm" a field with 4-10 to one odds and drop the fighter hangers first thing... How they can enjoy wasting all that time just to fight over scraps is beyond me. I do kinda enjoy killing the only con while 6 of my countrymen are fighting over him but only as a diversion for the real fighting and only if there is nothing fun to do.
I don't care if the fights are crappy because of numbers, poor gameplay issuses or simply the result of too much organization all these things feel the same to me. As toad says... all I care about is a field to take off from (I would add that it is best if it is close to the action and not too lopsided). What is happening in the rest of arena is not important.
lazs
-
AH is a victim game. if there are no victims there is no game.
For every single victory in the game there is a victim. This occurs on every component level of game play.
The problem is that players will grow tired of constantly being the victim.
Deal with it and play on, don't deal with it and quit or switch to a team that will minimize exposure. These are generally the three methods that are utilized by most players.
Play balancing is what ensures that being victimized is more or less an even proposition. I am in favor of any suggestion to improve play balancing.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
all I care about is a field to take off from (I would add that it is best if it is close to the action and not too lopsided). What is happening in the rest of arena is not important.
lazs
I don't think Mr. Sid will approve. :D
I, however, have no problem whatsoever with that. After all, it is YOUR $15; who else has the right to tell you how you should (or should not) play?
-
Toad the problem is not a varying situation on the arena. The problem comes with being constantly in the hole..
Beyond that, if you are truly Euro timezone and you see this problems at 0400 CDT in the US then you are seeing them between 1000 and 1300 in Europe. So at midday the numbers aren't balanced? I'm not really suprised. How many people in Europe play at noontime? Is the night time any better? That's when most people play in the US, in the evenings.
In the evenings the situation has been the most lopsided. 120 vs 120 vs 30 is the worst I have seen, 4:4:2 was common. Right now the arena balance has taken a step to a healthy direction, no country outnumbers others 2:1 anymore at any time I can log on.
Or does it not count because I don't continually bring something up ad nauseam until HTC sees my wisdom and changes it?
You should take a look in the mirror, you're doing the exact same with my posts whenever I raise discussion about the subject.
In fact with my problem being seemingly gone at this time, I can declare you Toad the winner of this bickering so we can both move on onto something more productive than arguing over meaningless detail. There is a saying that the smarter one quits first and I fully plan to win that race.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Sling how often do you fly 4-5 am your local time? Because that's probably when the things I speak of are occurring.
So this reply of yours to Sling was NOT what you meant to say then?
:D
-
Toad I was guessing that our primetime would be something like 4-5 am his time if he didn't see the numbers I see.
Last one before the last they say. End and out.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Toad the problem is not a varying situation on the arena. The problem comes with being constantly in the hole..
Well the MA does constantly vary in the macro view.
If you solely look at it in one narrow daily slot, a micro view, it could be more static I guess. Now, I agree if it happens to be the only time you can ever fly and it really bothers you then you would have a problem. If you can fly another time or if you are the type that just doesn't worry about it... no problemo.
All depends on the person and the personality, I think.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Right now the arena balance has taken a step to a healthy direction, no country outnumbers others 2:1 anymore at any time I can log on.
Wonderful! Good!
Now this may be because of good Sir Ripley the Chivalrous' campaign to enlighten the unwashed Bish masses and their subsequent conversion to the One, True Faith of AH. And it may last eternally and we'll all live happily ever after.
Or, it may just be the true nature of the MA acting once again. It may be the pendulum swinging as it always does and it may well swing back in the near or far term as pendulums always seem to do....... by design.
Be interesting to see, won't it.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
You should take a look in the mirror, you're doing the exact same with my posts whenever I raise discussion about the subject.
I'm not the one that initiated the "problem threads". You are the one continually raising the issue in multiple threads. I haven't bothered to reply in all of them, just a very few. In this thread, which was essentially dead after Pongo and I finished, you came looking to start it up again. I merely obliged you.
In short, I have merely responded to YOU with MY view on your problem/suggestions. You're the one that can't let this "arena balance" thing go, despite having had your say in multiple threads. You're the one that initially took issue with anyone opposing your idea. In fact, you've repeatedly insulted those that disagree with you. "Clueless", "Retarded" ring any bells? Not to mentiong the "shotgun approach" you took to insulting any and all Bish. :D
Now.. you still didn't explain to me how YOU'RE a liberal but I'M conservative.
Or how the profanity filter affects gameplay.......
Or why "selfish" players thay pay their own way in the game shouldn't be allowed to "look at their own interests" instead of doing what YOU think is proper.
Or how to keep people from just logging off if you implement features that don't allow them to do what they desire to do in the game......
And my offer still stands for a no-expense 30 minute chat with HT.
Ta-Ta!!
-
No Toad you're trying to deny me my right to express an opinnion on the board.
You're negating everything I say just for the sake of creating trouble.
I never said profanity filter affects gameplay adversely, it was just one example of a user controlling method which was implemented without fearing 'people just logging off.'
As I said I have no interest whatsoever to make an expensive overseas phonecall to HTC just to please you, get over it.
This is the final post I'm going to make on the subject as I'm extremely bored being played around by your little word games.
Find something else to do Toad as you won't be doing this with me anymore.
-
No, I'm denying you your desire to post your opinion without having anyone post an opposing opinion.
As if such a "right" on an internet BBS exists. :D
I believe that's what you're really ticked off about. After all, you've insulted just about everyone that posted an opposing opinion.. like AKIron.
You are correct in one respect though. If one posts on an open internet BBS, one should expect an opposing view from someone. Human nature.
So feel absolutely free to post any opinion you like on the BBS. I encourage you to do so in the same way that I encourage you to call HT at my expense and have a 1 on 1 chat about the problem as you see it.
However, just don't expect that everyone will bow down and agree with you when you do post.
Of course, you can always insult those that don't agree, right?
:D
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
I did however mention the arena balance as one of the reasons why I'm cutting off my subscription for the summer vacation.
Oh good! Thats the best news Ive heard all day.:D Please dont subject us to these worthless diatribes while your off sulking on your hiatis. BTW, as far as me not liking you, its not personal, I cant stand any whiny arsed people. I for one will be glad to see one less crybaby in the game this summer. :p
-
Muhah X2 the first time I met on on the arena and you got shot down, you were the whiney one.
Toad: everyone I insulted had it coming that is they posted something to deserve it.
-
My first clue that our mr. ripley is one to open his mouth without engaging his brain is when he persisted in arguing about Windows XP and the alt-tab psychedelic experience. As anyone with an Nvidia board and XP can tell ya, it's not the sync rate, it's the palletized textures that cause this.
To prove his ignorance I'll bet he'll continue with this argument even now. My question still stands mr. sid or ripley or whatever the hell you go by, do you have Windows XP even yet?
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Toad: everyone I insulted had it coming that is they posted something to deserve it.
But of course!
After all, they had the nerve to actually post an opinion that did not agree with YOURS!
Is there.. indeed, can there even BE a greater sin?
What ever is the world coming to!
Those arrogant, rude, immature dweebs!
:D
-
Originally posted by AKIron
My first clue that our mr. ripley is one to open his mouth without engaging his brain is when he persisted in arguing about Windows XP and the alt-tab psychedelic experience. As anyone with an Nvidia board and XP can tell ya, it's not the sync rate, it's the palletized textures that cause this.
It is?? hmm never had that problem and i use XP and am on my 3rd nVidia card...
SKurj
-
I guess I implied that everyone with an Nvidia card and XP had the problem. However, that isn't what I meant. Only that everyone I've talked to that had the problem solved it by disabling palletized textures.
Perhaps your palletized textures are already disabled? If so, enable them and then alt-tab out a few times, I'd be interested to know your situation?
-
Originally posted by Rude
Welfare comes to mind.
Just as in life, it's not always fair. How folks deal with this reality varies greatly.
You have those who want a handout due to adversity, and will not make much of an effort to achieve in life, because they no longer have to.
There are those who live each day, not taken back by adversity, they just make adjusments in their lives and keep on living.
Then there are those who work twice as hard to overcome the adversity, walking away with the satisfaction along with the benefit of their extra effort.
Some believe in the premise that anyone who has risen to the top should be brought down to the levels of others, in an effort to find equality...share that wealth.
The percieved MA inbalance is similar in many ways...some want every aspect to be equal and balanced...have HT build an equalizer into the game...an unchallenging and vanilla existence.
Others, just play...oblivious to the heated concerns of a few, just having fun...Ignorance is bliss?:)
Then there are those who reach down deep, get a little pissed off, and go to war looking for your head the entire way.
If the Bishops had more fields when the war starts or late war rides while others rode the early stuff only, then I would agree, that would be unfair. As to numbers of players and the quest for parity, if that were to become the norm, then life in the MA would mirror an existence similar to that of living in an old folks home...Salisbury Steak on Monday's, Spaghetti on Tuesday's along with endless reruns of Cacoon. No thanks.
I hope HT leaves it alone...it is inherently natural and fluid. It will come around to all of us:)
Great post Rude!
Ack-Ack
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Today at 9AM.
That's a bad example because the reason for the low Rook numbers is that they are down to 10 bases and a great deal of them switched countries to get reset perk points. So the unbalance in numbers wasn't created by any inherent problems of the game but rather from perk greed and petty dweebishness on the part of the country switchers.
Ack-Ack
-
Originally posted by sling322
Thanks for reminding me exactly why I fly for the Bishops. The knits are blinded by their perceived superiority over others simply because a great many of them fly planes with '0', '1', or '9' anywhere in the name
Coming from a mere commmoner, I will not dignify your comment with an answer. Good day sir!
(http://www.hispanicvista.com/assets/479th_shield.jpg)
Ack-Ack
479th Fg - Riddle's Raiders
Uber Knights
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Muhah X2 the first time I met on on the arena and you got shot down, you were the whiney one.
Toad: everyone I insulted had it coming that is they posted something to deserve it.
Blatent lie. First time I saw u in the arena you were calling one of my squadron a cheater/hack I called you to the duelin areana and you didnt show. Next time I seen you in the arena you were whining about your pampers or your hemmoroid creme and I killed you . I killed you a few minutes later also. :cool:
-
Oh you may be right I forgot our first encounter, stats do show you shot me down first.
Btw: I called you to DA after you mouthed off on the third encounter and YOU chickened out.
The reason for me not coming to DA the first time was as you well know that I was in middle of a sortie, I went to DA immediately after it. That however left you sufficient time to whine on CH1 and logout skipping the humiliating loss in the DA.
-
AKAK: why do you persist on that theory? I have posted the numbers when fields were even and it shows constistently the same difference in numbers. You're wrong akak.
-
After all, they had the nerve to actually post an opinion that did not agree with YOURS!
No, Toad, it's when people persist on something that is clearly wrong - like saying they know better than me of the situation on the MA during the time I play it daily. That's just hilarious.
-
AKAK posted: My first clue that our mr. ripley is one to open his mouth without engaging his brain is when he persisted in arguing about Windows XP and the alt-tab psychedelic experience. As anyone with an Nvidia board and XP can tell ya, it's not the sync rate, it's the palletized textures that cause this.
To prove his ignorance I'll bet he'll continue with this argument even now. My question still stands mr. sid or ripley or whatever the hell you go by, do you have Windows XP even yet?
Now, AKAK, you must have missed all the grateful players who downloaded the patch from the locations I provided them. I helped people to fix the problem during a time when hardly nobody knew of a fix. Thanks a lot for trying to (again, wrongfully) supply people with completely wrong facts.
The fact remains that if you won't run the refresh rate fix your games will most likely run at 60hz. This was the primary reason for the corruption.
Disabling palettized textures must change the way AH handles textures in a way that circumvents the problem.. That however does not mean the refresh rate / color depth problem has disappeared.
I'm happy AKAK if you really ignored all this and currently play your games at 60hz refresh rate, because you really deserve the headaches. :D
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
After all, they had the nerve to actually post an opinion that did not agree with YOURS!
No, Toad, it's when people persist on something that is clearly wrong - like saying they know better than me of the situation on the MA during the time I play it daily. That's just hilarious.
No, Ripley, it's when you start thinking YOUR opinion is the Gospel truth and the only possible correct answer.
You continually spout that unequal numbers in a persistent, 24/7, unlimited log in/log out, pay-to-play gaming arena are "wrong".
You refuse to even consider that it is quite possible that unequal numbers in a persistent, 24/7, unlimited log in/log out, pay-to-play gaming arena are simply a characteristic of that type of arena.
And, indeed, every other persistent, 24/7, unlimited log in/log out, pay-to-play Air Combat gaming arena has had this characteristic. To date, no device has been found to change that characteristic in the way that you apparently desire.
I see over in your "scientific polling example" thread that the numbers have changed once again and you have the sniffles over it.
I guess we found the answer to whether or not Sir Ripley the Chivalrous' campaign to enlighten the unwashed Bish masses and convert them to the One, True Faith of AH then?
Or, maybe its just this characteristic of the MA acting once again?
The pendulum continues to swing?
But then that can't be can it? Because your judgement of "wrong" would be non-germane to the issue.
You don't have to answer, I know you're not posting anymore since you've already made your "final" post several times. :D
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
AKAK posted: My first clue that our mr. ripley is one to open his mouth without engaging his brain is when he persisted in arguing about Windows XP and the alt-tab psychedelic experience. As anyone with an Nvidia board and XP can tell ya, it's not the sync rate, it's the palletized textures that cause this.
To prove his ignorance I'll bet he'll continue with this argument even now. My question still stands mr. sid or ripley or whatever the hell you go by, do you have Windows XP even yet?
Now, AKAK, you must have missed all the grateful players who downloaded the patch from the locations I provided them. I helped people to fix the problem during a time when hardly nobody knew of a fix. Thanks a lot for trying to (again, wrongfully) supply people with completely wrong facts.
The fact remains that if you won't run the refresh rate fix your games will most likely run at 60hz. This was the primary reason for the corruption.
Disabling palettized textures must change the way AH handles textures in a way that circumvents the problem.. That however does not mean the refresh rate / color depth problem has disappeared.
I'm happy AKAK if you really ignored all this and currently play your games at 60hz refresh rate, because you really deserve the headaches. :D
Wrong on two counts Ripley. First of all AKIron <> AKAK. AKAK is not an Arabian Knight.
Secondly, I've run AH at many different resolutions and refresh rates including 60 Hz. I can cause the problem at will by simply turning on the palletized textures. I've had no problems running at 60 Hz. My problem with you wasn't that you were wrong but that you indignantly insisted you were right.
The fact that you still didn't answer my question about whether you had or even have Windows XP leads me to the conclusion that you didn't and still don't. I didn't persue this very far several months ago but your recent posts here and in other threads compelled me to expose you for one that forms opinions and speaks as with knowledge when in fact you have little or none.
-
No I don't have windows XP installed if that's what you mean..
However I have received the information through multiple web sites which have found a similar problem on many other games, not just aces high.
I was sceptical about your fix since it doesn't fix the problem in my W2k box.
My only experience of XP professional is from MS certified IT education center where I took an XP pro / MS advanced server course last year.
I've had no problems running at 60 Hz.
Can't you see the flickering? Any refresh rate below 72hz is ergonomically not viable. It will cause eye strain and headaches.. For your own good (and even though you're attacking me on this thread) change the refresh rate to higher in the game.
-
Just in case, figured I'd at least show whats happening. Not necessarily in YOUR time zone, I'll label each. Remember...this is "roughly" prime time for our Euro and ...err, I think the Easten boys too. Now, before any of you whiner attack dogs fire off... this is simply fact. I'll post one every day if you want, but this is whats been happening for quite awhile. My own view is... well, I would like to fly AH under better conditions in the morning usually however, I just log off. Were I limited to these times completely (my wierd work schedule allows my a variety of times) I would probably cancel my account after a month or two. I can't see the benefit, however I can see it detracting from the game IN THAT it is an all too regular occurance over the last few weeks or months. Here's Sunday early on. Weekends aren't all that bad.
-
Here we have Sunday Morn, a little later... bout 10ish I believe.
-
Now here's Monday at 9am US Eastern. THIS is where it starts getting old.
-
I know what you mean Tumor..
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Can't you see the flickering? Any refresh rate below 72hz is ergonomically not viable. It will cause eye strain and headaches.. For your own good (and even though you're attacking me on this thread) change the refresh rate to higher in the game.
Your concern for my eyesight is heartening (pardon my skepticism). My monitor only supports 60 Hz at 1600x1200 and no, I don't find there to be any distracting flicker. The 60 Hz flicker is usually only a problem when there are fluorescent lights overhead which I don't have in my home. FWIW, I usually run 1280x1024 at 75 Hz.
Apparently you're also in the IT industry. I've been to many Microsoft (and other) classes and have the certifications. However, that doesn't make me an expert at anything. Experience is the only thing I've come to trust and I try to base any advice I offer on that. You'd do well to do the same.
Consider my "attack" finished.
AKIron (not AKAK)
-
Akiron fair enough. Could you tell me which is the exact method that cures the problem of corrup graphics via disabling the palettized textures? I'm pretty dark on that. All I know that the refresh fix fixes both refresh rates and this problem.
My little 'crusade' has got quickly browsing at least 6 responses of players whose problem was solved by the little utility I supplied them. I even hosted the webspace required.
If I can help someone with his problem, I don't stay to bicker with the cause. Main thing is to get things working.
Edit: Still on that 1600x1200x60hz.. Ouch! I'd go nuts after watching that for 10 minutes.. After all the hours behind the screen I've become very sensitive to low refresh rates. I'm lucky my screen supports 75hz at 1.6kx1.2k.
-
Sure, several others and I tried different resolutions and matching the desktop resolution and refresh rate with that of Aces High using different methods. No help, still got the psychedelic colors.
Check the disable palletized textures in the Aces High Video setup box and no more problem. Since I'm not clear on what exactly palletized textures are in this case I can't even speculate on why they cause this problem for many with Windows XP and Aces High.
-
Akiron it won't work to try to match the resolutions manually, W2k and XP handle color modes and refresh rates individually and there's no built in tool to set the refresh resolutions manually. In 95,98 and ME the graphics were handled in a much simplier manner.
That is why the refresh rate fix was needed to force the refreshes to something else than the default. Other option would have been to manually reconfigure the detonator drivers .ini file.
bockko
Member
Registered: Feb 2002
Location: co
Posts: 30
[I know -- this isn't my post ] I think I got the nvidia bug info and link from one of your posts mrsid! thanks and keep the good info flowing!
__________________
Fly Hard, Turn Hard, Blackout
------------------
funkedup
Senior Member
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: Nocal
Posts: 3707
Thanks guys.
So far it works slicker than owl toejam.
Thanks for the tip about refresh rates, was wondering about that...
---------------------
Seeker
Senior Member
Registered: Mar 2001
Location:
Posts: 2005
Worked like a charm...thanks a lot :-)
--------------------------
arat
Junior Member
Registered: Jan 2002
Location:
Posts: 1
alt tab blues
I had the alt tab prob on new pc, thought it was me! Got the program from the link to Nvidia, problem gone!
Thx guys
----------------------------
If you don't believe me, maybe you'll believe these users that had help from it. It is however possible that the fix won't work just like that in XP since I haven't had the chance to test it first hand. If the palettized textures fix the prob in xp, thanks for the info - I'll add it to my knowledge database.
-
I tried a couple of different programs that set the refresh rate for directx. It would seem reasonable to assume that if something worked in W2K it should work in WinXP. Just doesn't seem to be the case this time.
-
1:30 U.S. EST
-
Numbers can fluctuate rapidly, especially when a new version is believed to be imminent. Just took this at 12:27 CST today
-
Ah, yet again the ever-changing nature of a persistent, 24/7, unlimited log on/log off arena is revealed. To those who will open their eyes.
The only constant is change.
:D
-
The only constant is the BISH OPPRESION!
DOWN WITH BISH!
DOWN WITH BISH!
No I didnt read any of this noncence...
But my name is on the thread so I have to participate dont I?
-
If you look closely, the only thing that doesn't change on all of the screenshots is that the bish have the largest numbers. Constantly.
-
Instead of getting a freaking ulcer over a stupid online game just change sides and forget about it already.
-
The situation on my prime time has changed a lot, during the last few months this would have been impossible. Ok, it does change but it lasted months - and that is beyond my patience. When I took my MA account, Artlaws convinced me to join rooks because they were always low in numbers. That has not changed much during these months I've played here.
However now it really looks like tide might be changing. Still my incentive would prevent the build up of a hole for some other country, at least to the extent of fighting 3:1 for a long period of time.
Turbot: I wish you'd realise that side switching under pressure is exactly the reason for the huge mismatch. Every person that switches to larger side dips the scale further to the other direction. Therefore if you think about it logically there has to be some incentive for the players to remain fighting against the odds, because if enough people leave the smaller side it's finally unplayable for the last few.
-
Why, by golly........ you're right!
Maybe. In your timezone possibly. Today, anyway. Well right this instant then.
But only HTC has the true numbers 24/7. Everyone else is like the blind man grabbing (or screenshooting) one small part of the elephant and learnedly pronouncing just exactly what he "sees">
In any event the Bish have an overwhelming advantage of 14 players on the Rooks in Iron's shot. :eek:
Where is the PERFECT BALANCE, eh? Ah-OOoooooGAH! Ah-OOOooooGAAH! 3 Bish must immediately switch to ROOKS! STAT! 8 Bish must immediately switch to Knights! Standby for further orders after the next guy logs in to play! Oops! Wait a minute! Some Bish just logged off! Standby! Standby!
-
LOL Toad now you're making an bellybutton of yourself.
Didn't I just say a difference of about 30-40% is still acceptable? Doesn't your own logic tell you that?
The main principle would be to prevent the crazy 3-4:1 situations from building up - and far worse, lasting for a long time.
Another thing you should also realise is that the players never see a 24 hour persistent arena, nobody plays around the clock. So for a player nothing else matters except the situation that remains during his play hours.
If the situation won't change during those hours, it might not change at all. It simply makes no difference to anyone.
It's a bit like working a 2-shift job. Your shift gets the toejamtyest jobs, cleaning the toilets etc. constantly..
The shift after you gets to lay around watching tv and they also get a pay rise. You go to complain to your boss that the situation is not fair..
Your boss (Toad) responds that it's a 24-hour persistent job and that the other shift is getting all the perks needed, covering the whole day's average. You should be happy that the system works by the numbers.
Come on Toad, I'm sure you're a reasonable man. What ticks you so much in this?
-
Originally posted by Toad
Why, by golly........ you're right!
Maybe. In your timezone possibly. Today, anyway. Well right this instant then.
But only HTC has the true numbers 24/7. Everyone else is like the blind man grabbing (or screenshooting) one small part of the elephant and learnedly pronouncing just exactly what he "sees">
In any event the Bish have an overwhelming advantage of 14 players on the Rooks in Iron's shot. :eek:
Where is the PERFECT BALANCE, eh? Ah-OOoooooGAH! Ah-OOOooooGAAH! 3 Bish must immediately switch to ROOKS! STAT! 8 Bish must immediately switch to Knights! Standby for further orders after the next guy logs in to play! Oops! Wait a minute! Some Bish just logged off! Standby! Standby!
No offense Toad but your the one refusing to see the light. Like I said before, I'll continue to post what I've seen over the last few weeks. And again... I'll either fly or log off..thats up to me. The fact remains, the Bish have the numbers more often than not, and much more frequently more than a whole 14 plus during these hours. You can continue to make lite of it, but the fact is (call me a liar if you want)... it's been happening all to frequently at far too "unbalancing" numbers for our overseas friends. For me it's not about who wins or who loses, it's about setting the record straight. I'll continue to post screens, like it or not. I shouldn't have to, but it seems around here you have to show up armed with facts. Facts I will give you. Too bad a person's word is worthless here.
-
burn all the damn dildo worshipers! They fight like girls too.
lazs
-
Monday, 7:15pm EST
-
Hey, Tumor! Run it on the half-hour for 24 hours for 7 days in a row. Then lets see what you've got. The macro view instead of the micro view.
Ripley, you've identified what you see as a problem.Where's the solution that's fair to EVERY player and doesn't FORCE them to do something they don't want to do?
Provide that... and we'll have a basis for agreeing.
-
Toad as I said before my opinnion is that if you give a carrot (incentive) for players to balance the sides, they will most likely do that. Meaning, if players join a country that is in the hole they get rewarded more points.
That would (maybe) produce an automatic balancing tool when anyone who wants to boost their score would logically go and fight to the side of the smallest country. The score multiplier would change with the difference in numbers so the higher the difference, the higher the temptation for change would be.
How does that sound to you? No forcing anyone, just something extra rewarded for helping out the small side. If it could stop the 3:1 situations from continuing in the micro view in a sense that if it could balance the situation even half way, it would already be a big help.
46 vs 8 is not fun anymore, not for the bigger side nor the smaller IMO. If you think of it, who on earth would be foolish enough to join the side of the 8 if they want to gain actual benefit? Nobody. They make sure they stay on the larger side because all the benefits are there in current design.
If joining the smallest side would have special benefit to people it would make sense to do the move, right now it simply doesn't.
-
Basically there are almost always more Bish on. I certainly don't know the reason why this occurs.
Today, for awhile, there were almost more Bish on than Rooks and Knights combined. Somthing like 175 105 80. Then later the numbers pretty much evened out.
Rooks!
You always put up a tremendous fight when you are cornered.
-
The problem as rook is not fighting 1 vs 5, that is ok, the problem is having all your bases porked, all your fields vulched and your HQ nuked.
Two very different outnumbered situations, two very different fun levels:
1 - You and your wingman detect the typical bish horde coming towards you. You engange the horde, kill several orcs and RTB, outnumbered but big fun.
2 - You and your mates are being vulched over and over while taking off from field A, HQ is out, field B has no fuel, field C is closed, field X is whatever dissaster you want to place here and so on, fun = NULL, and the enemy is unskilled (or cruel) enough to be unable to take these fields in time and force a quick reset.
The second situation is what hurts the fun of this game.
-
hu ?
// snipped code
try
gangbanged();
except
if not alone then StartSocialLife()
else
GrabAGoodBook();
end;
-
Ripley are you talking about giving out "bonus" perk points after a sortie or boosting "score", the overall rank in the game that appears on the website score pages?
Boosting the score/ranking stuff would have no effect on gameplay. So that's fine with me if you can convince HTC to set up something like that.
Can't hurt, might help. Of course, there's lots of folks that don't play for score or even know where the score pages are.
Like I said though, can't hurt.
Bonus perk points idea is similar but with one potential difference. Excess perks can affect gameplay. I have no idea of the "details" of your plan but in the extreme it could be questionable if one is a big fan of the purpose of the entire perk system. For example, if the "bonus" is enough to get a 262 after one sortie some players might not consider that to be a good thing because it essentially makes the "perk system" meaningless.
:eek: What if the hordes of F4U-1C's returned! :eek:
;) Just an example there. You know some guys would get upset.
With a reasonable bonus, though, it's like the score thing. Might help can't hurt. Again, I believe there are lots of folks that don't play for perks or even want to fly perk planes for that matter.
But, within reason it can't hurt.
And indeed, you aren't forcing anyone. So I wouldn't oppose giving those ideas a try at all.
Additionally, perhaps HTC could categorize the current player base by basic world timezones. Rough breaks, like "Europe", "US" "Asia".. 4-6 breaks based upon when "primetime" occurs as the sun makes its journey around the globe.
Then, as discussed before "new accounts" in each timezone break would be routed to the lowest side in that timezone.
Hopefully the new guys would stick with the guys that mentor them and thus side numbers would gradually equalize.
Another "no force" option.
-
Mandoble,
"Condition 2" is pretty much what happens to every single country at some time or other right before they experience being reset.
And every country gets reset sooner or later. Perhaps some more than others. Perhaps more often at particular times of day. Perhaps.
But it is NOT solely a "rook" cross to bear.
-
No matter whether this is rook or knight or orcbish, but IMO, we have a serious problem here. There is some point where country A has no chance to fight, and countries B and C are just fighting each other while keeping country A tied looking for favorable reset conditions. This period may be hours, hours where country A has no chance to fight/defend, just to wait for the reset while being vulched over'n over.
Yesterday, for example, we were totally destroyed, and knights stopped the offensive just to keep jaboing our factories and cities well behind their own frontiers while spanking our HQ and keeping our bases closed. The bishorc horde just kept vulching our western frontiers without real interest into taking fields.
What about a "surrender" toggle button on the strat page? More than 50% of a country players with that button pressed and the reset is forced.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
There is some point where country A has no chance to fight,
Yes, agreed. This is generally just before the reset occurs. That's how resets occur, isn't it? In fact, we could almost say that is how the Strat is designed to work.
Now, whether or not the other two countries go immediately for the "kill" or whether they just keep "milkrunning"... well, that's an uncontrollable "human" factor. Some guys go for the kill, some go for the milkruns.
As long as we're not "forcing" anything I wouldn't care.
Surrender button? Sure, why not if it is strictly voluntary.
Just remember that almost every "solution" to a perceived problem brings new problems.
For example, what's to prevent some big group fun-loving guys from switching sides and all pushing the "surrender" button at one time whether or not the now-surrendering country is in its death-throes? Particularly in low-overall arena numbers situations when just a 20 or 30 guys could tip the 50% "trigger".
And what if a group of guys just decided they didn't like the particular map we were on.. so they just surrender to get a new map. Is that going to be no problem for everyone?
You get the idea, I'm sure. There always seems to be more problems generated by the solutions. Not always "better" or "worse" problems... just new problems.
-
Following mandobles line of thought, maybe reset should occur with more fields left intact..
That would mean most likely that the country who is getting reseted can keep fighting almost normally untill the end. They wouldn't have to choose between being grounded or being vulched trying. It's very typical that on the virge of reset the two leading countries start shooting it out between eachothers, trying to steal the reset from the other.
-
MrRiplEy[H], you may have an intact and undamaged field capped by a zillion of orcbishes. This is not going to ensure "fighting almost normally" by any means.
Possible solutions:
1 - Surrender poll.
2 - With some criteria (only 3 bases left?), activating a 3D zone in the space near a map margin where the obliterated country may spawn its planes already airborne (simulating out-of-the-map reinforcements?). For example, a zone of 10milesx5milesx5000 feet placed 5000 feet above the ground or sea near a map margin where your planes spawn at a random possition and height (into the box limits) and they spawn just 50 Mph avobe stall speed, leveled and with AP level enganged. To ensure this spawn area is not going to be used as strategic mission catapult, limit the fuel to 75% internal and disable the spawn of bombers. At least the defending country will be able to conduct jabo missions against a nearby captured base.
3 - Place your idea here ...
-
Mandoble I meant that maybe it would be better if reset came with for example 5 fields left.. That way they all wouldn't probably be capped before the reset treshold finally breaks.
-
I have followup these "Country numbers" topics for a while...
I need to say that MrRipley have a very good point about this issue.
GENERALLY (IMHO):
1. Long timers of the country (BTW: I have been change for short period to the Knit from Rooks and back)
2. People who want first of all to be at winner side no matter of anything else.
3. People who simply enjoy beat weaker ones (school yard syndrome).
4. Those who have a guts fight what evere numbers are in enemy side.
I take 1. and 4. no need to ask why, just take a look where Im from.
Gosh! :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Xjazz
I take 1. and 4. no need to ask why, just take a look where Im from.
..??....Brainfreeze? :D
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
AKAK posted: My first clue that our mr. ripley is one to open his mouth without engaging his brain is when he persisted in arguing about Windows XP and the alt-tab psychedelic experience. As anyone with an Nvidia board and XP can tell ya, it's not the sync rate, it's the palletized textures that cause this.
To prove his ignorance I'll bet he'll continue with this argument even now. My question still stands mr. sid or ripley or whatever the hell you go by, do you have Windows XP even yet?
Now, AKAK, you must have missed all the grateful players who downloaded the patch from the locations I provided them. I helped people to fix the problem during a time when hardly nobody knew of a fix. Thanks a lot for trying to (again, wrongfully) supply people with completely wrong facts.
The fact remains that if you won't run the refresh rate fix your games will most likely run at 60hz. This was the primary reason for the corruption.
Disabling palettized textures must change the way AH handles textures in a way that circumvents the problem.. That however does not mean the refresh rate / color depth problem has disappeared.
I'm happy AKAK if you really ignored all this and currently play your games at 60hz refresh rate, because you really deserve the headaches. :D
Before you accuse someone of posted or supplying wrong facts, I suggest you pull your head out of your arse and look who left the post. You'll notice that the poster is AKIron and not me, the one and only Ack-Ack. I forgive your little error since I'm quite used to them by now and expect nothing else from you.
Ack-Ack
479th FG - Riddle's Raiders
-
Originally posted by AKIron
I tried a couple of different programs that set the refresh rate for directx. It would seem reasonable to assume that if something worked in W2K it should work in WinXP. Just doesn't seem to be the case this time.
You might want to go to Guru3D (http://www.guru3d.com) and download the Win2k/XP refresh rate fix. Another good recommendation is do download MultiRes v.1.40 (http://www.entechtaiwan.com) so you can change your refresh rates easily.
Ack-Ack
-
Thanks for the tip but I never had a problem setting my refresh rate. At the risk of starting another debate I'll say it isn't the refresh rate that causes the alt-tab problem in windows XP.
-
When "the end is near" for any country that is about to reset the fighting ISN'T going to be "near normal".. whatever "normal" is supposed to be.
When any country is about to be reset, they are getting hammered. It's how you reset a country, right? Crush them? Yes?
Excuse me but I'm starting to think some folks think resets are somehow avoidable or "bad for the game" or should follow some sort of "rules of fair resetting".
The whole point of the strategy in the MA war is to take the other guys bases... I think. Isn't it?
So when that task is nearly accomplished there is NO WAY you are going to make it fun for the guys that are getting hammered and about to be reset.
IMO.
Am I missing something here?
-
On a second thought; nevermind.
Have a nice life Ack Ack.
-
In a way you are missing something Toad..
You see, the point we're after here is to figure out ways on how to keep the game fun for all sides at maximum amount of time. Presently if the reset gets delayed because the two larger countries start shooting it out between themselves, the country being reseted will be totally down for hours. The fight won't end untill another side gives up and captures finally the last required field. During that time the reseted country can just watch things happen, logout or take off and get vulched. It's common to see a 'losing' side gift-wrap a field to the reseted one just to deny the reset from the winning side..
If reset would occur with more bases left intact, all sides could keep on fighting untill one side achieves the required % of captured fields required for reset. That would probably speed up the reset also because the attacking countries couldn't stop all activity of the smallest one just to continue the fight elsewhere.
If you compare the situation to the real world, how often do you see a country fight up untill its very last town, very last field untill they surrender? Never. Simply because everyone knows it would be insane to waste resources and lives when facing a certain defeat anyway.
Nazi Germany even caved in before their last village was occupied..
-
Originally posted by Toad
Am I missing something here?
Of course, you simply justify the system as it works now cause this is how RL works. But IMO the system is wrong and dont represent the real world rules.
If you want to keep tied to the real world, then you better take into consideration the casualities (not a factor in AH). For example, Bishorcs would never achieved a single reset with casualities being a factor. Yesterday, as an example, I saw four consecutive bishorc hordes vaporized by the same rook defenders in less than 20 minutes. In RL, bishorcs would have been running out of man power and planes so quickly that the reset would have been achieved in less than two hours with the bish surrending.
Is the reset the objetive? yes.
Do you need to crush the fun of a lot of players to achieve that? Not necessary. There are a zillion of ways to configure the reset parameters and to ensure that outnumbered/gangbanged countries may keep fighting and having some fun all the time.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
There are a zillion of ways to configure the reset parameters and to ensure that outnumbered/gangbanged countries may keep fighting and having some fun all the time.
Well, I'm a curious guy.
Why don't you just tell me TWO of the ways you are going to make being reset "fun" for the losing country.
Thanks.
-
OK, Ripley.
How many bases left or what percentage?
The new 512x512 map the AK's made has something like 70+ bases per side.
How's your plan work in that environment? I believe all future maps will be at least this size as well so we can expect this to become the "standard" I think.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Why don't you just tell me TWO of the ways you are going to make being reset "fun" for the losing country.
I already did, just check some post above.
-
Toad I believe those 5 last fields would be enough. I don't think they all could be bombed down and/or capped totally.
That would enable the losing side to remain fighting untill the bitter end.
-
well.... I belive that what is being missed here is that there are two distinct types of people who care about "numbers". No One likes to be gangbanged as a steady diet but..
One type of simmer cares not a whit about overall numbers or "winning the (lol) war" ... they care about local numbers. wheather there is a field to take off from or go to where the numbers are pretty even.
The other type cares only for "overall numbers" they are heavily into "winning the (lol) war". Any percieved unballance when they come on is considered poor gameplay and "unfair".
And never the two shall meet and agree.
ripley.... I think that one thing you and I do agree on tho is that the war shuld be over when there is more than one field left. Not the way it is now. I have allways advocated this.. It would make "being caugt behind nme lines at reset" less likely and less gamey and it would allow for good fights all the way up till the "surrender". It would "force" other countries to fight each other IF..... they wanted to (cough) win the war and not let the other country have it.
lazs
-
The other type cares only for "overall numbers" they are heavily into "winning the (lol) war". Any percieved unballance when they come on is considered poor gameplay and "unfair".
I think you go a bit to extremes there.. At least what I've been after all this time is to prevent a crazy mismatch in numbers like constant 2:1 or worse (for players of a certain timezone.)
Wouldn't you say the situation 3 days ago when I last played was unfair with 47 bish 27 knights and 8 rooks? lol.
-
rip.... it would't be "unfair" to me if....
I were a rook and there were a rook and a knight field close to each other and the knights were sending over say... 10 guys at a time and I had 7 other rooks to "defend"... No.... not unfair.... simply a great time online.
And that is my point. I care only about local conditions. I would reiterate tho that the way the "war is won" sucks. if the hammered country "surrendered" when it was down to 2-3 fields then there would allways, or allmost allways, be good gameplay even at the endgame portion. It still wouldn't help out the gamers who think "winning the war" is important.
lazs
-
What if the situation was (and it mostly is) that you're there with 7 of your friends and your fields are hit elsewhere by knights so 2-3 of your friends go there to defend at 10:1 odds.
You're left with 4 of your friends to fight the 30+ bishops who are attacking you with high-altitude typhoon strikes. One of your friends sits on a capped field blasting away in osty. IMO that's not a playable scenario by any means.
But I guess it can still be fun if a player fights as I think you do, just diving to the first furball with no intention to even try to fly out of there alive.
-
Mandoble, I'll assume you're talking about this post.. the one above where you posted two ideas?
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
1 - Surrender poll.
OK, how do you envision this working? If it is voluntary, I have no problem with the theory, I just like to hear the plan.
How will you counter people "surrendering" just to cause a map change? Even if many people are on having "fun" on that map? I'd think a minority of the players actually online could accomplish this, right?
A Country = 100 B Country = 100 C Country = 99. If 50 folks in country C decide to switch maps while the other 249 are having the most exciting times of their online career, how do you stop the "surrender"?
Additionally, what about guys like Laz? He's still having fun as long as the "fight is on"? Does his fun not count?
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
2 - With some criteria (only 3 bases left?), activating a 3D zone in the space near a map margin where the obliterated country may spawn its planes already airborne (simulating out-of-the-map reinforcements?).
How does this one work fairly then?
Assume Side A, Side B and Side C all start out at 7 PM EDT (US Primetime) with 150 players each. The battle rages all night long with numbers staying fairly close.
Nonetheless, about 10 PM Side A has gained the upper hand, mainly because Dweebs like Toad and all his ilk won't listen to the self-appointed "generals" in the losing country. Guys like Laz just keep furballing as fields are lost to the dreaded enemy. ;)
OK, the losing side is down to 3 fields. They still have equal numbers, although all sides are down to 100 players now.
So, the losing side suddenly gets the "airborne start" enabled, even though they are NOT outnumbered?
And even though Side A, through brilliant gameplay, superior generalship and all that other real important stuff, has waged a near perfect "war" they must now overcome this new advantage given to the losing side which waged a terrible war with poor strategy, failure to cooperate and rebellion against the "generals"?
That's what you want? That increases everyone's enjoyment?
Please do explain.
-
Well, here are some thoughts. They may have been brought up already, I certianly didn't read all threads relating to this subject previously...but here they are anyway:
1) A major potential drawback for the new SuperMaps (AK Pizza and the like) will be getting down to 1 base for the reset. Resets may take a very long time to acheive. Personally, I like the variety of maps, and would rather not be stuck on one map for months at a time. To help this situation and the numbers problem, the reset could be based on one country owning a majority of the entire map's bases. Whether that is 51% or 66% or 75% could be determined by a pole similar to the one's that HTC performs at login on occasion. I know I'd vote for 51%. Making resets easier may cheapen the victory, but at least it doesn't completely demoralize the "loser" by obliterating them off the map.
2) Local numbers can be addressed by limiting the number of planes that a base can launch. This was done in AW3 where damaged bases could not launch as many planes as undamaged fields. I wouldn't suggest that model, but rather something where fields can only support the launch of a set number of planes and as a country's fields are reduced from the initial number given after reset, the plane allocation to other fields is increased. Further, the number of GVs launched from the hanger position should be unlimited since those are a purely defensive weapon when launched on the base.
Anyway...my 2 cents.
-
Toad the voting system should be as easy as follows:
Do you have only 4 fields left?, that is, are you clearly loosing (this is a MUST to enable the button)? If so, the surrender button is enabled. More than 50% of that country players with the button toggled to "surrender" and we have a reset. No problem with people that have fun keeping fighting from closed/vulched bases, they will have even more fun fighting in a clean map.
About the aerial spawn point, with 100 players per country but one country with only 3 bases, when that country takes a fourth field its aerial spawn point will be disabled, so this wont be a permanent advantage for the loosing country. Or disabling the spawn point when numbers are almost equal (+-10%?) even having only 3 bases left.
-
The only thing I would not like about the "surrender" voting button would be that it potentially gives the "losing" country the ability to decide who to give the perk points to if the other two countries have nearly the same number of bases.
-
Additionally, what about guys like Laz? He's still having fun as long as the "fight is on"? Does his fun not count?
Guys like lazs have fun anywhere where they can find 2 fields close to eachothers.. Resets aren't affecting them.
I think the 5 field limit would be a good compromise, no fake airstarts but no sitting on field either, looking at tiffy's strafe the field.
When the 6th field gets taken, reset simply happens and nobody has to spend 30min - 2 hours vulched on a broken field.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
About the aerial spawn point, with 100 players per country but one country with only 3 bases, when that country takes a fourth field its aerial spawn point will be disabled, so this wont be a permanent advantage for the loosing country. Or disabling the spawn point when numbers are almost equal (+-10%?) even having only 3 bases left.
So if a country is down to 3 bases and they get the altitude advantage.. and decide from then on not to take another field back... then they keep the advantage? (Assuming the numbers stay close.)
-
Originally posted by Toad
So if a country is down to 3 bases and they get the altitude advantage.. and decide from then on not to take another field back... then they keep the advantage? (Assuming the numbers stay close.)
If they keep outnumbered but decide not to take any more fields, they are going to lose for sure. That aerial spawn point doesnt let u to spawn bombers, nor fighers with more than 75% internal fuel or DTs, you just have an opportunity to re-take the nearest base or to defend the nearest base. That aerial spawn box is also at low level, no more than 10k its maximum alt and no less than 3k its minimum alt. And one your spawn altitude is random. Basically this will ensure that you are not going to be vulched inmediatelly even having this spawn box capped by the enemy.
-
better that when a country is down to 3 bases it automatically "surrenders". Game over... reset.
lazs
-
ripley... I am not very good but I don't really just "dive into a furball with no intention of surviving". I will admit tho that during the times I fly (prime time) there enough numbers up that I can nearly allways find a good fight. Maybe you should check my stats so that you get a better idea of how I do against other fighters. GV's and ack kill me a whole lot of the time.
lazs
-
Lazs I just got that impression from your past text..
If you don't care about bases or being vulched, I assumed that you just want to furball regardless of the result.. Kill as many as can and go up again.
-
ripley... I do not care about bases being vulchjed or who (LOL) "wins" the war. If I get killed by another plane then I have made a mistake and need to do better. I am not adverse to augering or discoing if I am a long way from home and haven't been hit by anyone tho.
I do agree with you that we need to end the "war" when one country is down to a certain number of bases. I think 3 is pretty cool but with the new maps being so large it may have to be 5 or 6..
What toad is saying I think is that at some point.... a country will be on their last legs and at a "disadvantage" and that is as it should be otherwise it would just be a huge see-saw... fine for players like me but for those whos imagination is limited to a narrow set of goals such as "winning the war" as a measure of success.... It would soon become frustrating.
I don't mind my side losing the "war" so long as there is some gameplay all the way till the end.... and that includes having dar and fighter hangers and fuel at one field at least.
lazs
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
If they keep outnumbered but decide not to take any more fields, they are going to lose for sure.
:confused: I thought the whole idea was based on the fact that they were "going to lose for sure".
I thought this was just a way to "to ensure that outnumbered/gangbanged countries may keep fighting and having some fun all the time" prior to the inevitable reset. After all, your scenario is that they are down to 3 bases and outnumbered. Or just 3 bases and equal numbers.. or whatever.
So, this is a last ditch way to keep the reset from ever happening? If the defenders "fly smart" (whatever that is)?
So it's OK that the attackers have worked a few hours for the reset but they won't be able to accomplish it if we give the defenders enough advantages?
-
LOL Toad..I hadn't really looked at all this from a political point of view...but ya DO sound an AWful lot like a liberal TV journalist denying that all the OTHER journalists are, in fact, left-leaning-commie-lovin-West Wing watchin pinkos. However...loggin in night after night (6pm--11pm EST fer me) and seein Rook part of map lookin like Italy in 1943, is discouraging. Gettin crap ganged out yas is no fun, and from opposite perpesctive, it's no fun being one of 47 guys chasing 1 leaky 51 because there's no one else left to shoot at. What I think WOULD help, without radically changing game, is making people wait 24 hours to switch BACK (an AW thing) after country hopping. Also...ya cant switch countries without your whole squad hopping, lest ya withdraw from your squad. At any rate... it is REAL hard to deny that Bishops have overwhelming numbers more often than not...and the game is just no damn fun to play when things go that way.
-
Nah, just trying to fully understand these proposals. They seem simple at first glance but when you think about them you can see potential for abuse and/or potential for good old human nature to interfere.
As far as the "______ always being outnumbered", don't start it, OK? ;)
Well be back in the "Incoming Screenshots! Counter-Battery Screenshots... FIRE!" mode before you know it. Everyone here seems to be able to "prove" their position with screens. I've got some too... hidden away in a forest awaiting the "counterbattery" order. :)
-
OTOH Toad the point is that some people can just snap a screen anytime and show the result instead of storing the screens on those rare occasions it happens.. :)
I don't like Mandoble's idea of airstarts either, itīs kinda artificial and would make reset hard to achieve. I'd go for 5 last fields as the reset treshold.
-
Originally posted by Minotaur
Today, for awhile, there were almost more Bish on than Rooks and Knights combined. Somthing like 175 105 80.
I think I figured out the Rooks problem.....it seems that they arent always outnumbered....its just that they cant add correctly. ;)
175 is not greater than 105 + 80.....at least not according to my education.
-
What does that have to do with anything Sling?
You mean that if bish aren't having more players than others combined, all is fine and dandy? LOL. There's still those 100 extra players compared to other two countries - and yes even though many bish seem to think otherwise, bish are not the only country that fights 2 front war. It's the same for all countries.
Besides, you have to practise your reading, he said ALMOST.
-
Originally posted by akak
Coming from a mere commmoner, I will not dignify your comment with an answer. Good day sir!
(http://www.hispanicvista.com/assets/479th_shield.jpg)
Ack-Ack
479th Fg - Riddle's Raiders
Uber Knights
Heh heh....nice comeback. :)
By the way, your comment about folks switching for perks isnt entirely true. If a side is down to 10 bases, how do you make sure that the impending reset doesnt occur for at least 12 hours? Cause you have to be a member of the winning country for at least 12 hours to get the perkies.
-
Didnt you say back on the middle of page 2 that you were done with this thread? LOL
If you spent as much time recruiting rooks as you do whining about being outnumbered here, your country wouldnt have a problem. :)
-
Sling the people who switch must be mostly newbies who don't know this. Or they switch simply because they're tired of being ganged and vulched in the last moments of the reset which is as good a reason as perks.
This is part of the reasons why it could be a positive change to force reset with more fields intact.
And yes I WAS over with this thread untill it turned to a more civilised discussion. Now it's ok again.
I could say the same about you sling, if you'd spend as much time trying to figure out ways to improve the game as you do checking what I'm saying about things, you'd become a far better poster for this thread.
-
whichever method plus the surrender button.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
I could say the same about you sling, if you'd spend as much time trying to figure out ways to improve the game as you do checking what I'm saying about things, you'd become a far better poster for this thread.
I guess thats the difference between you and me Ripley.
I could give a flying diddly if its balanced. I have fun flying with my squad, shooting chutes, augering when we need a goon, not giving a toejam about score and what not. Its all perception....you either have fun or you work yourself into a frenzy and give yourself an ulcer over a game.
I switch sides when I feel like it. Sometimes those Nightmare guys persuade me to fly with them. I almost always come back to Bish though for the simple reason that, IMO, there are less "Napoleon Wannabes" over here constantly barking out orders and telling people what and where to fly and what to attack and what to defend.
Like I said before, do something about the Little Generals and you might get a few more folks who enjoy flying on your side.
-
Sling there are no little generals in Rooks because everyone knows rooks aren't listening to anyone.
Don't know where you got that idea..
If you don't give a flying diddly about the balance, try flying as the worst underdog for a tour. If you still don't care about the balance I'll believe you.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
whichever method plus the surrender button.
A surrender button is the worse suggestion I have heard on this thread yet. What would stop a bunch of rook/bish from defecting to have the 50% adv to push the button? The only way that would work {imo) is if every knight had to push it.
Besides.
Surrender hell. :mad:
-
Umm.. what benefit would one have on defecting just to press surrender button? lol.
-
Automated diplomacy.
If one county's population exceeds the population of the other 2 countries combined for say 20 minutes, then the 2 smaller countries automatically form an alliance against the larger country. This would have the following effects for the allied countries:
They could no longer shoot each other down (with some warning before killshooter toggles on).
They could no longer damage each other's bases or strategical targets.
They can sortie from each other's bases.
Their communications channels are combined.
If the population of the larger country falls below the population of the alliance for more than 20 minutes, then the alliance ends and its back to a 3 country war.
I don't care about this issue and I don't know how tough this would be to implement, but this would be a way to equalize the numbers between opposing sides.
-
That's actually not that bad of an idea Lance... but I think it already happens to some extent anyways.
Though... Looks like it would be a tough one to impliment without using an arena reset of some kind.
AKDejaVu