Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: mora on April 09, 2003, 09:23:51 AM
-
But enough is enough. It is a good map for 300+ players but it is really boring to play it for 2 weeks straight during euro times when theres sometimes only 100 people logged. HTC please consider resetting the arena.
-
Trinity from Matrix? She's hot!
Especially in that Latex, WhooHoo!!:D
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA
Trinity from Matrix? She's hot!
ROFLMAO - That's exactly what I thought when I read the title of this thread!!
-
isn't that a DoS tool too ... bet that's where the movie got the name...
-
Originally posted by mora
But enough is enough. It is a good map for 300+ players but it is really boring to play it for 2 weeks straight during euro times when theres sometimes only 100 people logged. HTC please consider resetting the arena.
Trinity is the best map for GV fights. I used to think it was AKDesert, but really, Trinity has a couple of advantages: (a) Tank Town; and (b) better topography.
I've pretty much got the northern acreage of A214 memorized.
Trinity wants you to stop bashing the map!
(http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0133093/1)
-
I never like trinity for more than one sortie a day... and even then, that's one HELL of a good sortie. I miss NDIsles :(
-
Don't take this wrong way, I am good in vehicles, they are amusing to use in certain situations but... This is first and foremost SUPPOSED to be a WW2 Combat FLIGHT Simulator. If I wanted to play tank warrior 24/7 I would have chosen to spend my $15 a month elsewhere. Choosing to advocate the 'Infiniity' map based solely on its conduciveness to GV battles is somewhat lame.
The simple fact is the prevalence of late war planes (ie: La7, Spit9, P51 D, 109G10 etc) to the almost total exclusion of all others is a symptom of the Trinity map. While this in and of itself isn't necessarily bad in the short term. Week after week after week of seeing the same 3 or 4 planes over and over and over gets...well...FRIGGIN' BORING AS HELL. Not to mention that due to the distance between the fields the average cruising alt for Dweeb #5678 is 25k+.
So, while this map is a dream for those who choose to play a flight sim to drive tanks around !?!?, it is boredom ad nauseum for those of us who actually wish to have exciting, perish the thought, Fighter Battles in a combat flight sim. The simple fact is, this map de-emphasizes Air Combat generally (as does Pizza), and what air combat there is is boring, overly time consuming to find and resolve, and by its very nature only taking advantage of a tiny fraction of the otherwise utilized planeset.
All that being said however, Trinity, for a few days is ok, for a week gets old, for 2/3rds of the camp is hell on wheels (literally). Everyone will admit we spend 2 to 3 weeks on Trinity, one week or more on pizza map a camp, and maybe 2 or 3 days on all the other maps combined. This just doesn't make the most of our geography selection, and contributes to the burn out syndrome experienced by many. The widening variety of maps is a good thing, and the larger maps will become better as the player base increases. The answer is term limits on maps. Having a set rotation schedule will allow people to budget their limited free time around gaming environments that suit their play styles. It is patently unfair that the % of players that dislike the GV portion of the game can be stuck paying their 15 bucks a month for 3 and a half weeks of GV biased maps like Trinity and Pizza. Just my 2 cents....
Zazen
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA
Trinity from Matrix? She's hot!
Nah come on there are ALOT better ;)
-
so... unless yu like tanks infinity sucks? we all agree then?
lazs
-
Yup, ive looged on 3 or 4 times today, each time staying on for only about 10 minutes :(
-
It seems that the battles always seem to concentrate around the same 3 or 4 airfields in the north, and are centralized around "pockets" of bases in the southern part of the map. I think that makes it a bit easier to find the action, since it breaks the map into smaller sections of attack.
Needs more ports and CV groups, though.
-
I tend to agree with zazen. too far to fly for a decent fighter engagement. I've had one really good 1:1 recently (c205 vs fbflawd's 190 a8 - nice work with that a8!), but mostly fly over a sector to get near the action. It is a flight sim, not a gv sim. The fronts are stagnant as no one can sustain an offensive long enough to get a reset, ultimately the lines return to the mountain range borders. :(
-
The distance between the fields has another negative ramification as well. I am sure others can relate. You take off from Field A, well it's a sector and a half from the target area. So you try to plan ahead, do I fly attack mission or fighter? How much fuel? What sort of ordnance load-out? etc.. The usual checklist.
Well, on a smaller map you can be fairly certain that you can up, get sufficient altitude, and engage, with the situation being either similiar to that which you saw in the tower prior to take-off or at least changed somewhat but in a predictable way. Well, with long flight times between fields this is not the case, on many occasions I have taken X fuel load, on Y type of mission with Z load-out only to find that by the time I get there the circumstances have totally changed. Now, much to my chagrin my plane,weapon, sortie type are totally inappropriate for the situation. A standard case of at the wrong place, at the wrong time, in the wrong plane. Logic would dictate that this sort of incongruence of flight and situation should occur occassionally, on Trinity and Pizza maps this is the rule not the exception. Because the fields are so far apart geographically it is usually not feasible to re-evaluate and re-aim your mission on the fly. Very annoying...
This is a subtle symptom of these huge maps, but sure as the sun rises in the morning makes flying aircraft far less of an enjoyable experience than it should be. The above described scenario particularly affects those who only have the discretionary free time to fly one, two, or a few sorties a day, in effect causing them to waste a hefty percentage of their available trigger time with pointlessly long flight times and frustration.
Zazen
-
Map rotation would be nice, but how would you schedule it? A new map every three days or so? If a country got reset would you keep the same map or accelarate the rotation?
I also would like to see "Tank Town" fall into the center of the earth to be replaced by an inland sea with a few more ports and large fields.
I like Trinity map but it does get boring....
-
Widewing,
Of course there are better. There is a better one around every corner everyday. That's why it's easy to get out of bed in the morning. I just like Chick's doing Gung Fu in Latex.
Anyway I'd like to see a map with two sides flying over a narrow channel loaded with CV's. Just a thought.
-
A schedule for rotation would obviously be up to HTC. But, subjectively, from this player's point of view. Any map, even my most favorite maps in the set, get old after a week. It seems reasonable to meif we can't get a reset in a week there should be a scripted reset/scroll to the next errain in the set. This would accomodate all players, flying at least once a week is almost the definition of a casual player, also most squads have weekly squadnights, after which point the map should be rotated. A week would give everyone a chance to play on it, and wouldn't give us a chance to get sick of a particular map to the point of dry heaving on sight at load-up.
Zazen