Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: hitech on December 10, 2006, 12:13:40 PM
-
Monday we will be implementing a new balancing system. It works with the existing ENY number. It will no longer limit what planes you can fly. But rather when it reaches a preset value, people entering the arena will not be able to fly in that arena for their current country.
You will get a message similar to you are 3rd in a queue of 3 .
Your choices will be
1. go to another arena.
2. change countries.
3. wait until more people come onto the other side, or some one from your country leaves.
People waiting will always be able to change countries regardless of their last country change time.
People waiting in queue will not be counted in the ENY values.
This new balancing system will be implemented in all main arenas.
The test capture lines will be taken down until we can layout and code some different options.
1. The current zone / strat setup does not lend it self very well to the current setup,We will be change the supply system to work on all your countries fields, hence hitting the strat targets will have a larger effect.
2. The war win criteria will be changed from having to capture almost all of 1 country , to having to capture around 30 - 40% of both countries fields.
3. Will also make some core fields uncapturable in each country.
HiTech
-
I like it...
Although i forsee much whining. Some people have much loyalty to their cartoon chess pieces.
-
As for the win the war criteria, how about having to capture the opposing country's capital instead?
-
Awesome!
Sounds like some great changes there HT!
I am looking forward to how this all pan's out.
(pulls up lawn chair, pop's open a beer. Somebody get some chips)
-
Should be fun:cool:
-
will the caps be removed to allow more people in the same arena??
Off peak squads will be crippled when there arent enough people to fill both orange and blue.
-
Sounds like the best option to solve the numbers problem. In general the new capture system has been nice, as a GV/JABO its been easier to find a fight than under the earlier multi-arena system. Keep it up!
:)
-
lol, the whines will be unprecidented with this one, but i think it's another great move HTC, thanks :)
-
"Sit back and relax boys and girl this is going to be a fun ride"
Personally i love the new idea that will be implamated moday i see nothin wrong with it except for those Squads and Players that are dead loyal to a Chess peice "Which is jsut silly" but hey they need a wake up call anyway.
Man im going to love watching this thread grow :t :t and i know stangs down there in florida starting up the laptop ready to woop some whinners around:aok
BTW thanks HTC for trying to make the game bette!:aok
-
yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa:aok
-
Originally posted by hitech
Your choices will be
1. go to another arena.
2. change countries.
3. wait until more people come onto the other side, or some one from your country leaves.
I´m not a big friend of a solution to prevent flying at all for some. I personnaly still prefer the "P40 for all" instead of "La 7 for some" approach,coupled maybe with just locking the highest numbered country for side switching. But let´s see how it works
1. The current zone / strat setup does not lend it self very well to the current setup,We will be change the supply system to work on all your countries fields, hence hitting the strat targets will have a larger effect.
Sounds very good to me. If it works like intended, the buffers finally have some other targets than just shutting down a field for 15mins. I´m very eager to see more deep penetration raids by more that single buffs.
2. The war win criteria will be changed from having to capture almost all of 1 country , to having to capture around 30 - 40% of both countries fields.
Interesting. Could stop the gangbanging on one single country
3. Will also make some core fields uncapturable in each country.
Combined with (2.) could give a country the chance of fighting back when it´s opponents finally clash to get the bases needed for the reset. :)
HiTech
Conclusion: I don´t like the ENY change (yet) but the other changes sound promising to me...
:aok
(Sorry guys, no :cry this time from me)
-
now this sounds interesting ...
I think just the fact that you now have to capture in bolth countrys should be enough to stop the 2 country war thats been going on alot .
-
Monday we will be implementing a new balancing system. It works with the existing ENY number. It will no longer limit what planes you can fly. But rather when it reaches a preset value, people entering the arena will not be able to fly in that arena for their current country.
You will get a message similar to you are 3rd in a queue of 3 .
Your choices will be
1. go to another arena.
2. change countries.
3. wait until more people come onto the other side, or some one from your country leaves.
People waiting will always be able to change countries regardless of their last country change time.
People waiting in queue will not be counted in the ENY values.
This new balancing system will be implemented in all main arenas.
I like this one. However I'm a little worried about the whines revolving around mega-squads. Will they just suck it up? Or will they start throwing a fit on how they can't play with the rest of their mob?
The test capture lines will be taken down until we can layout and code some different options.
1. The current zone / strat setup does not lend it self very well to the current setup,We will be change the supply system to work on all your countries fields, hence hitting the strat targets will have a larger effect.
2. The war win criteria will be changed from having to capture almost all of 1 country , to having to capture around 30 - 40% of both countries fields.
3. Will also make some core fields uncapturable in each country.
Change from "bash one guy to smithereens" to "world conquest", eh? Now this should be really interesting. Looking forward to it :D
-
Deleted
-
Originally posted by Roscoroo
now this sounds interesting ...
I think just the fact that you now have to capture in bolth countrys should be enough to stop the 2 country war thats been going on alot .
A yes, war bad thing, peace brothers :) :) :)
-
Deleted
-
Deleted
-
Deleted
-
so now we have to be quiet unless we agree with you?
-
Ladies, Gentlemen, Children , HTC & Co may I be the first to say .....wtf :cry
Now thats done may I also be first to say ..you want my 15 bucks for sitting in the tower. :O
May I also say i'll see how it goes. :D
Won't even speculate as to what your doing with strat an the like. Be interesting to have a new system. There has to be a better use of the Heavy Bombers than hanger banging :aok
Edited... Bollocks... wasn't first :furious
-
Originally posted by Laurie
so now we have to be quiet unless we agree with you?
no, you have to be quiet with your criticism until you have given it a chance, or at least read the changes properly.
-
There seems to be a huge contradiction between the 2 addressed issues.
1) balancing all 3 countries to about equal numbers (?)
2) requiring one country to conquer both of the other countries to win a war.
The Classic Ratio for attack is 3:1 and what any sane commander would wish for is 6:1. But now (or in near future) a country is expected to conquer and win with 1:2 odds?????
I think that either of these approaches could be good ALONE, but I have hard time seeing how they would work together. I actually give my ful support to concept 2. I think it alone could work as a balancing feature, since a large country would be fighting against 2 smaller countries... not like nowadays, when the 2 largest countries kill the smallest country.
The concept 1 also works against squadrons and small groups of friends, forcing them to split and/or communicate constantly where (in which arena and country) they could fly together.
PLEASE, go for concept 2... and reconsider forcing people to split their squadrons.
-
Just another joke to the gaggle.....whatever....this cant get any worse for squads...but I said that when the arenas split.
-
Go easy on hulse.
He is allowed to vent his frustrations just as much as you guys agree with the changes. Thats the point of a discussion.
Some of his points are valid many players arent great dogfighters and like to play the war game.
If it gets to a point where i'm forced to fly for bish and being unable to fly with my friends as an arena is full I would be pissed too.
Need the LW cap gone for these new changes or i dont see how its going to work.
-
Originally posted by stuntman4real
Deleted/B]
hey, does anyone remember that site with the whine descriptions, the one where someone thinks that $15 buys them the right to dictate what the company does with the game?
too funny, this guy couldn't be more like that if he tried :rofl
-
I'm sad to see these changes come. Aces High was the best thing since sliced bread, while it lasted. :(
-
Originally posted by Bruv119
He is allowed to vent his frustrations just as much as you guys agree with the changes. Thats the point of a discussion.
yes, totally true. unfortunately, they all whine about it instead of posting their views on the situation. if they weren't so rude, they might actually be listened to...
-
This sounds like it should be fun ... and by "it" I mean the BBS and ch 200 :)
-
Having just come in from MA Blue then these changes are far from welcome. Its the usual threats of leaving the game and taking whole squads with them.
Personally I dont care that much because im not now, nor will i be in a squad. I can understand those scared of ending up in a different country than their squadmates tho.
Testing this doesnt sound so bad to me because what cheese piece i play for does not matter, but please dont implement the orange arena thing. Ive tried it and its nothing for me at all.
my 0.02$
:)
-
I like the fact that strat will become a bigger role now. Maybe there will be some convoy destroying missions out of that?
I do foresee rather long wars now.
Good thing you are able to change countries nomatter how long it has been since you last switched (if coming into an arena). Should make it a bit easier to stay with the squad.
Originally posted by Ball
As for the win the war criteria, how about having to capture the opposing country's capital instead?
I like this idea, but instead of having people just capture the HQ from the get go, say you must capture certain fields first. So you have what seems to be a supply line following your movements. If a country is advancing straight to the HQ, then the opposing country can cut off their supply line and have them surrounded. Then the first country has a set amount of time to regain their supply line or they lose the fields which have been cut off.
-
The new war winning system is good. ;)
strat role is good ;)
queing is not/ side switch is not
infact it really sucks in my opinion.
it's gonna cause troube for squads :mad
:aok that better ?
:noid
btw ive seen you guys get 'rude' too :eek:
-
how are squads supposed to fly together with this new set up????
-
if they weren't so rude, they might actually be listened to... [/B]
a yes, and if they are not listened, who loose ?
-
Heres an interesting idea.
Front line fields make them capturable like the old way but when a country gets reduced down to fields near its HQ only then must the new system of following a certain path of capture kicks in....
I dont see why you should restrict a new system why not mix it with the old?
Some of the bigger island maps that I miss would suit this.
Bruv
~S~
-
Originally posted by Laurie
The new war winning system is good. ;)
strat role is good ;)
queing is not/ side switch is not
infact it really sucks in my opinion.
it's gonna cause troube for squads :mad
:aok that better ?
:noid
btw ive seen you guys get 'rude' too :eek:
yeah, it is better ;)
i agree that some squads are going to get upset over this, but try to remember it's a game, and you shouldn't take it so seriously. it's great fun to end up in a good fight with a friend in the MA, and even better if it's a squaddie :) be less 'loyal' to your 'country', relax a little, and have a good time.
the point of AH isn't the war but the fight, be it fighters bombers or GV's. imagine a great dogfight with a good friend, bombing a base defended by some good mates, or duking it out in tanks together.
that light hearted fighting is what it's about, not some virtual field numbers :) having fun with friends, with or against, is always a blast. try to keep an open mind and relax a little, you might just enjoy yourself ;)
and sorry if i've been rude in the past :)
-
Originally posted by JimBeam
how are squads supposed to fly together with this new set up????
how about instead of madly trying to get to your squad, they come to you?
if the arena is getting locked up because of inbalance, then why don't they all switch, open up the arena for free play again, and you still get to fly together, everybody wins :)
-
biggles what about guys that have more fun playing this "GAME" doing squad ops than flying around aimlessly
-
Originally posted by Hades55
a yes, and if they are not listened, who loose ?
it's easier to debate a topic if people are understanding and sensible than if it's an all out word war, where nothing gets done. if you don't like it, don't complain and threathen HTC with leaving etc, but suggest another way of doing it ;)
-
for all the possible "squad whinning" its interesting how many have left there previous squads as they've seen them become "gangbangers". The really good squads have as much fun killing each other as anyone else....The squad I'm with tends to move away from the arena where we have numbers....not due to any eny (we tend to fly high eny birds alot) but for better game play. Sometimes we "win....other times we "lose" but by and large we always have fun.
Personally I think this is a big step in the right direction...
-
Originally posted by JimBeam
biggles what about guys that have more fun playing this "GAME" doing squad ops than flying around aimlessly
well, the important thing to remember is that this is a game, and that you shouldn't take it so seriously :) if you can't get to bish, and knights are heavily outnumbered, go to knights, and ask your guys to come with you.
that way you keep the arena balanced, and fun for everyone, and you still get to fly with your mates. don't feel you need to be loyal to your country, it's only a virtual chess piece. who knows, you might even make a few new friends :)
-
I dont like it.
I have'nt liked the recent changes for various reasons. Now we are going to have to sit in the tower and wait, or switch countries, for the sake of balancing.
Do you really think this is going to work?
Why is it, everytime someone disagrees with something, they are labeld a whiner? I'm sure someone will enlighten me with some disparaging remark.
Tell me the benefit of the orange arena, please. I have'nt seen it.
Why bother with early and mid war. They are barely populated.
People will determine the outcome by either continuing to pay, or, they will simply cancel their accounts. Which will it be? Time will tell.
Hope this does'nt get deleted...
ZZ3
479th Raiders
-
Oh Lordy, and if this doesn't work, I can see AI taking over control of peoples planes and forcing the nose toward the nearest con. Actually thats not a bad idea...
-
this doesnt punish the leavers...... sigh...
-
Originally posted by BlauK
There seems to be a huge contradiction between the 2 addressed issues.
I think that either of these approaches could be good ALONE, but I have hard time seeing how they would work together.
After some thought I figured a way (of gameplay) how these 2 new changes could work together, especially on large maps.
It can easily evolve into a milking contest. Which country can be most efficient and quickest to capture enough of the other 2 countries empty bases? Usually there are much fewer willing defenders (against greater odds) than attackers with good numbers.
So it might actually work... if the winning country is not required to defend its own original area while conquering the enemies in balanced countries. Or if it has better defenders at some areas and efficient attackers at other areas.... meening overall better players than the other two countries (dunno how likely that would be).
-
I’m now 110% convinced that HiTech is a woman, change, change, change,
we're men and we don’t like change!
This game is now no longer the same game that I loved playing 2 years ago, I've lost the buzz lads :(
-
Thxs ht, both idea's about balancing and capturing that many stated will work imo.
I'm not sure how this will effect mega-squads negatively. It would seem to me that the mega-squads would grow in size. With new friends to talk and fly with how can that be a negative? I believe 200 and bbs will become more civil and more focus on trouble shooting the real issues we have with the game. Something about winging and defending/attacking a base that brings you closer. The community will grow with ht's balancing system and the maps will return with the capturing system woot.
-
Originally posted by hitech
1. The current zone / strat setup does not lend it self very well to the current setup,We will be change the supply system to work on all your countries fields, hence hitting the strat targets will have a larger effect.
2. The war win criteria will be changed from having to capture almost all of 1 country , to having to capture around 30 - 40% of both countries fields.
3. Will also make some core fields uncapturable in each country.
HiTech
1. good stuff.
2. nice, means 2 sides wont gang one... because you need so much of BOTH countries
3. again, good stuff.... its annoying when your HQ zone is NOT yours...
-
So are squadrons going to be disbanded next? That's where this is going. Some people actually fly to fly with their friends. Or is the master plan to force Squadrons to goto CT?:noid
-
i'm bored, when does CT open?
-
We all get to go to the Island!
I know some of you will get it...
ZZ3
479th Raiders
-
I guess my arena is still sick and needs more meds.:huh
-
Originally posted by ZZ3
We all get to go to the Island!
can i go to the island where she is: -
(http://www.jawbonepodcast.com/blogpics/kate.jpg)
-
Originally posted by JimBeam
how are squads supposed to fly together with this new set up????
Oh man ......you don't wanna go there but I'll give you a hint .....listen to AC/DC dirty deeds done dirt cheap
Your one of Cooley's crew right . In a sim far far we were enemies then also. I was red to his green then he was purple to my gold. It wasn't unheard of to "steel" a capture from the purples attack on green with a Gold Ju. I'll shut up at this point..... just talk to Cooley he'll tell you all about the gamey chit.
It'll take a nintendo kid less than 2 hours to figure it and believe me IT SUCKS:furious
-
would prefer a quieter island without some physco's running around and weird watermelon going on.
Guess im on one of those already
:noid
-
Yo Hitech my man, are you going to take off the cap when these changes are implemented ?
-
Whaddaarya islandguys talkinnabout??? I am completely Lost? ;)
-
Originally posted by ZZ3
I dont like it.
I have'nt liked the recent changes for various reasons. Now we are going to have to sit in the tower and wait, or switch countries, for the sake of balancing.
Do you really think this is going to work?
Why is it, everytime someone disagrees with something, they are labeld a whiner? I'm sure someone will enlighten me with some disparaging remark.
Tell me the benefit of the orange arena, please. I have'nt seen it.
Why bother with early and mid war. They are barely populated.
People will determine the outcome by either continuing to pay, or, they will simply cancel their accounts. Which will it be? Time will tell.
Hope this does'nt get deleted...
ZZ3
479th Raiders
what's so bad about changing country though? i know it's nice to fly with squaddies, but remember that this system will only kick in once one side starts getting big numbers. in that case, why don't you pm your squaddies and ask them to move with you? :)
i know you don't want to have to do stuff just to fly with friends, but the arenas do need to be balanced, otherwise it gets unfair for the 2 countries getting ganged. so it's for the greater good really, and that's what HT is aiming for, balanced fun gameplay.
just give it a go first off. remember that this won't be on all the time, only when your side has a huge number advantage ;)
-
Originally posted by ZZ3
We all get to go to the Island!
I know some of you will get it...
ZZ3
479th Raiders
If your on about the Island I think your on about.. bamboo hut , palm trees crashed P38......Well I actually escapede from there once. Rest of the time I gave up an did Alt F4
-
Biggles is God :aok
-
Looking forward to seeing how this works Hitech. It's obvious you guys put alot of thought into it, achieving a more balanced game.:aok
-
Some of us actually did this swapping our favoured country to go help knits because most of the time they are badly outnumbered.
It will just force some more stubborn folk to balance the teams. Which can only be a good thing. (Maybe these changes would never have happened in the first place if people would have sorted the numbers out themselves)
Seems the only way to curb out hordes in the new restricted 120 player arenas.
-
Major Biggles may I ask you 2 questions ? Are you in a squad and if so how many in it ?
-
Originally posted by Kazaa
Biggles is God :aok
that's the second bloody time you've revealed my true identity!!! :D
good to see you back, we need to do some TA duels sometime mate :)
-
Lynx biggles aka pooface is part of the 71st squad i believe. The ones that dont care for bases just good fights etc etc .....
-
Originally posted by Major Biggles
it's easier to debate a topic if people are understanding and sensible than if it's an all out word war, where nothing gets done. if you don't like it, don't complain and threathen HTC with leaving etc, but suggest another way of doing it ;)
i always suggest, as you suggest, but no one listens.....
some whiners (known) have separate AH in furballers and toolsheders .
They cant catch the fact that in a well designed war everyone has a place
and everyone from gvs to bombers can be a member of the food chain where in the top lies the great vulchers. (furballers).
Gvs rush, other gvs and jabos goes for them,fighters go for jabos, other fighters
go to protect jabos, bombers go to kill fighter factories (spit, lala especialy), and the spit me109s ponys lightings and jugs at last go high very high to protect their lovely factory. Aces High.
from low ( Eastern Frond ) until High (European theater) we have many choises for every kind of war you like.
(now, we have only low alt war, Eastern Front).
As is now, bombers have no interesting to go high.
But imagine what will hapen if they go to kill the supposed spit factory.:)
(deep inside enmy territory hidden in the big cities, who now are dead bodies
doing nothing, under hvy ack and nmy fighters )
Dweebs High :) and every one will have the war he like, on the same place of
the map,just in different alts. WAr at his Best (simulated).
( we need also mobile artillery (you kill it with jabos or loose your fields) and also the others kill your jabos) (lots of differend targets)
interests create wars in reality, interests drive the great wars here.
Without interests, every one does his own and they all stay separate from each other and whining that my war is better than yours.
-
Originally posted by LYNX
Major Biggles may I ask you 2 questions ? Are you in a squad and if so how many in it ?
71 squadron ;)
about 50 members total but we're from all over the place, and not all active, so a good turnout is 15 online at the same time. we don't do squadnights, so we don't have big numbers each night or so, but hey, plenty of guys, and we move to help each other out and fly together, and we have a good time while doing it :)
-
Originally posted by Bruv119
Lynx biggles aka pooface is part of the 71st squad i believe. The ones that dont care for bases just good fights etc etc .....
we'll do a good base raid, or fun buff mission every now and then for some fun, but mainly, we're fighter guys yes :)
-
If you don't like changes to AH then perhaps a boxed sim is a better choice. That said, I do think this could adversly affect squads. Squads will now have to change their outdated loyalties to a country.
Squad action/missions is what separates AH from most other sims. Perhaps a AH could throw a bone to the squads by allowing them to reserve a number of slots in an arena.
For instance 12 squad members show up for their squad night. We meet in the lobby, sign up as a squad (kinda like a mission), then request 12 slots for whichever country AH needs to play balance. There could be a limit to the number reserved to avoid a major unbalance and only registered squads would be allowed to reserve slots.
This would help keep the arenas balanced and promote a players allegience to his squad rather than a country. As posted above, most squads enjoy a good fight and don't mind working for the underdog in the arena. This would promote helping the underdog and I could see squads gaining much more allure to new players since they become more important.
Just an idea.
-
Originally posted by Major Biggles
what's so bad about changing country though? i know it's nice to fly with squaddies, but remember that this system will only kick in once one side starts getting big numbers. in that case, why don't you pm your squaddies and ask them to move with you? :)
i know you don't want to have to do stuff just to fly with friends, but the arenas do need to be balanced, otherwise it gets unfair for the 2 countries getting ganged. so it's for the greater good really, and that's what HT is aiming for, balanced fun gameplay.
just give it a go first off. remember that this won't be on all the time, only when your side has a huge number advantage ;)
Sir I respect your point. I simply dont see the need to make the game play artificially balanced.
Imbalance is a part of warfare. Imbalance in this game has effected all countries at some point.
I am simply against the idea of being forced into a situation, of that I mean switching sides, or being forced to wait because I dont want to switch countries. It does'nt make me right, wrong, or unwilling to switch. It is simply a choice which I want to make for my self. If I see fit to do it.
Whats wrong with that?
Thank you,
ZZ3
479th Raiders
-
Bless you HiTech!
I have to admit, the last few weeks have been frustrating b/c the core issue seems to have been #'s and arena switching for the best odds.
Looking forward to this :)
-
Rivalry is a part of Human Nature, This Harmonous Community thing HTC is talking about will never occur,Only when all of us old members that remember the days of the MA leave and new people arrive. Peolpe like to dislike other people for what ever reason, It fires the coal in the belly of our souls. I have flown on all 3 countrys, made friends , made enemies. The only thing that has stayed stable is my squad, Now the HTC crew wants to take that from us split us up, this will not be recieved favorably. I don't want nor will I enjoy fighting against my squad mates. There will be no purpose to the arenas, Up fly 15 miles get shot down repeat, People will only want to be on the side that is winning, That has been proved time and time again in the most recent of HTC updates. I do consider the fact that I might be wrong and that HTC has a crystall ball that tells them the furture of their ideas. Only time will tell, But on thing I'm sure of is that being in a squad is going to be useless, unless you wait for God knows how many minutes or hours to fly with your buddys. Peolpe enjoy belonging to something that will never change.
-
interesting point zz3.
I'm sure the Brit/american pilots in 1944 said "oh chit" we better swap sides this is just darned unfair for poor old jerry.
I like seeing 80 bish 50 knits 50 rooks it means some Bish are gonna get killed :)
striving for an AH utopia where alls fair in love and war is impossible???
-
I suppose even the 1st concept of country caps may work ok, but it would depend a lot on this "preset value" where the prohibiting system kicks in.
Before the value is known, all this is pure speculation.
-
Originally posted by edge12674
If you don't like changes to AH then perhaps a boxed sim is a better choice. That said, I do think this could adversly affect squads. Squads will now have to change their outdated loyalties to a country.
Thats the take it or leave it metality that I so despise in this community.
Heaven forbid you disagree with something.
ZZ3
479th Raiders
-
To fix the problem of squads not being able to fly together. Could it possible for HT to add a permission for the squad leaders to switch the whole squad to a different country???? That way when members log on they would automaticly be switched to the country their squad is flying with.
Or another possible fix would be to make the lone wolfs that don't fly with a squadron switch sides first.
-
Originally posted by edge12674
Squads will now have to change their outdated loyalties to a country.
I dont think it is so much about loyalty to a chess piece as it is about knowing where one's mates can be found when logging to the game. There are even some small squads wishing to fly together (e.g. some 10-20 players online from the 4 or 5 different Finnish squadrons) and they cannot use the .sr command to find each other.
This may now mean that when one logs in, he first needs to check out the different servers to find his mates and then (if he cannot enter) recheck the arenas and countries and start negotiating on some 2## channel which arena and country could host himself and the mates.. then beg them to abort playing and follow with him (the newcomer) to some other place.
Sounds a lot like FB/IL-2 at Hyperlobby.. waiting and waiting to get organized fightis started.
One of the best things in AH has always been fairly quickly delivered action with friends with very little meaningless waiting.
-
Sounds fine to me .
Please leave the test up for one week at least , cause I am old and need my sleep during the week :furious
hehe
Really this balance thing is way out of hand IMO , do you all think that defending against 12v1 bish is fun ? ;)
alot diffenent in LWO when I left , had to beg some bish to defend on the north part of their map . A big to those that did :aok
-
Bah,
Quit experimenting! Drop EW/MW/LW Orange and go back to the old MA.
-
Willing to try this hitech and I will leave it at that.
-
I'm wondering if just the "Must capture bases in the 2 other countrys " would be enough to settle down the " one country super hoard /or 2 countrys ganging the smaller country problem ".
as for the 20-40 percent overage in player numbers over the lowest country isnt that bad .. its when the highest country is upwards of 70-100 percent over when it gets bad in the arena .
-
agreed, i think the trick will be getting a fair figure for the ENY to kick n. perhaps once the numbers reach 120 online, it is activated, and only once the big country has a very large advantage.
i'm sure HT's already got it covered though :)
-
When the ~SOB~ (Sons of Bishes) left Bishops to Rooks three (3) years ago the first Bish guy I felt bad about shooting down was Tsunsan. A real nice fellow from japan, not a squadie a bish. I know it's a game but the guilts was bad. Man ! that was 3 threes ago and I still remember it....I'm a sad avacado eh?
Well, with the arena splits I felt I only had one option and that was to disband as of the end of last TOD. Even today I was asked in a private PM "what happened to the ~SOB~. I said I didn't have the heart to tell them what arena or what side to fly on or forsake a couple guys because the cap was on.
I'v just sent some e-mails pre-empting appols if we end up as foes.
Dudes ! Some of these guys came with me from that other sim ffs :furious
I suspect some other squads are headed the same way now:(
-
:aok
Sounds good all round. I just wonder if the ENY thing forcing you to other countries might be awkward if ya disco from a sqaud sortie or something. Anyways to tell if you disco, and let you back as you were prior to a disco?
-
Funny how all of the whiners so far fail to realize one thing. HTC gave them the chance to solve this, but they whined about "loyalty to a chess piece". "Those who rang up up their rank, boosted their ego's/confidence while steamrolling the opposition."
When numbers were 120 Rooks, 65 Bish and 50 Knights, you chose to steamroll, and vice versa to other countries. Now things have turned for the better.
Noone's squad will "be split up", switch countries and it won't. Chances within an hour or two your "precious chess piece will be available".
Thank you HTC!:aok
-
Well, this sounds like it's going to be interesting. :)
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Well, this sounds like it's going to be interesting. :)
I nominate thee for "The Understatement of the Year Award"! :D
-
Depends on your squad format really lynx.
Been a bit down recently with player numbers but last month wasnt bad.
Us hardy Brits need to stick together in these troubling times......
Bruv
~S~
-
we sure do
(plays god save the queen):rofl
-
Originally posted by Bruv119
Depends on your squad format really lynx.
Been a bit down recently with player numbers but last month wasnt bad.
Us hardy Brits need to stick together in these troubling times......
Bruv
~S~
lol thanks for the invite but could you imagine "off peak" trying to get all your squad in. Tell ya what I'll volunteer for the tower wait, shouting bruv119 clr for take off... kazaa clr for take off an so on. Off peaks gonna be a pisser mate.
-
What ever happened to the "Customer is Always Right"I guess that kind of thing went out many years ago an now your at the Company mercy...oh well life goes on...however I know how to adapt to change went through many of them in my 14 year Navy Career...seem no different here.
-
yea well once you've cleared me and kazaa off thats been about it recently apart from fury, prhim.
Our squad policy is quality and not quantity so we shouldnt suffer that much...
My grand designs for taking over the virtual skies with an elite band of Brit brothers never really materialised lol
Depends on the where the ENY limiter is going to kick in. Hopefully it will be used in moderation :)
-
What I can't figure out is how people can be griping and we haven't even tried it yet.
Might want to at least see how it plays out first.
As far as the squad thing goes, It hasn't been an issue for the Headhunters. We just go low side everytime. Everyone can get in then
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Funny how all of the whiners so far fail to realize one thing. HTC gave them the chance to solve this, but they whined about "loyalty to a chess piece". "Those who rang up up their rank, boosted their ego's/confidence while steamrolling the opposition."
When numbers were 120 Rooks, 65 Bish and 50 Knights, you chose to steamroll, and vice versa to other countries. Now things have turned for the better.
Noone's squad will "be split up", switch countries and it won't. Chances within an hour or two your "precious chess piece will be available".
Thank you HTC!:aok
Go with the herd, or be a whiner, you decide.
Need I say more...
ZZ3
479th Raiders
-
Originally posted by Bruv119
Us hardy Brits need to stick together in these troubling times......
I guess i am playing the part of Lord Haw Haw in here then?
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
What I can't figure out is how people can be griping and we haven't even tried it yet.
Might want to at least see how it plays out first.
Are you brand new out of the box? This is AcesHigh 2. Everybody flips out before we test something. lol
-
OMG!!! It's the Y2K Bug.....7 years late!!! EVERYBODY PANIC!!!!:eek: :huh
-
MUAHAHHAHA I cant wait!!!!!!
Wait till the squads are torn to peices and griping will be paramount!!!!
HTC needs to change the website though... making your own squad now will be pointless.. it needs to read... fly in a continiously changing arena beta test for only 15 dollars a month!
Fly with your friends for and hour till the horde logs on then be forced to fly with the ppl you just where fighting there by not getting cooperation ever again!
Join in huge bomber raids with noobies that have no concept of how to bomb!!!
Be forced to fly in arenas that you dont want too in order to be with friends!!!!
ACT NOW AND YOUR POST WILL BE DELETED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
This has possibilities (Of course I initially liked all the other ides too:( ) I dont think it will mess with squads too much....MEGAsquads.....probab ly
-
Originally posted by mwk522
What ever happened to the "Customer is Always Right"I guess that kind of thing went out many years ago an now your at the Company mercy...oh well life goes on...however I know how to adapt to change went through many of them in my 14 year Navy Career...seem no different here.
There's another saying.
What's the best way to piss your customer off??...............
Give him exactly what he wants. :)
Got to have a little faith they know what they are doing and in the end the results will be beneficial for all parties involved. Voicing concerns, offering opinions as adults and using the proper channels to express them are all good things. No one is saying we all have to agree. But from some of the stuff I've seen people pull, never rule out the fact that sometimes "firing" a customer is a good thing.
If for one have a belief that HTC is pointing this game down a new and better path and am willing to ride out and speed bumps as they work towards the destination.
-
well i guess the new arenas werent such a great idea since now the game has to be continuously "tweaked" in order to be "fair"...maybe the old slums that were enjoyed werent so bad...
that being said...i dont see what this accomplishes unless hitech et al really just dont want anyone to fly together at all....
lets use a regular night where most squads probably have 7-15 guys finding each other to enjoy some laughs and get some kills....what does switching countries accomplish? if 5 guys try to fly together and have to switch from "A" to "B" and then 5 more guys show up and "B" is now ahead in numbers....can switching to "C" support 10 guys moving there together or will only 8 get in??????
maybe hitech could post the numbers that will dictate imbalance? that might help me understand how it will play out....maybe on the arena page it could somehow let one know how many "under the cap" a country is so one could know where to tell your friends to meet you.
i have played as long as i have because of comradery...its a cartoon game otherwise...i hope we wont continue to see changes made that encourage arcade or "pick up basketball" as the encouraged way to play. the recent changes removed the "drama" that the game once held for me...it will be sad if the longer term friendships will be removed as well.
like other vets here i have found my playing time has decreased dramatically...even KOTH last night was about 2/3 strength from where it used to be...i continue to find myself wondering why i just dont quit...stubborness is part im sure....the squad is the other.
-
I dont like it, it breaks the squads up even more then what they are now
-
been trying for two days to get into LWB, it's always capped, it must need fixn. :lol
i can still watch football, my cable co hasn't said, " too many people on that channel, go watch a movie."
-
Originally posted by edge12674
If you don't like changes to AH then perhaps a boxed sim is a better choice. That said, I do think this could adversly affect squads. Squads will now have to change their outdated loyalties to a country.
Squad action/missions is what separates AH from most other sims. Perhaps a AH could throw a bone to the squads by allowing them to reserve a number of slots in an arena.
For instance 12 squad members show up for their squad night. We meet in the lobby, sign up as a squad (kinda like a mission), then request 12 slots for whichever country AH needs to play balance. There could be a limit to the number reserved to avoid a major unbalance and only registered squads would be allowed to reserve slots.
This would help keep the arenas balanced and promote a players allegience to his squad rather than a country. As posted above, most squads enjoy a good fight and don't mind working for the underdog in the arena. This would promote helping the underdog and I could see squads gaining much more allure to new players since they become more important.
Just an idea.
This makes it more and more like a box sim... numbers were this games biggest asset
-
Originally posted by skycaptn
MUAHAHHAHA I cant wait!!!!!!
Wait till the squads are torn to peices and griping will be paramount!!!!
HTC needs to change the website though... making your own squad now will be pointless.. it needs to read... fly in a continiously changing arena beta test for only 15 dollars a month!
Fly with your friends for and hour till the horde logs on then be forced to fly with the ppl you just where fighting there by not getting cooperation ever again!
Join in huge bomber raids with noobies that have no concept of how to bomb!!!
Be forced to fly in arenas that you dont want too in order to be with friends!!!!
ACT NOW AND YOUR POST WILL BE DELETED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
great post!
-
Originally posted by skycaptn
MUAHAHHAHA I cant wait!!!!!!
Wait till the squads are torn to peices and griping will be paramount!!!!
HTC needs to change the website though... making your own squad now will be pointless.. it needs to read... fly in a continiously changing arena beta test for only 15 dollars a month!
Fly with your friends for and hour till the horde logs on then be forced to fly with the ppl you just where fighting there by not getting cooperation ever again!
Join in huge bomber raids with noobies that have no concept of how to bomb!!!
Be forced to fly in arenas that you dont want too in order to be with friends!!!!
ACT NOW AND YOUR POST WILL BE DELETED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ROFLMAO!! That post is funny:lol and true :(
:noid
-
i don't think this number balance is a new issue HT has been looking at. it existed in the first MA, which was the point of eny. it's just not a new issue, but one that, imho was never fully corrected.
i think as the game progressed, like every other online game out there, someone felt the need to balance teams. i don't think you can log onto games like bf2, counter strike, etc etc and play horde warrior. if you know of any combat games that allow for one team to have huge number advantages i would be curious as to which one?
as far as breaking squads up, you still have the option to change sides and even things up. if you choose not to do so, you can only blame yourself. i would suspect that between 2 arenas you might find a place for your squad.
-
Originally posted by Mr No Name
This makes it more and more like a box sim... numbers were this games biggest asset
lol. well guess you can't argue with that. which ever team has the most players can steam roll everything is sight. maybe we should have all just joined one country. we could pretend that we were all converted because of conquest.
-
Originally posted by FALCONWING
that being said...i dont see what this accomplishes unless hitech et al really just dont want anyone to fly together at all....
I honestly do not understand where this keeps coming from (just quoting you as last in a line of many). Either you all are under a large misconception or I have lost my own marbles (which is always a possiblity at any given moment).
ENY already allows a certain amount of imbalance. So 2 squaddies trying to get on at the same time will not be forced to two different countries. I see nothing that will automatically split a squad or keep members out of an arena where his squaddies already are.
The same restrictions hit all arenas, so we will not have the large imbalances already in place when you log on. In the rare occasion when a large squad logs off all at once from one country, we may have a problem, but by and large it shouldn't be an issue because it will not be allowed to start in the first place.
If you end up waiting in a queue, so what? It won't be long before someone on another country hits the same problem in another arena and comes bouncing along looking to get in somewhere, or another player decides not to wait and just switch.
The only way I can see this really being a problem is if we have 30 Bish waiting in the queue to get into Blue while 30 Rooks wait to get into Orange and 30 Knights waiting to get into MW. And if something like that does happen, all it should take is for a single squad recognize it and switch to another arena.
And why not switch to the other arena? You know (now) that you will not be entering a situation where your side is outnumbered 20 to 1.
Compared to other balancing propositions that have been bandied about on the BBs, this one seems fairly "tame", and still allows the player to choose his course of action.
I hope I am not being overly optimistic, but I think this has a good potential for a "soft landing."
<>
-
Something must be wrong with my squad. We keep finding ways to fly together.
Any suggestions on how I can avoid flying with them so I can support the 'this will wreck' squads campaign?
-
it helps if the rest of your squad don't like you and aren't prepared to move to fly with you dan :D
-
I like it. Anything that allows me to more easily switch sides so I can kill my POS squaddies is a good thing.
-
Originally posted by Ball
I guess i am playing the part of Lord Haw Haw in here then?
lol now you mention it I was thinking more like the Iraq PR guy, Information minister ..."we'll kill them like rats".. jesus whats his name. buggery beers kicked in. iraq dude on TV, sub cult funny geeza. Can't remember what he was on the deck of cards..... Mohammed Saeed Al-Sahaf commonly known as
Comical Ali :rofl
-
Originally posted by Fencer51
So are squadrons going to be disbanded next? That's where this is going. Some people actually fly to fly with their friends. Or is the master plan to force Squadrons to goto CT?:noid
I thought CT would not have squads. So maybe this is all prep for CT.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Something must be wrong with my squad. We keep finding ways to fly together.
Any suggestions on how I can avoid flying with them so I can support the 'this will wreck' squads campaign?
BoPs havent had any problem flying togehter either...i hope this will continue after the change...again i need some concept of what the allowed buffer will be before a country is closed..if it is 20 then ok....if it is 5 then no matter what chesspeice we choose we will have too many....
-
Being buried someplace in page three I am sure that HTC will not even read this.
BUT
I would suggest that this is not good for squads. And, let me also say that it has been my SQUAD and not your game that has kept me here the past 6 months or so.
-
Did you guys know that flight sim enthusiasts fly on all sides in this game? Frankly, I never notice a difference in attitude, banter, or skill when I switch sides to balance. These people aren't your actual enemies, its a game.
Judging from the posts you'd think HTC was trying to give you a forced gender change.
-
We are getting closer and closer to this post right here...(start the wayback machine!)
The ultimate solution
It seems the recent changes have not made enough progress in fixing AHII. Here are some ideas for an AHIII.
1. No more strats. This stops the "pork and auger" dweebs.
2. All hangers should be indesructible. This stops the griefers.
3. No more troops. Troops are need to capture bases. Capturing bases leads to winning the war. Winning the war is bad.
4. No more ack. Alot of good comes from this. It stops people from running to the protection of friendly ack and it stops people from crying that the ack is to much or to little. Since there are no strats it's not really needed. Maybe frame rates will go up
5. No more squads. Flying with your friends is bad.
6. No more vox or text bar. Talking with others may lead to friendships. Friendships can lead to squads. We can't have that. Also see rule 5.
7. Communication with others will be limited to the automated "check six" command. Not to much though. We'll be watching you closely to make sure your not trying to pull something sneaky like a code or something.
8. No more countries. Players might develop loyalty to one or another. That's a bad thing.
9. All players to fly the same plane. This ends the debate over wich plane can be flown against any others. No talking of dweeb rides either. Plane selection to be made at random at midnight.
10. No bombers. Nothing to bomb so why have them.
11. No GVs. Want to fight in tanks? Go somwhere else.
12. New planes to be launched in the air at altitude in random places. This will stop the vulchers.
There you go. Can't get much better than that.
(now back to present)
I'm a 'tard and did not know how to link to a post from the past so I just did a copy&paste.
:noid
-
Why do you persist in this?
People have voted with their feet. Players will always do only that which they enjoy doing, no matter what obstacles you throw in their way. What each individual seeks from the game will not change. The game changes will not change the goals of the individual and players will always look to find the shortest path to achieve their personal goals.
Your changes have not enhanced enjoyment across the board by any stretch. You are trying to force people to do things that they will not. This alienates and frustrates your customers. It is more profitable to retain a customer than to spend the money to gain a new one.
Leave it be. Stop getting these stupid ideas for "necessary changes" from the BBS. Spend time in the arenas if you want to see what people like and dislike.
If you had simply spent the time developing more and better maps and new interesting planes/gvs that you have on these ridiculous innovations you would be racing ahead.
-
KTM520guy should be made commander of our non-country.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Something must be wrong with my squad. We keep finding ways to fly together.
Any suggestions on how I can avoid flying with them so I can support the 'this will wreck' squads campaign?
Thats easy Dan all of you just need to all try and fly with the numbers side. :p
Then you can come to the BBS and whine also.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Overlag
theres 2 wars on.......
.....if you dont like 1 war, you leave and go to the other war.
cycle goes like this:
[list=1]
- balanced server during day
- 2nd server opens.
- whoever is loosing in server1, goes server2. (in this example/thread rooks)
- as rooks leave server1, there numbers over inflate in server2, and drop drastically in server1.
- as knits and bish in server2 are now both facing silly odds against rooks, they leave to goto server1.
- before you know it server1 is 120:120:60 and server2 is 60:60:120.
[/list=1] [/B]
from another thread.
I dont know how the new ENY system will fix anything.... if the loosing side quits, is it the attackers fault?
-
i like how HT engages the community. everyone has a chance to voice their opinion. if your opinion doesn't match HT's idea and direction he wants "his" game to follow, then thats just how it is.
-
Originally posted by ZZ3
Originally posted by edge12674
If you don't like changes to AH then perhaps a boxed sim is a better choice. That said, I do think this could adversly affect squads. Squads will now have to change their outdated loyalties to a country.
Thats the take it or leave it metality that I so despise in this community.
Heaven forbid you disagree with something.
ZZ3
479th Raiders
ZZ3, didn't mean to offend you. Just trying to point out that AH is constantly changing (as it should) and that not all will agree with the changes. To my knowledge the only way to keep a game from changing is to buy a boxed sim and don't install any patches (or find one that is no longer supported).
To play this game and expect it to stay the same is like marrying a women and expecting her to remain the same. It is not the nature of the beast! :cool:
It just saddens me to watch my squad nights disappear, as they have for the past several months. Several long time players on my squad have cancelled their accounts due to the changes. I plan to stick with it and give Hitech his tweak time. There is a point however, where I will no longer be able to justify the monthly expense as I find myself flying less and less.
Squads are still able to fly together, but it is getting more difficult. I would just like to see Hitech find solutions that strengthen squads. Better for players, better for the community, and better for Hitech coffers.
-
i dont even play anymore but the idea of having to wait or switch sides doesnt sound like a good idea to me. So now ill wait and listen on thes BB's to see how this one goes before i come back.
-
f you know of any combat games that allow for one team to have huge number advantages i would be curious as to which one?
....World War 2 Online......
I don't think I am going to like being to forced to switch sides all the time....
Looks like a lot of my time will be in A v A now...
I hope HT is not going to try and fix that next...:(
CAVALRY
-
All of this talk about squads by those that are in what they call a squad points out one thing....me, me, me. It seems it's all about the individual. The association with a "squad" to some it seems is just being associated with like-minded individuals...with the like-mindedness being me, me, me.
What's the point of a squad if it's not to help each other out...to work as a team? Fighting each other servers the purpose of bettering one another. But to what end? What will those skills be used for?
For many who post here about squads and squad mentality, you really only are seeing it from your perspective of what a "squad" is. To you it's not a team, it's just a group of people under the same name. For others it is a team that likes to work together toward a common shared goal.
-
Originally posted by john9001
KTM520guy should be made commander of our non-country.
Does being commander pay anything?
-
Sounds promising and at least worth a try.
I have 2 questions:
How will we know which fields can't be captured?
Will you still have to belong to a side for 24 hours or whatever it was to get the perk bonus for winning the war?
Will you be able to freely go back to your old country, even if it's not needed, before entering the arena.
Oops, thought of that third one while I was typing.
[EDIT] One more:
How will we know precisely how many/how many more of each country's fields we need to take to win and conversly, how many of our fields we need to hold onto to keep the enemy from winning?
-
Originally posted by plank
Did you guys know that flight sim enthusiasts fly on all sides in this game? Frankly, I never notice a difference in attitude, banter, or skill when I switch sides to balance. These people aren't your actual enemies, its a game.
LIES! ALL LIES!!
PS: Plank, did you hear about Rocky Road ice cream?
-
My 2 cents..
Having the winning conditions be that the winning side beat BOTH of the other sides down to 30 % is the best thing in the pool.
Making folks change sides and be responsible for balancing the arena is not a community resposibility. Forcing it down the throats of the community will not have profitable results.
If you pay attention to what keeps folks coming back it is the community. Squads are the core of that community and making it difficult for them to operate will undermine it and reduce retension.
-
my squad has no problem flying together.........O wait we had almost 32 3 years ago and now maybe 3 play at 1 time. But I dont think the changes have affected our squad at all.
:rolleyes: cant wait for this
-
did anyone see that HT is removing the base capture lines for the moment?
-
The concern is of course that lots of stuff is changing constantly without obvious improvement.
I think the main problem with the latest capture lines is infact their method implementation in Orange. They have not been designed in sync with the spawn lines and field layouts and of course (importantly) the field layout has not been designed with capture lines in mind and also there are some errors...........
In terms of focussing conflict they work.
I think the changes proposed to the zone/strat set up are welcome
I think the idea that 1 country has to win 30 -40% of both of its opponents territory is excellent.
It motivates the two smaller countries to fight the bigger rather than the two bigger countries to fight the smaller.
Leaving core fields uncapturable is very viable.....however they should be those fields around the HQ and not dotted about the terrain such that they become fortress fields safe inside enemy territory. (infact on larger maps they could be nearly the whole HQ zone as was)
HT you know your business but do you really want to instigate so many changes in one sweep? Might it be better to implement the changes to strat, war win criteria and uncapturables, and then wait and see what effect this has before forcing access type balancing criteria?
I think that access balancing is a brave move. It is clear that the game teaming model until now has been one that promoted loyalty to various countries. It was so in AW. I realise that ENY limiters etc were put in place to promote side switching. I realise that side balancing would be easier if country loyalties were not as strong as they are. Given the strength of these loyalties I am not sure if this brave move (albeit targetting a very desirable end state) is a wise one.
I wish there was an easy answer to side balancing that over came country loyalties.
In RL this is the function of the mercenary class. Warriors are rewarded for fighting for one side or another.
What currency does AH have to offer fighters of a 4th group (a nation without a land .........Pawns?) who switch sides (or are switched) to balance the battle...... these Pawns could have automatic perk multipliers (always 1.5?) and carry their own Pawn icon into battle under the colours of their present master country. (red yellow or green)
I quite fancy being such a Mercenary Pawn.
-
Enough with this craziness!!
I will get with HT and set up some sort of balance proceedure.
It only makes sense for myself or HT to place people where we think they belong based on yrs played, personality, what plane/vehicle they like, clothes and jewelry prefrences and bathing habits.
This should stop all the bickering and fuss and helps out the whole community.
Thanks!
-
Originally posted by Ball
can i go to the island where she is: -
(http://www.jawbonepodcast.com/blogpics/kate.jpg)
Is that kate from lost??....If so damn stright load up the a6m and get out the giant magnet that will crash us!....Lol great show:lol
-
Originally posted by plank
Did you guys know that flight sim enthusiasts fly on all sides in this game? Frankly, I never notice a difference in attitude, banter, or skill when I switch sides to balance. These people aren't your actual enemies, its a game.
Judging from the posts you'd think HTC was trying to give you a forced gender change.
Don't listen to him. He's as dumb as a brick...er, piece of wood. :D
-
Greetings,
And freedom to fly any plane regardless of eny setting...... To some, perks are valueless as they already have tons.
Looking forward to being a Pawn - and pwning everyone ;)
Regards,
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Something must be wrong with my squad. We keep finding ways to fly together.
Any suggestions on how I can avoid flying with them so I can support the 'this will wreck' squads campaign?
:lol :aok
-
some change is a good thing but to much of a change will run people off...but we'll see how these "new changes" pan out
-
Originally posted by Overlag
I dont know how the new ENY system will fix anything.... if the loosing side quits, is it the attackers fault?
Or amybe the "leavers" left because they got tired of fighting against a horde?
Let's not get trapped in argument about which came first, the horde or the leaver...because the point is that its no fun to get swarmed unfairly, to not even have a chance.
And when one side is high, generally the other 2 cant find much fun.
I hear what you're saying overlag - -but from a game standpoint, teams have to be in the same general numbers range for all to have fun. And, regardless of whose fault it is, AH hasnt had "in the same range" balancing for a while.
Bottom line -- if we had solved the gross imbalance issues ourselves, HT would have done nothing. But, too many players only cared about themselves or their squads, even if that meant scr@@ing everyone else. Since we couldnt be good sports on our own, HT had to make a rule to approximate good sportsmanship.
-
Are the new changes already in place?
-
Originally posted by hitech
1. The current zone / strat setup does not lend it self very well to the current setup,We will be change the supply system to work on all your countries fields, hence hitting the strat targets will have a larger effect.
Question about this:
Will the supplies be run to the fields via train/convoy?
Or, will the supply chain be dictated by a chain of bases?
It would be nice if you could sever the supply chain. Instead of making a change that enables the supply system to work on all of your country's fields, why not make it so a base captured in enemy territory cannot be supplied via the supply system unless it is "linked up" directly back to a friendly zone base?
-
Flying around in these past few weeks of imbalance, I never noticed public griping, when I was on the understaffed side, about imbalance.
But yes, I can understand how imbalance could be a problem. People who have compiled the numbers these past weeks have posted on this board... something like:
Orange:
Bish- 60
Knits- 75
Rooks- 120
Blue:
Bish- 125
Knits-100
Rooks- 60
Seems pretty imbalanced, no? What if you could add them together somehow, maybe some sort of super mega arena....
Bish- 185
Knits- 175
Rooks- 180
..........nah, that would never work.
Perhaps sample size is the problem here. Not anyone's "naughtiness" of not personally taking the initiative to switch sides to whichever side, that day, has the numbers. With any small sample size you are going to see fluctuation, sometimes severe. There is the possibility that having two Late War (Main) arenas just splits up the numbers enough so that usually there will be a side imbalance.
Look, I'm not advocating going back to the old MA. I'm just simply acknowledging that all of these problems (ENY inflation, the need for a new capture system) arose from a chain of events starting with that switch.
Sometimes the best way to start a problem is to go back and fix it from the roots, rather than go forward with another new innovation that has the potential of ultimately, down the chain, starting new problems itself.
This is bad for squads. I am not in a squad, and personally I have no problem changing sides, but I can understand that people rightfully want to fly with their buddies, and making it a hassle for them to do so is going to make this game more of a chore than enjoyment. As long as every third new person who registers is assigned bishop, the next knight, and the next rook, etc, I don't see how this numbers imbalance won't correct itself in the long run if everyone is allowed to fly in the same arena.
-
Ok right from the get-go I said this was a Mistake.......Its like the guy who's lost ..who keeps driving and refuses to look at the map......The mistake is not in making a mistake ..but refusing to admitt the mistake making the intial mistake even worse.....If the intial changes had worked..."A" then why are we trying "B" and now "C" ..your up the wrong branch of the tree Sir...even idiotts like me have a firm grasp of the obvious.
999000
PS guess what... the "eny thing " doesn't work.
-
Good point 999000.... This new change thing is starting to become a joke.
-
Ok I have an idea for balance...even thou Balance is NOT A PROBLEM.....ok anyway this is the idea .......Shawk over there!...everyone else over there!
999000
-
What currency does AH have to offer fighters of a 4th group (a nation without a land .........Pawns?) who switch sides (or are switched) to balance the battle...... these Pawns could have automatic perk multipliers (always 1.5?) and carry their own Pawn icon into battle under the colours of their present master country. (red yellow or green)
I'd be a pawn. This is an excellent idea. With this, only those who are willing would be switching countries, those with strong country loyalties wouldn't have to switch. Win Win situation.
I especially like the idea of the Pawn Icon with current country colors :D
-
Originally posted by Elfie
I'd be a pawn. This is an excellent idea. With this, only those who are willing would be switching countries, those with strong country loyalties wouldn't have to switch. Win Win situation.
I especially like the idea of the Pawn Icon with current country colors :D
Including a new system message:
You have been Pawned by *name* ;)
-
Seems to me that there was an issue. Apparently unless I'm really reading this wrong a big enough issue that HT felt he needs to get involved in it. We as a community have had the chance to resolve it and do what's best for everyone and we as a group decided not to use it for whatever reason. We had the ability to self regulate and we didn't.
-
Originally posted by 999000
Ok right from the get-go I said this was a Mistake.......Its like the guy who's lost ..who keeps driving and refuses to look at the map......The mistake is not in making a mistake ..but refusing to admitt the mistake making the intial mistake even worse.....If the intial changes had worked..."A" then why are we trying "B" and now "C" ..your up the wrong branch of the tree Sir...even idiotts like me have a firm grasp of the obvious.
999000
PS guess what... the "eny thing " doesn't work.
excellent post, sir!
-
Originally posted by Lusche
Including a new system message:
You have been Pawned by *name* ;)
GOOD ONE!!! :D :rofl
*edit* Besides the humor in the System Message, it would let folks know that a mercenary just killed them.
-
I see where they are going to back off the new capture system for now but the way I read it it will be back.I liked the new system but it will mean that squad level play will be more important than ever. You will have to work togather to win a base or map, have to get to know the people and how they operate. WORKING TOGATHER TO GET TO THAT POINT. Can not see that happening now. I see AH taking one step forward then two back.
-
Hmmm....
First, it was three time periods, breaking up the MA. Almost everybody fights in the late war arena(s).
Then orange got lines. Almost everybody went to blue. I went to mid war, which seems to be gaining popularity since the capture system.
About this time, complaints about overbalancing appeared. I don't know.... it looked like a wagon- wheel effect was going on with the orange arena; ie- rooks steamrolling the knights, knights steamrolling the bishops, bishops steamrolling the rooks.... The only thing I saw the overbalancing affect was who got steamrolled the fastest.
Now I'm ridiculed by some because I have loyalty to a chess piece and not wanting to switch countries?
(Just out of curiosity, why is loyalty a bad thing?)
Someone said earlier that sooner or later, all of the old players will be gone and new blood will replace them. The new blood will not know any different. Nobody will be complaining then.
-
I have been flying Rooks more out of character issues with other folks on the other sides than loyalties to chess pieces.
I dont like those nasty green peas. I dont eat them.
I dont like some folks on Bish. I dont fly there. Doing so makes the game unenjoyable for me.
I find that most the chest thumpers and arrogant folks who are full of themselves seem to congrigate more to the Knights. I dont fly Knights either. Once again the game isnt enjoyable for me.
So now what I read into this, is that HT wants to force me into doing something I dont like and expect me to like and have a nice cheery grin on my face as I pay him my monthly subscription?
Thats just friggin rude.
The "Ultimate Game Balance" that all want to see isnt going to happen. Forcing people is only going to make for much more aggrivation and anger than what is currently being seen.
Leave it alone and quit screwing with it PLEASE! Its all cyclical and works out to a happy medium because there are those who do on their own switch sides to even the numbers. I'm sure it would be nice if they all could be on 24/7 but their not.
-
Originally posted by TexInVa
(Just out of curiosity, why is loyalty a bad thing?)
Someone said earlier that sooner or later, all of the old players will be gone and new blood will replace them. The new blood will not know any different. Nobody will be complaining then.
I wonder why some people think loyalty is a bad thing, too.
Maybe that is the intent...to force the old out that do not subscribe to the chosen philosophy.
Maybe the intent is to make the MA's less appealing so that there will be interest in CT whenever it comes out. Look at it this way: You have a new product you want to sell (CT). Squads and loyalty are not a part of CT. So why would you offer another product that may be more applealing when you've put so much work into the new product? Maybe the MA's are being structured to appeal to those only looking to fight (smaller number of people) while hopefully driving the others to CT.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Maybe the intent is to make the MA's less appealing so that there will be interest in CT whenever it comes out.
I have thought that on many occasions recently.
-
Maybe just maybe there will be life once again in the AVA.
instead of sitting in the lobby, Try ou tthe AVA, where its all about the furballing and bombing, no perkies just haveing a ball!
-
Originally posted by 1azbaer
Maybe just maybe there will be life once again in the AVA.
instead of sitting in the lobby, Try ou tthe AVA, where its all about the furballing and bombing, no perkies just haveing a ball!
You mean there are other arena's? zOMFG!:O
Hey what's that Dueling Arena for?
What? It's for fighting?
Wait, then what are the socialist (oops, Main) arena's for?
-
Since when is loyalty silly. My squad and I are Rooks. I like being a Rook, and yes they are cartoon chess pieces. Just like those cartoon airplanes we fly.
It's also fun to build a healthy respect for those your flying against on a daily basis. If I do a tophat right and see an LTAR I'm going to guns no matter what color he is....lol.
I guess I'll give it a try, not much choice.
-
Hitech you POS HORDE KILLER!!!......
no wait... YAAAAYYYYYY!!!!! :aok
-
If any of you whining idiots can completely convince me that you can make a better game and make more money than HTC..... then I will finance it. Otherwise stfu.
Coach
-
It was bound to happen if the Combat Tour is to work.
Myself, I prefer a squad system, because its the backbone of the game for me. I'm not sure if the game itself is strong enough to hold my interest, as flying with my friends I've flown with so long is the fun for me.
I'm willing to see how it goes. But I have a feeling if I end up not flying with my closest friends, or not able to conduct things like Bomb Wing, there won't be much here to keep me.
Each time I've quit, I've come back. Why I ask myself. Because of my friends. It is'nt the game that keeps me coming back..its my friends. Friends made 10 years ago, in another game.
Like I said, I'll give it a chance.
-
Originally posted by Coach
If any of you whining idiots can completely convince me that you can make a better game and make more money than HTC..... then I will finance it. Otherwise stfu.
Coach
Werd.
-
Originally posted by Coach
If any of you whining idiots can completely convince me that you can make a better game and make more money than HTC..... then I will finance it. Otherwise stfu.
Coach
First, define "better game".
Second, what does the "make more money" condition achieve?
A mom and pop bakery doesn't "make more money" than a supermarket chain, but I bet their product is better.
(not a slam on HTC or anything....just trying to get some clarification on Coach's statement)
-
this seems to be another obstacle to overcome in trying to fly with squadmates,which is one of the big attractions to this game. i think squad commeraderie is one reason people have an enduring love of Air Warrior. i have friends from that game close to 15 years now.
i appreciate the efforts to evolve, and i think you have unprecedented customer service ,but it is getting a little tuff to "wing up" with your mates.
...just constructive critism , not a whine.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Bottom line -- if we had solved the gross imbalance issues ourselves, HT would have done nothing. But, too many players only cared about themselves or their squads, even if that meant scr@@ing everyone else. Since we couldnt be good sports on our own, HT had to make a rule to approximate good sportsmanship.
this is absolute rubbish....im sick of being told by griefers that this is somehow the community's fault that the game is imbalanced and it is somehow our responsibility to ignore friendship and fun to solve poor thought processes and impetuous changes....
before the original MA change the sides were balanced...hitech or someone didnt like the gameplay (hording).
so we got 4 new arenas and side imbalance and hording.
oops didnt work everybody liked flying one arena so we got arena caps and hording...
oops darn guys still seem to be having fun..lets try AI and ditch it quickly rather than use it to equalize sides (btw AI is used in many online games to even sides out)
oops didnt work so lets limit capturable front line bases...oh crap now we got megahording...
so lets now open up a few more frontline bases...good now we just have the original hording and oops gangbanging one country seems more fashionable now since its the only way to get enough hording to capture bases.
Now who is to blame for all the above goofs??? and who in good heaven is advocating for any change at all??? and who is asking for CTOD btw??? i have only seen folks ask for new planes..better graphics and better designed maps...instead we get redesigned gameplay that seems to ignore what the main reason adult men log on for...
i have not posted for over a month and have tried to adapt...i can only hope this new change continues the trend of not really changing anything because the changes are so poorly thought out they dont come close to accomplishing the stated objectives it IS sad that that is the best attitude i can muster right now about a game i used to love:furious
-
well said falcon....well said
-
Originally posted by Donzo
First, define "better game".
Second, what does the "make more money" condition achieve?
A mom and pop bakery doesn't "make more money" than a supermarket chain, but I bet their product is better.
(not a slam on HTC or anything....just trying to get some clarification on Coach's statement)
If you feel the money you are spending on this product is not worth the value.... then either invest your dollars in making a better product or spend your money elsewhere on another entertainment product. I am just tired of seeing somebody busting their bellybutton to make a better product for their customers and they continue to receive whining from the same. I would bet (know) Dale and the Crew invite productive input from the customer base. It's just that I see some piss n mone instead of trying to help the process. It is to these I say just stfu and taking their money somewhere else if they do not want to help the process. To address Donzo... this is America...the wonderful hub of the Free Enterprise World. Generaly, the better product with the correct marketing will make the most money. I personally believe HTC is not a mom n pop bakery.
Find me a Supermarket WWII sim that will compare. just my .02
Coach
-
Well as much as I hate this, Ill give it a try but the moment I have to fly as a Rook, Im leavin. I remembered flyin AH1 with my dad and it was nothin like this. Sorry HTC but I dont like where this is goin. Maybe if yall would "test" these chages first instead of forcing them on us things might be different but with the way things are going now looks like ill have an extra 15 bucks to spen on my car :aok
Times like these I miss Air Warrior.....
-
<----------Content to wait and see.
-
Just a thought on "balance"......Just imagine Churchill durring the battle of Britain ...picking up the phone and calling Hitler...."you have too many planes"....will some of your guys come over here so we can have a fair fight?......or will you ground your 190's for awhile to give us a chance?
Thank god in real life these men had the courage..stomach..and tenacity to win out against tough odds....
Seriously don't people playing this "game" enjoy the challenge of haviing the short end of the stick at times?? just to see if you can overcome the odds?
999000
-
Originally posted by 999000
Just a thought on "balance"......Just imagine Churchill durring the battle of Britain ...picking up the phone and calling Hitler...."you have too many planes"....will some of your guys come over here so we can have a fair fight?......or will you ground your 190's for awhile to give us a chance?
Thank god in real life these men had the courage..stomach..and tenacity to win out against tough odds....
Seriously don't people playing this "game" enjoy the challenge of haviing the short end of the stick at times?? just to see if you can overcome the odds?
999000
Wow didn't know AH was world altering struggle.
Thanx for clearing that up 999000.
You've really changed my mind with this post.
:rolleyes:
pfffft
Bronk
-
Call it what you want, but I stuck with the Bishops ever since I started playing the games. Even though HT made sure that all of the newbies landed on our country. I used to tell the 'whiners' complaining that the Bishes couldn't take a country, that it is good to stay with the Bishes as it made you a better opponet in the long run
Then, in its infinite wisdom, HT changes the game around again and the Bishes started hammering out wins. Even though the K and R's did cooperate to work against the bishes. Now to keep all of the HT "Socialist" happy, they screw even further with the game because K and R's got tired of losing.
I stayed 'patriotic' with the bishes all this time and so has my squaddies. We will stay Bish and if we can't fight together, then there are other places and things we can do as a squad.
The solution to the whole problem of the furballers, realestaters and others was to simply make arenas for those folks. But no, you had to make sure that it wasn't a well accepted or well researched move to change the game.
As for you non whiners, you are truly 'socialists'. Whatever the party line is that is where your at. This is one of the reasons why the US is falling apart right now. You can't think for yourselfs and truly, you could care less about others, as long as it benefits you and your 'truth script'. I would bet real money that many of your are way left on the belief system aren't ya?
Well..."Liberalism is a Mental Disorder" has once again been proven correct.
Drink the Koolaid and have a good time!
-
Originally posted by Coach
If any of you whining idiots can completely convince me that you can make a better game and make more money than HTC..... then I will finance it. Otherwise stfu.
Coach
This makes you an intellectual?
Your really not adding anything to the discussion. Oh, I know if you dont like someones opinion, they are an idiot.
Thanks, I get it now.
ZZ3
479th Raiders
-
Time for a reality check for some of you. I fail to see how a desire for fun, fair, and balanced gameplay has anything to do with the downfall of american society, and I also fail to see how it suddenly eliminates friendship and comradery. I know damned sure it's got nothing to do with the odds in the Battle of Britain. Some of you really need to get a grip. Look at yourselves, melting down over how some changes you've not yet experienced are ruining the game for you. Pathetic. Maybe it's time for a little break from the game.
-
Originally posted by stuntman4real
Call it what you want, but I stuck with the Bishops ever since I started playing the games. Even though HT made sure that all of the newbies landed on our country. I used to tell the 'whiners' complaining that the Bishes couldn't take a country, that it is good to stay with the Bishes as it made you a better opponet in the long run
Then, in its infinite wisdom, HT changes the game around again and the Bishes started hammering out wins. Even though the K and R's did cooperate to work against the bishes. Now to keep all of the HT "Socialist" happy, they screw even further with the game because K and R's got tired of losing.
I stayed 'patriotic' with the bishes all this time and so has my squaddies. We will stay Bish and if we can't fight together, then there are other places and things we can do as a squad.
The solution to the whole problem of the furballers, realestaters and others was to simply make arenas for those folks. But no, you had to make sure that it wasn't a well accepted or well researched move to change the game.
As for you non whiners, you are truly 'socialists'. Whatever the party line is that is where your at. This is one of the reasons why the US is falling apart right now. You can't think for yourselfs and truly, you could care less about others, as long as it benefits you and your 'truth script'. I would bet real money that many of your are way left on the belief system aren't ya?
Well..."Liberalism is a Mental Disorder" has once again been proven correct.
Drink the Koolaid and have a good time!
Sweet jebus
This is some funny watermelon right here.
Dude have a drink or something. If your letting a game get to you this much... well... You have bigger problems than being made to fly for another chess piece.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Donzo
All of this talk about squads by those that are in what they call a squad points out one thing....me, me, me. It seems it's all about the individual. The association with a "squad" to some it seems is just being associated with like-minded individuals...with the like-mindedness being me, me, me.
What's the point of a squad if it's not to help each other out...to work as a team? Fighting each other servers the purpose of bettering one another. But to what end? What will those skills be used for?
For many who post here about squads and squad mentality, you really only are seeing it from your perspective of what a "squad" is. To you it's not a team, it's just a group of people under the same name. For others it is a team that likes to work together toward a common shared goal.
Donzo-
This is about the stupidist post I've ever seen. Thanx for tell me what I believe a squad is. Without your insight I never would have known my own opinion.
-
Originally posted by Tilt
I wish there was an easy answer to side balancing that over came country loyalties.
In RL this is the function of the mercenary class. Warriors are rewarded for fighting for one side or another.
What currency does AH have to offer fighters of a 4th group (a nation without a land .........Pawns?) who switch sides (or are switched) to balance the battle...... these Pawns could have automatic perk multipliers (always 1.5?) and carry their own Pawn icon into battle under the colours of their present master country. (red yellow or green)
I quite fancy being such a Mercenary Pawn.
EXCELLENT IDEA, Tilt!
Allowing people to sign up as volunteers being switched to another country on demand and rewarding them for being mercenaries :aok :aok :aok
Carrots always work better than sticks!
-
Originally posted by Dantoo
Why do you persist in this?
People have voted with their feet. Players will always do only that which they enjoy doing, no matter what obstacles you throw in their way. What each individual seeks from the game will not change. The game changes will not change the goals of the individual and players will always look to find the shortest path to achieve their personal goals.
Your changes have not enhanced enjoyment across the board by any stretch. You are trying to force people to do things that they will not. This alienates and frustrates your customers. It is more profitable to retain a customer than to spend the money to gain a new one.
Leave it be. Stop getting these stupid ideas for "necessary changes" from the BBS. Spend time in the arenas if you want to see what people like and dislike.
If you had simply spent the time developing more and better maps and new interesting planes/gvs that you have on these ridiculous innovations you would be racing ahead.
Probably couldn't have been put more accurately, succinctly or politely. Salute :aok
-
See Rule #4
-
I won't fly CT. I did my 20 in the real world.
I doubt I will be here much longer. I fly with my squadron and with Rook squadrons that we do joint operations with. These changes will spoil that for me.
These "balancing" efforts are nothing more than a thinly disguised promotion to encourage some of us to like it or leave it.
I shall soon take my few $ and find something else to do with them.
I won't fly CT and soon I will not fly AH.
-
Originally posted by Soulyss
We had the ability to self regulate and we didn't.
What do you mean, "We"? I self-regulate nearly everyday, sometimes twice a day. And, I haven't gone blind yet. LOL
-
We tend to find away to get together to fly.... don't think squads are in any danger of being lost
But a few things came to mind after reading all this stuff....
Over the years, have seen nights when sides were balanced, it still didn't make much of a difference. EX:
All sides have 100 people
one country has 40 or 50 in one place pushing forward, and the other 50 spread out in other areas. Hence a horde........ now the country being pushed needs to pull 50 together to defend and the 3rd country is now able to hit either front due to smaller defenders spread out across their fronts. Been that way ever since I started playing AW then AH.
Will try any setup HT sends out, more of curiousity than anything. But mobs will still occur and unless zones are setup with plane number cap limits, there is no way to stop it.
Secondly, with this new plan it seems that being able to change sides so frequently, are we really hoping that everyone will not abuse knowledge from coutries they just came from? ie. cv locales, missions posted, noe raids otw, etc.
Been flyin for years, and one thing that has been constant no matter what changes is players will find away to do what they want. If they want to mass together for pushing another country, they will. Players abusing any info they have, there will be some.
Not advocating anything by this post, but the horde will always be there, your not going to see go away, and as for the other stuff........... not sure, but have been reading posts of others complaining for years (alt monkeys, spying, furballers complaints on buffers, killing troops, nmy, dweeb rides, gangbangs, etc) so I'm not so confident that I won't be see the same complaints in the future.
I just keep reading an either/or. Again, for those of you against the "hordes": do you really beleive people are not going to find away, even if a front is left open? And until forming a squad function is takin away, players will find away to fly together if they chose to even if it means going to another arena to do it.
They only change I can see in this whole thing is HT setting up the even keel, from than on players will play as usual IMHO
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Time for a reality check for some of you. I fail to see how a desire for fun, fair, and balanced gameplay has anything to do with the downfall of american society, and I also fail to see how it suddenly eliminates friendship and comradery.
You got it right this time. YOU FAILED!!! As you continueously do. You failed to understand someone else's opinion. I suspect because you don't give a damn about anyone else, let alone their opinion, especially if different from yours. Big surprise coming from you.
You're happy with the changes cause they still satisfy your desires for gameplay. They don't for many of us, but you can't see past your own pleasure center to see why. Even if you could, it wouldn't matter. You don't value us, so you don't value what is important to us. And how dare us, spoiling your perfect existance and private chat room by actually voicing our displeasure.
Get a clue. You and your griefer friends are a cancer on the community, not part of it. And I'm sure what you post in here IS an accurate depiction of what your attitude and behavior is like in real life. Be thankful for families. They have to put up with you.
Oh, and thanks so much for all your concern and input. Round file, please.
-
Sloehand. Please read what you just wrote and think about it for a sec.
You are suggesting that folks who want fair and balanced gameplay, in the hopes of making the experience in the game enjoyable for the most possible players, are somehow selfish.
That makes little sense. The guys I fly with switch to low numbers country everytime we fly. Not because we worry about winning the war, but because when playing a game, it seems like it would be more fun if the teams were fair.
What you seem to be suggesting is that as long as the game fits for you, then everyone else will have to live with it. Which is the more selfish position?
This IS NOT war. No one dies. It is a game, where folks fly cyber planes, driver cyber tanks or ships and have a chance to compete against other people via the online world.
My loyalty is to the game and the people in it. I don't recall coming across any 'bad guys' in this game. It amazes me when someone says the Bish are this way, the Rooks are that way and the Knits are another way.
I've not seen it. I just want to enjoy the game and know that the good people I'm flying with and against are having the chance to have as much fun as I can, regardless of the chess piece I happen to be flying for that hour.
That doesn't appear selfish to me. And as near as I can tell, that's all hub has been preaching for quite some time.
I would suggest that Hitech and company look at it the same way. How do we make this game enjoyable for the most possible players......not just the guys who like to furball, or not just the tank drivers, or not just the win the war guys, or not the guys who like to drop bombs.
I don't believe HTC favors any particular group, but wants the best for the game they've put so much time and effort into.
-
Has anyone taken into account who has the most to lose if the changes don't work?
Wouldn't that be the guys who design and own the game?
Earlier tonite some guy was ripping into HT, wondering what was wrong with Hitech and how HT didn't have a clue what people wanted in this game.
I asked him how long he'd been flying.
He replied 'about a year".
I then asked him if he thought that HT and company, who have been designing these games and playing them longer then most of us, might just have a clue as to what they want?
I then got the 'Oh, so I don't get to have an opinion' reply.
Sure it's fine to have an opinion, but to suggest the folks with the most to lose, have no clue about what they are doing and that somehow we know better, seems a tad bit over the top.
That they even participate in these discussions and look for help or suggestions speaks volumes about how they operate. I appreciate that they have the patience to wade through some of the BS we spew at times.
I'd suggest relaxing and seeing how this plays out.
-
Guppy:
"This IS NOT war. No one dies. It is a game"
I agree with your post and have much respect, however, feelings of frustration, tension and abandonment ARE real
"My loyalty is to the game and the people in it"
Well, same here and for a lot of other folk. So switch sides, don't be too loyal? OR frustrate your squad or friends and just move on?
Lot to be said on this one, I'll agree it's not easy all the way around. I just wish I had more ideas to share with HT to help.
-
Originally posted by MOIL
Guppy:
"This IS NOT war. No one dies. It is a game"
I agree with your post and have much respect, however, feelings of frustration, tension and abandonment ARE real
"My loyalty is to the game and the people in it"
Well, same here and for a lot of other folk. So switch sides, don't be too loyal? OR frustrate your squad or friends and just move on?
Lot to be said on this one, I'll agree it's not easy all the way around. I just wish I had more ideas to share with HT to help.
Not sure about the abandonment part :)
Sometimes because the 80th bounces around a lot to low numbers, I'll end up shooting LTARs or getting clobbered by em. Other times I'll be flying with them or running to the protection of their Osti's from the horde :)
Either way, i figure they're good folks This applies to all kinds of squads and individuals whether it's shooting at them or with them.
The joy of 200 is the ability to keep talking to folks on any side so I don't feel like that's letting folks down if by moving to the low number country to try and balance it a bit, I'm helping to make it a bit more fair...or to provide more targets for the high number guys :)
-
The problem is human choice. People choose to do what they want, damning what the other human that flies the plane or drives the GV does.
If someone is gonna vulch, they're gonna vulch. If they'll horde they'll horde. You can't really stop human choice. If they're gonna call loyalty to chess pieces and/or squads then they will.
Another choice is that they don't have to play AH2 when it is not convenient nor advantageous to them. No one is going to force them to play or NOT to play.
The basic core of AH2 is getting in a plane and either: dogfighting, JABOing, strat runs or capturing bases. You are not prevented from doing any of these bar the other guy in the plane that shoots you down.
Don't want to even sides? Then fine, have fun not playing. Theres other servers that allow you to do the basic core gameplay of AH2.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Monday we will be implementing a new balancing system. It works with the existing ENY number. It will no longer limit what planes you can fly. But rather when it reaches a preset value, people entering the arena will not be able to fly in that arena for their current country.
You will get a message similar to you are 3rd in a queue of 3 .
Your choices will be
1. go to another arena.
2. change countries.
3. wait until more people come onto the other side, or some one from your country leaves.
People waiting will always be able to change countries regardless of their last country change time.
People waiting in queue will not be counted in the ENY values.
This new balancing system will be implemented in all main arenas.
The test capture lines will be taken down until we can layout and code some different options.
1. The current zone / strat setup does not lend it self very well to the current setup,We will be change the supply system to work on all your countries fields, hence hitting the strat targets will have a larger effect.
2. The war win criteria will be changed from having to capture almost all of 1 country , to having to capture around 30 - 40% of both countries fields.
3. Will also make some core fields uncapturable in each country.
HiTech
well what i get from this is one big train wreck that HTC has created...lets all see how this cleans up...cause im not paying 15 to be told what base i can take or what country im to fly in ... i forgot who said it but yeah this has become a buzz kill
-
I truely believe it's the end of the world!:noid
-
i think the new system really sucks.
i used to love being on the outnumbered team with so many targets, now we all have to share kills fairly, wtf?
:mad:
-
Old mission statement was : kill the red
New mission statement is : kill the red
hmmmm ... ok for me.
-
When today will it change? Im looking forward to trying it out. Ill just have to remember to stay away from channel 200.
Good point Straffo.... Shoot red (unlike numbers who likes to shoot at everything)
-
Guppy, MOIL, some great posts here.
Me too am vary about all this new testing and systems inplemented. While im not affected directly (as one of the freelancer spies), i am very much concerned about what all this does to the community. But im pretty sure so are HT and crew.
But I also see the dilemma: Gameplay as it was in the old MA did start to get out of hand, so i pretty much understood the decision for the arena split. Only HT really knows, but im sure there have been other facts and backgrounds that made him do it, beside the player obvious things on the BBS and in the arenas.
Gameplay as it is at the moment got worse and worse: EWA and MWA turned mostly into a milkrunners delight, the LWAs are heavily unbalanced country wise.... the "run for the reset" is on. Almost every single time I have logged into the MAs in the last weeks, it was to one country "having the numbers" and one country trying desperatly to fight and defend their last five bases.
Im not saying I cant find a fight that suits me or have my fun, but the overall atmosphere in the MAs has turned into something more distand and a little colder then i remember from the past. Add to that all the negativity on the BBS, that has made me pretty much avoid the General Forum, im not sure where this is heading.
But one thing I AM sure of. Hitech is trying his best to get things sorted. He cannot change peoples mentality and attitudes though.
As MOIL said, i wish i had more contructive things to say, but im afraid im short on ideas too. I wouldnt want to be in HTs spot.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Either way, i figure they're good folks This applies to all kinds of squads and individuals whether it's shooting at them or with them.
The joy of 200 is the ability to keep talking to folks on any side so I don't feel like that's letting folks down if by moving to the low number country to try and balance it a bit, I'm helping to make it a bit more fair...or to provide more targets for the high number guys :)
bang on guppy!
:aok
-
Welcome to
Aces High III
A flight sim.
Nothing more.
:mad:
-
Interesting.
I reserve my right to whine after until after I see how this works out.
-
Originally posted by Major Biggles
what's so bad about changing country though? i know it's nice to fly with squaddies, but remember that this system will only kick in once one side starts getting big numbers. in that case, why don't you pm your squaddies and ask them to move with you? :)
I for one do not switch countries...... that is my choice..... however with the current set up, its either switch or wait.... I have not really liked the new set up from day one, but since there is nothing else out there really, we are stuck with it.... for the last year, this game has gone seriously down hill..... its very sad to see... AH used to be a kick bellybutton game. I am not the only one that sees it, but since most dont post here, sadly we are the vocal minority..... probably need to redo the commercials as well, since the ideas of squads, flying with friends, etc is heading out the door..... just my 2 cents.
-
Originally posted by skernsk
Being buried someplace in page three I am sure that HTC will not even read this.
BUT
I would suggest that this is not good for squads. And, let me also say that it has been my SQUAD and not your game that has kept me here the past 6 months or so.
:aok well said...
-
It doesn't matter which chess piece one flies for as long as they are able to have fun. I gave up loyalty to a chess piece two years ago and it was the best move I ever made in this game. Now, when I log on, I look at the whole map and choose the best battle that the game has to offer. If I must change country do get there, then so be it!:aok
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by badhorse
I reserve my right to whine after until after I see how this works out.
....well....how silly. Don't you realize that if you approach the changes without having first decided that you don't like them, you might find them to be worthwhile? And where would you be then? Stuck without a whine, that's where you'd be.
No, don't thank me. Just quickly make up your mind that this is all a bad idea. Then you can go fly in the new system with a clear conscience.
- oldman
-
Originally posted by Major Biggles
yeah, it is better ;)
i agree that some squads are going to get upset over this, but try to remember it's a game, and you shouldn't take it so seriously. it's great fun to end up in a good fight with a friend in the MA, and even better if it's a squaddie :) be less 'loyal' to your 'country', relax a little, and have a good time.
the point of AH isn't the war but the fight, be it fighters bombers or GV's. imagine a great dogfight with a good friend, bombing a base defended by some good mates, or duking it out in tanks together.
that light hearted fighting is what it's about, not some virtual field numbers :) having fun with friends, with or against, is always a blast. try to keep an open mind and relax a little, you might just enjoy yourself ;)
and sorry if i've been rude in the past :)
If we remember that it is just a game... then all the anti-squad rhetoric etc. has no place either. If it is just a game from one perspective it should be just a game from the other. We broke up the arenas to try and get a certain type of game play going. It didn't work. Those that screamed for EW planes... flocked to EW and then in less than a month essentially abandoned it.
So rather than accept that the majority of the customers don't share the same vision of what the game should be, we continue to try and change the mechanics to make the game be something different.
Anyone opposed to those changes is criticized with phrases that contain words... game... horde... cartoon... chess... squad... silly... etc.
It's a matter of perspective.
Personally I've found the last year of AH to be a constant evolution of heavy handed game management policy.
My perspective...
-
Originally posted by Mystic2
I for one do not switch countries...... that is my choice..... however with the current set up, its either switch or wait.... .
you could also try a different arena. is your country always ounumbering the other? if not, then i might suspect you have little to worry about. if so, as the numbers i've seen, there should be room in a different arena.
all in all, like you said its your choice. if you love your chess piece enough and your arena enough, and your squad doesn't care if they play with or without you, you will wait.
on the other hand, how it is now is horde or be horded. which is the lesser of 2 evils concerning gameplay?
-
Wow...total change package should address nearly every issue I can think of (except that I'm too easy to kill). WTFG HTC! Clear indication to me that the leadership up there in Grapetown is paying attention by loggin in under shade accounts and actually witnessing the degradation of gameplay over the last 3 years or so.
This new package has things to please those who like to fight, those who like to strat, as well as those who like to win. Only possible negative would be that each of those categories (fight/strat/win) will be somewhat harder to get good at, but a challenge is what most folks who play PC games enjoy, at least those who echew the cheat-code method of winning the game (not talking about AH but PC games in general), but then again I've never figured out why one would buy a game and then beat it in a day or two via the use of god-mode etc.
-
i second edbert's post. :aok
-
Originally posted by john9001
i'm bored, when does CT open?
Now there is a post I can agree with.
I realize I am in the minority, but imho arena play is lame by its nature. It was lame years before the changes and it will continue to be lame, but it will remain popular because the majority likes mindless furballing.
I only stay here for my squad and events and honestly the events are not what they once were.
Bring on CT, something reasonably historical, with a mission and a goal and I will be perfectly happy.
Not a very popular opinion, but it is what it is.
-
Originally posted by 4510
Those that screamed for EW planes... flocked to EW and then in less than a month essentially abandoned it.
I also noticed how the EWA fell on it's face essentially. I like the early planes, but with next to nobody in there when I'm normally on, what fun is it? The nostalgia of the hangar queen is back to where it was--zilch.
:(
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Sloehand. Please read what you just wrote and think about it for a sec.
You are suggesting that folks who want fair and balanced gameplay, in the hopes of making the experience in the game enjoyable for the most possible players, are somehow selfish.
That makes little sense. The guys I fly with switch to low numbers country everytime we fly. Not because we worry about winning the war, but because when playing a game, it seems like it would be more fun if the teams were fair.
What you seem to be suggesting is that as long as the game fits for you, then everyone else will have to live with it. Which is the more selfish position?
This IS NOT war. No one dies. It is a game, where folks fly cyber planes, driver cyber tanks or ships and have a chance to compete against other people via the online world.
My loyalty is to the game and the people in it. I don't recall coming across any 'bad guys' in this game. It amazes me when someone says the Bish are this way, the Rooks are that way and the Knits are another way.
I've not seen it. I just want to enjoy the game and know that the good people I'm flying with and against are having the chance to have as much fun as I can, regardless of the chess piece I happen to be flying for that hour.
That doesn't appear selfish to me. And as near as I can tell, that's all hub has been preaching for quite some time.
I would suggest that Hitech and company look at it the same way. How do we make this game enjoyable for the most possible players......not just the guys who like to furball, or not just the tank drivers, or not just the win the war guys, or not the guys who like to drop bombs.
I don't believe HTC favors any particular group, but wants the best for the game they've put so much time and effort into.
This is the best post that I have seen on the BBS in a couple of weeks.
:aok
-
I'll wait and see but sometimes you feel like this.
(http://www.dvdfuture.com/images/upload/scrat.jpg)
Waiting for the crack to apear..
I like the sound of most of the changes it's just the balancer that worries me some. Just hopeing that it's not to hard for at least the 32 man squad to get togeather.. But like I said I'll wait and see. :)
-
Amazing ain't it -
1st - The MA was broke, lets fix it.
2nd - The spawning arenas numbers are broke, lets fix it.
3rd - The numbers in the rolling cap arenas are broke, lets fix it.
4th - That fix didn't work, lets try another one.
5th - People won't defend fields, lets fix it.
6th - The field capture system is broke, lets fix it.
7th - That doesn't work, back to what it was.
8th - 3rd one didn't work, lets try the latest.
Sure is funny how much is 'suddenly' broken in the game. (and I've probably missed a few out)
-
Originally posted by Major Biggles
lol, the whines will be unprecidented with this one, but i think it's another great move HTC, thanks :)
Another great move. The only question I have is that since this is 'another' great move, that means the past moves were great also. Since they were so great, why do we need more great moves? Looking forward to the next great moves in a couple of weeks :noid
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Bottom line -- if we had solved the gross imbalance issues ourselves, HT would have done nothing. But, too many players only cared about themselves or their squads, even if that meant scr@@ing everyone else. Since we couldnt be good sports on our own, HT had to make a rule to approximate good sportsmanship.
Originally posted by FALCONWING
this is absolute rubbish....im sick of being told by griefers that this is somehow the community's fault that the game is imbalanced and it is somehow our responsibility to ignore friendship and fun to solve poor thought processes and impetuous changes....
OK Falc....I'm really trying to understand what you're saying, but I cant quite see your perspective.
How exactly is having roughly equal numbers a bad thing?
We get to select our arenas and countries; how is it HT's fault if we choose imbalance?
To put it another way, if the Rooks have a 2:1 advantge in Blue, and are underdogs in Orange, why are you so rigidly demanding that Rooks be freely allowed to keep joining the horde? It just doesnt make sense to me, I dont see the connection -- how is this imbalance NOT our fault? All we have to do is shift arenas, and it helps EVERYONE.
If the BOPS want to fly together, why cant they pick the arena where Bish are low instead of the one where the Bish are high? Wouldnt that work out for EVERYONE'S best interest?
What I hear you saying is that your freedom to choose country and arena should outweigh any negative effects on the rest of the game. And that's why I see "caring about themselves more than the game" as a core issue. You think that's rubbish, apparently, but I cannot fathom the logic. If I'm wrong about this, them ...please explain your position so I can understand it. If I've misinterpreted, I'll apologise to you for any insult.
-
Originally posted by pluck
you could also try a different arena. is your country always ounumbering the other? if not, then i might suspect you have little to worry about. if so, as the numbers i've seen, there should be room in a different arena.
all in all, like you said its your choice. if you love your chess piece enough and your arena enough, and your squad doesn't care if they play with or without you, you will wait.
on the other hand, how it is now is horde or be horded. which is the lesser of 2 evils concerning gameplay?
Lately I have found myself playing alot in the EW and MW arenas, and when I am usually on, Bish are 99% of the time outnumbered...... saturday morning I spent almost 2 hours by myself against a total of 14 or more of the other 2 countries... so its usually us against the hordes.... which to be honest, it has been better with only 3 or 4 attacking 1 base......so the fights have been fun... I just dont like the idea of being told how I should play this game...
-
Originally posted by thndregg
I also noticed how the EWA fell on it's face essentially. I like the early planes, but with next to nobody in there when I'm normally on, what fun is it? The nostalgia of the hangar queen is back to where it was--zilch.
:(
Did it finally go down to 0? :rofl Did someone say this was going to happen about hmmm 2 months ago?
-
I concur completely.
Originally posted by FiLtH
It was bound to happen if the Combat Tour is to work.
Myself, I prefer a squad system, because its the backbone of the game for me. I'm not sure if the game itself is strong enough to hold my interest, as flying with my friends I've flown with so long is the fun for me.
I'm willing to see how it goes. But I have a feeling if I end up not flying with my closest friends, or not able to conduct things like Bomb Wing, there won't be much here to keep me.
Each time I've quit, I've come back. Why I ask myself. Because of my friends. It is'nt the game that keeps me coming back..its my friends. Friends made 10 years ago, in another game.
Like I said, I'll give it a chance.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
If the BOPS want to fly together, why cant they pick the arena where Bish are low instead of the one where the Bish are high?
Hey Sim, sir!
As far as I know from my limited time on, we've been doing our best to accomodate that overall.
-
Should have added -
"Some core bases will be uncapturable"
Real great idea - You can't take that base, but they can launch raids out of it to take fields surrounding it.
Willing to bet one will be the Me163 base next to HQ, so thats open to mega ABUSE.
So coming real soon -
9th - Uncapturable bases broken, lets see what the fix for that will be.
-
Originally posted by BugsBunny
Did it finally go down to 0? :rofl Did someone say this was going to happen about hmmm 2 months ago?
Bugs, I said " next to nobody ", as in-- not quite zero, but not far away.
-
Originally posted by Grits
I like it. Anything that allows me to more easily switch sides so I can kill my POS squaddies is a good thing.
Here's a for ya gritty-one!
-
Bwahahahaha, no way have I read all 5 pages, but I have to expect the usual suspects are ranting and raving.
WTG HT at continually trying to make this a better game, thank you.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
Bwahahahaha, no way have I read all 5 pages, but I have to expect the usual suspects are ranting and raving.
WTG HT at continually trying to make this a better game, thank you.
You know, the beginning of every failuer IS trying :lol
Can we just put things back the way they were?
-
A lot of changes in a short period of time. I liked it better when there was just one main arena.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Amazing ain't it -
1st - The MA was broke, lets fix it.
2nd - The spawning arenas numbers are broke, lets fix it.
3rd - The numbers in the rolling cap arenas are broke, lets fix it.
4th - That fix didn't work, lets try another one.
5th - People won't defend fields, lets fix it.
6th - The field capture system is broke, lets fix it.
7th - That doesn't work, back to what it was.
8th - 3rd one didn't work, lets try the latest.
Sure is funny how much is 'suddenly' broken in the game. (and I've probably missed a few out)
My thoughts exactly...fix tweak...fix tweak....fix fix fix. How about putting some energy is a bigger server.
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by LTARstud
A lot of changes in a short period of time. I liked it better when there was just one main arena.
I think there was less dilution and less potential to horde with one MA. I think the forest is not being seen for the trees...
-
Originally posted by Mystic2
Lately I have found myself playing alot in the EW and MW arenas, and when I am usually on, Bish are 99% of the time outnumbered...... saturday morning I spent almost 2 hours by myself against a total of 14 or more of the other 2 countries... so its usually us against the hordes.... which to be honest, it has been better with only 3 or 4 attacking 1 base......so the fights have been fun... I just dont like the idea of being told how I should play this game...
i appreciate your reply. i guess when all the cards fall and we are all blue in the face, it just comes down to some will like it and some will not. i will say it is unfortunate that guys who were not part of the imbalances might not like the changes, as they, imho are the innocent bystanders. such is life, people who are not contributing to the problem may be affected by the solution. for me, i am excited about the prospect of not having to fend off a huge horde with only a couple of guys night after night.
as for the issue of changes creating more need for changes i submit this.
multiple MA's where not the solution to number balances, it was an attempt to add peer pressure back into the community......with hopes it would improve the atmosphere. imho, the atmosphere is better than the old MA. number imbalance has been an issue for a long time. it existed in the MA, all one needs to go is go back and revisit all of the many threads about how someones country has no numbers to compete with. it is the very reason why eny was created.
the next change was aimed at the imbalances, only being able to attack a certain field, gave the team that was outnumbered direction. forces would have to be concentrated, so in affect you could still be overwhelmed, you would not have to worry about defending 2x as many fields against 2x as many attackers.
with the MA split, number imbalances, imho did get worse, but that change was not aimed at fixing numbers. so new solutions had to be worked out. i think it is unrealistic to expect HTC to foresee all problems created. i have a feeling he expected the community to settle in and make things competitive on their own for the health of the game. obviouslyl that didn't happen. i think the reason why more changes are needed is because HTC overestimated that response of the community....in that it would balance itself. it did not, and some still resist every attempt to have a somewhat fair playing field for everyone. after all it's about the best team winning right? not just the one that can completely overwhelm the opposition....
-
(http://www.princeandpauper.com/maypo.jpg)
-
What would be the negative effects of putting things back the way they were?
-
Originally posted by 96Delta
I concur completely.
quote:Originally posted by FiLtH
It was bound to happen if the Combat Tour is to work.
Myself, I prefer a squad system, because its the backbone of the game for me. I'm not sure if the game itself is strong enough to hold my interest, as flying with my friends I've flown with so long is the fun for me.
I'm willing to see how it goes. But I have a feeling if I end up not flying with my closest friends, or not able to conduct things like Bomb Wing, there won't be much here to keep me.
Each time I've quit, I've come back. Why I ask myself. Because of my friends. It is'nt the game that keeps me coming back..its my friends. Friends made 10 years ago, in another game.
Like I said, I'll give it a chance.
I concur with that concursion!
I think the key phrase is "the squad is the backbone of the game" and I would add that the squad is the key element to this balancing issue. Therefore, IMHO, the "balancing algorithm" needs to be done at the squad level, not the player level. We need to be about balancing the squads across the three countries rather than balancing players. HT has all the numbers about the squads so the balancing decisions can be dynamic enough so as to produce good accuracy. Here is my idea of a balancing scheme:
1. Using the statistics of how many squads there are, how many players in those squads are actually active, and how often they play, etc., assign each squad to a particular country for the next campaign based on what would balance the countries the best. If that's too long a period then maybe you drop it to a week or a day, etc. Good analysis of the squads and the behavior of its players is key to assigning a squad to a country. When a squad member logs on, he is offered the option of joining his squad or going "freelance" (in which point #2 applies).
2. Use the freelancers (those not in squads) as "balance tweekers." When they log into an arena, they are automatically assigned to a country so as to help the balance.
If the statistics are managed carefully, the balance will always be pretty reasonable and over time, the system would tend to stabilize. Obviously, this will not make everyone happy but it does keep squads together which accounts for the majority of the players.
-
Originally posted by HomeBoy
Here is my idea of a balancing scheme:
Summary:
"Make people other than myself adjust."
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Summary:
"Make people other than myself adjust."
How so? Am I not a part of the scheme as well?
-
Originally posted by ZZ3
Sir I respect your point. I simply dont see the need to make the game play artificially balanced.
Imbalance is a part of warfare. Imbalance in this game has effected all countries at some point.
I am simply against the idea of being forced into a situation, of that I mean switching sides, or being forced to wait because I dont want to switch countries. It does'nt make me right, wrong, or unwilling to switch. It is simply a choice which I want to make for my self. If I see fit to do it.
Whats wrong with that?
Thank you,
ZZ3
479th Raiders
ZZ3
If everything pans out right with the artificial balance, it would ultimately creat the ultimate stalemate, and that my friends would lead to stagnation. I have found myself playing less and less of late as I'm just not motivated to record my favorite programs on TV and play instead. The whole experience is going downhill for me at this rate. Warfare in itself is fluid and when we start to put restrictions on it, well we saw how that worked in Vietnam didn't we?
All the Best...
Jay
awDoc1
-
See Rules #5, #2
-
Originally posted by HomeBoy
How so? Am I not a part of the scheme as well?
Not according to what I read...
You basically said that those who were in squads would be able to bypass the side-balancing mechanisms if they wanted to and the mechanism should only affect those not in squads or those in squads who didn't care.
Seems pretty clear to me that you want others to be impacted by this while exempting yourself. If I am reading that wrong please indicate how a forced mechanism can be effective while being optional for anyone who chooses to exempt themselves.
-
Deleted
-
Originally posted by thndregg
Hey Sim, sir!
As far as I know from my limited time on, we've been doing our best to accomodate that overall.
Back at ya.
Never meant to BOP-bash....my post was specifically in response to Falc's.
Originally posted by Excaliber
My thoughts exactly...fix tweak...fix tweak....fix fix fix. How about putting some energy is a bigger server.
May want to read a little about the original changes....they have absolutely nothing to do with server capacity, or technical issues in general.
Despite persistant urban myth to the contrary, the 300 max arena changes came because the MA "wasnt healthy" as measured by HTC's hard data analysis (ie not by soft impressions or opinions).
It's idiotic to belive that HT (or any business owner) would deliberately poison his product to "force" people to do something differently.
The formula's pretty simple -- "the most fun for the most people equals the biggest profits."
-
Originally posted by doc1kelley
ZZ3
If everything pans out right with the artificial balance, it would ultimately creat the ultimate stalemate, and that my friends would lead to stagnation. I have found myself playing less and less of late as I'm just not motivated to record my favorite programs on TV and play instead. The whole experience is going downhill for me at this rate. Warfare in itself is fluid and when we start to put restrictions on it, well we saw how that worked in Vietnam didn't we?
All the Best...
Jay
awDoc1
so, the only way to take bases and win the war is to have overwhelming numbers. that is the generally strategy. sounds like fun.
i think we need to move away from comparing an online game to real war. obviously in war you want every advantage there is. we are talking life and death. this is an online game. there is no life and death....the only purpose for it's being is the exact opposite of war.....to have fun. games generally run by having the best team win. if you can't have fun without having large number advantage, and can't devise a strategy to compete fairly, then i might submit you are not a strat guy, you are just something else.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Not according to what I read...
Edbert, you're reading "motive" in my proposal that is simply not there. Ok, I do say the squad member is given a "chance" to circumvent the automatic assignment but that was not an intentional "bypass" of the system. It was an attempt to "soften the rules" so as to give the player some flexibility while still maintaining the objective. Lighten up a little here man. I'm just trying to offer something constructive.
I had thought of editing what I proposed (before you even replied) to include a method where the freelancer could choose to wait for a spot to open up in the country of his choice or something like that but figured everyone would get the basic gist of what I was saying and decided not to. I had no idea anyone would "read in" a motive on my part. Trust me, I have no motive here. I just, as I presume you as well, want to see something workable come out of all this.
-
Homeboy thats the route I'd take. It would require a little research,and input from all the COs and squads being redeployed to another team, but atleast they could stay intact.
Edbert, for those people who arent in squads, and who side switch often, and fly lone wolf, the recent change means little. They have no squad to miss. So if Homeboy's idea was used and the people who arent in squads were managed by the game as to who they flew for that day, what would change for them?
-
What do you mean, "We"? I self-regulate nearly everyday, sometimes twice a day. And, I haven't gone blind yet.
Now here is someone that maturity and good manners has permanently avoided at all costs.
Still think the children should be removed from the game, no matter what their age. LOL
-
Originally posted by FiLtH
Edbert, for those people who arent in squads, and who side switch often, and fly lone wolf, the recent change means little. They have no squad to miss. So if Homeboy's idea was used and the people who arent in squads were managed by the game as to who they flew for that day, what would change for them?
but clearly there are not enough people who switch sides as it is, otherwise there would not be large number imbalances. also, some guys, even a couple i remember seeing posting, do not belong in a squad, but won't switch countries. do you really think squads who won't switch of there own free will, and those saying they have no freedom are going to accept flying for a different country? at least this way, they still have the choice to continue to fly for their country....if they want to wait, if they want to change areans, or if their country isn't holding a big numerical advantage. just my thoughts.
-
It's still an attempt to make the balancing effect only other people, while giving those who never wanted to help out an exemption. That's partial to those types who have contributed to the situation that HT felt he needed to correct. That wouldn't seem like a good idea to me.
Why are you guys so hung up on this idea of switching? You didn't know **** about the country you started out with, and you didn't know most of the people on it. Somehow, despite this overwhelming adversity, you met people, and formed squads, and had fun. Why can't you do this now?
-
I think the biggest problem we have is the lack of understanding of exactly what the problem is!
HT obviously sees a problem and is going about solving it by splitting the arenas, the "orange experiment", and now the latest ENY adjustments. From everything I've read of what he as said, there are two problems that need to be solved:
1. Too many players in a single arena which creates a "slum" effect (hordes, milkruns, etc).
2. Imbalance between the countries.
From everything I've read of the response from the community, my conclusion is that the majority of players are concerned with staying together with their squads.
I would love to see us begin to reach consensus as to what we are trying to solve. When I read things like "why not put things back the way they were?" then it becomes clear to me that we are not understanding the problem or that maybe the problem is not what we think it is. I worry sometimes that HT is listening to particular groups of players and getting an understanding of the "problem" that not neccessarily reality but then realize that he is a pretty sharp guy and should be able to see through that sort of thing.
Compound all of this with the natural tendency (especially among men) to resist change.
If someone would clarify exactly what problem we are trying to solve I would appreciate it.
Have a great day!
-
Originally posted by HomeBoy
Edbert, you're reading "motive" in my proposal that is simply not there.
Fair enough
Glad to see another old hand posting here too. Since you've been around since the beginnings of AH perhaps you are as amused by those who see "sudden changes" to the game? This game has been tweaked/modified/changed/fixed/broken/repaired hundreds of times fellas, only exception was a relatively staid period of around 2-3 years where TOD was at the forfront of HTC programming efforts, other than that period, change has been a constant. And immediately following almost every significant change was a bevy of panic, hurt feelings, gnashing of teeth, and threats of quitting, but the game continued to grow and evolve.
That said, I can see how someone could join in 2004/2005, or early 2006 and see the game as remaining a constant. I also notice that a majority of the detractors of this change seem to have joined in that time frame, maybe me, maybe coincidence, not claiming to have seen the hard-data.
-
sorry,
but i never saw a problem. in the old days ht fixed bugs, graphics, not the "herds".
in the old days we flew and fought each other and had fun doing it. now all i see is complaining. i miss wednesdays when skuzzy would come on and we give him crap (all in good fun).
where did those days go? :(
-
My only Question to HITECH is...
Why cant we have One Areana untouched, with a cap of say 600, No rules or regs, No ENY, with Only BIG Maps, and do whatever you want to the other areans.??
This is not for anyone else to answer, but the developing team. Thanx in advance.
-
Originally posted by 4deck
This is not for anyone else to answer, but the developing team. Thanx in advance.
Why do you post it on a public forum then? If you wanna talk to developers, talk to developers.. Email, phone, personal visit...
-
Originally posted by 4deck
My only Question to HITECH is...
Why cant we have One Areana untouched, with a cap of say 600, No rules or regs, No ENY, with Only BIG Maps, and do whatever you want to the other areans.??
This is not for anyone else to answer, but the developing team. Thanx in advance.
Because everyone will just go in that arena. Sorry, I am a developer :D
-
Just rename them Az, Bz and Cz. Ehh, on second thought, people would gripe about that, too.
Ahh, the days of a Cz Mossie raid on the Az scum's spit factory.:cool:
-
(Obi Wan) "I've not heard the term spit factory in a long time.........a long time."
-
Originally posted by BugsBunny
Because everyone will just go in that arena. Sorry, I am a developer :D
well doesn't that say something right there?
-
Originally posted by Simaril
OK Falc....I'm really trying to understand what you're saying, but I cant quite see your perspective.
How exactly is having roughly equal numbers a bad thing?
We get to select our arenas and countries; how is it HT's fault if we choose imbalance?
To put it another way, if the Rooks have a 2:1 advantge in Blue, and are underdogs in Orange, why are you so rigidly demanding that Rooks be freely allowed to keep joining the horde? It just doesnt make sense to me, I dont see the connection -- how is this imbalance NOT our fault? All we have to do is shift arenas, and it helps EVERYONE.
If the BOPS want to fly together, why cant they pick the arena where Bish are low instead of the one where the Bish are high? Wouldnt that work out for EVERYONE'S best interest?
What I hear you saying is that your freedom to choose country and arena should outweigh any negative effects on the rest of the game. And that's why I see "caring about themselves more than the game" as a core issue. You think that's rubbish, apparently, but I cannot fathom the logic. If I'm wrong about this, them ...please explain your position so I can understand it. If I've misinterpreted, I'll apologise to you for any insult.
i believe i was making two points simaril....
1) it is rubbish to continue to try and assign blame to anyone paying $15/month for a service for the fact that the game is "broken". If players can stay within the designed rules of the game and it can not be "fair" then i blame the programmer (rule maker)...not the players. (the often used "basketball" reference doesnt fly because noone is playing 10 vs 5...see the rules only allow 5 v 5...so 10 v 5 would be breaking the rules.)
so please stop saying that WE are at fault...let me reexamine my objectives for this game....
1. Have fun
2. Laugh and chat with guys whose company i enjoy
the rest is trivial..an excuse to be hanging out...thats why so many folks dont put alot of time and energy into switching etc...they really dont care...i know i dont...get banged or bang ...all the same to me.
so for my second point...
2) i dont care if it turns out we have to jump countries to fly together...i just know (as anyone who plays does) that numbers vary dramatically and who wants to play "jump countries til all the squaddies who happen to be on right at this moment can be the same country...but whoops 30 minutes later 2 have logged and 3 new ones are stuck having to play another country??)
i see the latest brash change as yet another poorly thought out plan whose results have not been properly anticipated.
(honestly sim...could your 5 yo kid not have forseen that limiting frontline bases available for capture would promote "hording" and " country gangbanging" can you honestly tell me that that was thought out at all??)
and why the rush...even if you want limited frontline bases capturable..why not design a map that will work for it instead of turning out a mediocre result by sticking it on top of an established map????
and why design 4 arenas and have less maps that can work for them then you had before??? why werent new maps designed in advance???
so NO Sim i dont think im gonna let folks like you try to make me feel small for not "doing our part"...its time the leadership around here took some responsibility and quit releasing more wild horses from their barns.
so far you have supported them completely...have all their moves been superb then or can you only see that the community is the problem?
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Here's a for ya gritty-one!
Grits, get a kill? priceless :rofl
-
Originally posted by pluck
so, the only way to take bases and win the war is to have overwhelming numbers. that is the generally strategy. sounds like fun.
i think we need to move away from comparing an online game to real war. obviously in war you want every advantage there is. we are talking life and death. this is an online game. there is no life and death....the only purpose for it's being is the exact opposite of war.....to have fun. games generally run by having the best team win. if you can't have fun without having large number advantage, and can't devise a strategy to compete fairly, then i might submit you are not a strat guy, you are just something else.
Where did that I state that the only way to win the war is to have overwhelming numbers? I don't see it. OK so this no longer a war simulation and now it's an arcade game. Is that your response?. Some of you wanna-be folks appear to have been programmed to believe that just because a person is in a "mega-squad" that they only fly with hordes, and that is just not the truth. I rarely fly with numbers and when I do, it's because it's with friends that I like to fly with. Personally, I like the Mid War arena and it just doesn't have numbers and I would be the last person to state that I want people forced to fly there! You pay a fee to play as you like within the rules that the provider has established and that is all that I care about, with the exception that I will pay as long as I can play with my friends in an environment that is playable.
All the Best...
Jay
awDoc1
-
Originally posted by DadRabit
in the old days we flew and fought each other and had fun doing it. now all i see is complaining. i miss wednesdays when skuzzy would come on and we give him crap (all in good fun).
where did those days go? :(
Yeah, thats a very good question. Only that i do not see HT at fault to where those times have gone to. The community has shifted, slowly but steadily.
-
Hitech,
Sounds very interesting I also am willing to try it. I will see how it effects our Squad tonight and going to try and get 20 of the 68th to fly together somewhere?
Hitech,
Question ,Is there still a long wait to switch to another country or you can switch at any time?:aok
-
68ko: Country change time is 1 hour.
If you are in the waiting queue, the change time is ignored.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Torcher
Just rename them Az, Bz and Cz. Ehh, on second thought, people would gripe about that, too.
Ahh, the days of a Cz Mossie raid on the Az scum's spit factory.:cool:
OH jesh!!! I had forgotten all about the Spit factory. Nothing can compare the unadulterated fun of watching gaggles of dweebs racing to protect their precious Spit factory!!
HiTech, can we please have a spit factory?!?! And maybe an LA factory if it ain't to much to ask for? I would pay double for the the fun of denying the dweeb access to his crack!!
Big Mickey
-
Originally posted by 68Ripper
See Rules #5, #2
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
:noid
-
Originally posted by hitech
68ko: Country change time is 1 hour.
If you are in the waiting queue, the change time is ignored.
HiTech
So when trying to get a squad together somewhere, some members may switch immediately, but others may have to wait 1 hour to switch after their mates if they were already playing?... or do they also have to try getting into the queue somewhere else to be able to switch?
What if the queue ceases to exist with a few people switching?
Seems a bit confusing, but I suppose it will be more clear when we see it.
-
Bit of a hijack but what happened to servers last night HT?
and back to original subject,
What time is this change being implemented?
-
Originally posted by Big Mickey
OH jesh!!! I had forgotten all about the Spit factory. Nothing can compare the unadulterated fun of watching gaggles of dweebs racing to protect their precious Spit factory!!
HiTech, can we please have a spit factory?!?! And maybe an LA factory if it ain't to much to ask for? I would pay double for the the fun of denying the dweeb access to his crack!!
Big Mickey
sometimes we would take a fully maned B17 (death star) to the spit factory, sometimes we made it in and sometimes we even made it back out.:D
-
i think i know what would quit the whining.
1 MA
large map
space for everyone to do what they want.
no friction.
no attrition.
numbers would be even again.( total up all arenas numbers and there almost always equal give or take 10 players.)
if ch.200 was so bad, why not just ditch it?:huh
-
I like :aok
-
See Rules #5, #2
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
It's still an attempt to make the balancing effect only other people, while giving those who never wanted to help out an exemption. That's partial to those types who have contributed to the situation that HT felt he needed to correct. That wouldn't seem like a good idea to me.
Why are you guys so hung up on this idea of switching? You didn't know **** about the country you started out with, and you didn't know most of the people on it. Somehow, despite this overwhelming adversity, you met people, and formed squads, and had fun. Why can't you do this now?
because the luftwaffe didnt kiss the RAF and USAF pilots?
lol.
-
Originally posted by Mr No Name
See Rules #5, #2
:lol
that idea just struck me lol
seems like it was a 9pop up light bulb above my head) kinda one lol
-
Originally posted by pluck
but clearly there are not enough people who switch sides as it is, otherwise there would not be large number imbalances. also, some guys, even a couple i remember seeing posting, do not belong in a squad, but won't switch countries. do you really think squads who won't switch of there own free will, and those saying they have no freedom are going to accept flying for a different country? at least this way, they still have the choice to continue to fly for their country....if they want to wait, if they want to change areans, or if their country isn't holding a big numerical advantage. just my thoughts.
My sense is if you did a good job of dividing up the squadrons across the three countries, that would sufficiently balance things so that where to put the "freelancers" would almost not matter. [I'd love to know how accurate I am on that.] From talking with members of squads, I also get the sense that most squad members don't care as much for the chess piece as they do the squad they're in. That's why I feel the "squad divvying" concept just might work.
Please indulge me this little rant. I just roll my eyes when I hear the phrase "loyalty to a chess piece." It sounds cleaver enough but it's a pretty naive view of the issue. It's really not "loyalty to a chess piece" at all. It's a comraderie thing. After a while, you get to know guys in other squads who have joined in a base takeover, etc. and you enjoy helping that squad accomplish an objective. You get and receive "check 6s" between these guys and enjoy seeing them again days later. You see them and recall the fun you had in a battle with them. It becomes a family thing. Surly you understand that don't you? [Rant off] Even with all that, the loyalty to the squad is tighter than the country (IMHO) and forcing a squad to change countries would be something I feel most would accept (even though all of what I've just said would apply and the change would not come without some bit of whinning.) If the squad divvying is done well enough, it might even work out that there might not be that much moving around; one big move might do it for a year or more.
-
Originally posted by BugsBunny
Because everyone will just go in that arena. Sorry, I am a developer :D
Greetings from an old Air Warrior, and an AH squad member since we all moved here from EA, years ago.
This is my first post in this forum since we moved here, but I have a few things to say about all of these massive changes to the game arenas.
First, I have a couple of questions: Why was the MA split into several arenas? Was it a technical thing? Was it a business decision that HT hoped would make the number of subscribers grow?
Whatever the reason, I don't see the positive benefits of it. Constant change may be how real life works, but it has been my observation that if you constantly screw with a game, people eventually throw up their hands and find one that they can depend on to be somewhat predictable and simple to understand, even if stoned or drunk. (Sorry, just trying to be realistic here.)
On "combat game" vs "wargame": A video combat game doesn't need any set of gameplay rules except those that make the sides even, and it's all about furballing. You don't need any sort of historical realism, and in fact, you can invent weapons and vehicles just for the pure fun of it. That type of video game has its place. But by its nature, a "wargame" is a simulation of a particular situation, a particular set of combatants, and a particular technological stage of development for weapons, aircraft and vehicles. Saying to people who subscribed to AH because they enjoy a (yes, let me say it) serious wargame, that it's just a game and they shouldn't take it so seriously, is tantamount to telling them that they should be content in playing a combat video game, even though what they bought was something else. Nothing good can come of this approach. A good WWZII wargame is going to have furballing, territory capture, defense, offense, strats, supply and communication lines that can be disrupted, etc., etc.
On squads: Squads are the real community for many of us. They are like families that you can count on in a sea of indifference and online anonymity. I guarantee that if you force squads to switch countries, or worse, fight against each other or log, you will kill AH. I can't speak for other squads, but the Flying Tigers AVG and SkyKnights are filled with people who are loyal to each other first, and to the game second, and often, squaddies re-up their AH accounts solely out of loyalty to their friends.
On hording: Sometimes you horde, and sometimes you get horded. The old gameplay model had an ebb and flow to it. I don't know about the rest of you, but I belong to a squad (The Flying Tigers AVG), and we fly with a sister squad of bomber pilots (The SkyKnights). With one MA, you played the hand that was dealt you by circumstances. When we logged on for squad ops, we played the game for our country (not "chesspiece"), whether we were the horders or the hordees. It didn't matter which was which, because the important thing was that we we took pleasure in flying combined ops with each other.
On Balance: I hear people say that balance is so very important. I simply don't agree with this at all. We've had just as much fun in fighting against a horde as in being part of one. This is an attitude issue - not a balance issue.
On ENY: Let people fly what they like. It is, after all, just a game. ENY just irritates people.
On whining: Is that what started all of this? Mass numbers of whiners attempting to control the gameplay? It feels like HT is surfing the whiner wave, instead of letting people just play the game and whine all they want - something whiners are going to do, no matter what HT does with the arenas.
Suggestion: If the split arenas are here to stay, let's see what happens if there is one old-style MA with a 600 person cap, hording allowed, may the best horde win, etc., etc., and see what happens. If, as Bugs says, everybody will just go there, then there is the answer to what the community wants - whiners notwithstanding.
Meanwhile, both the Flying Tigers and SkyKnights are losing players to other games in unprecedented numbers - something we've never seen before, and all for the same reasons: too much screwing with the game. There is a limit to how much crap people will put up with. I hope it ends soon.
Respectfully submitted,
Stiletto
XO
The Flying Tigers AVG - now in our 10th year as a squad
-
"surfing the whiner wave" lol
:rofl :aok
-
Originally posted by Stiletto
This is my first post in this forum since we moved here, but I have a few things to say about all of these massive changes to the game arenas.
Wow! I have to admit that I didn't think I was going to like what you had to say. I was wrong. You actually make a lot of sense. S!
Reminds me of something someone I know pretty well said:
"I think the biggest problem we have is the lack of understanding of exactly what the problem is!"
-
Originally posted by FALCONWING
i believe i was making two points simaril....
1) it is rubbish to continue to try and assign blame to anyone paying $15/month for a service for the fact that the game is "broken". If players can stay within the designed rules of the game and it can not be "fair" then i blame the programmer (rule maker)...not the players. (the often used "basketball" reference doesnt fly because noone is playing 10 vs 5...see the rules only allow 5 v 5...so 10 v 5 would be breaking the rules.)
so please stop saying that WE are at fault...let me reexamine my objectives for this game....
...snipped for space...
2) i dont care if it turns out we have to jump countries to fly together...i just know (as anyone who plays does) that numbers vary dramatically and who wants to play "jump countries til all the squaddies who happen to be on right at this moment can be the same country...but whoops 30 minutes later 2 have logged and 3 new ones are stuck having to play another country??)
...snip...
so NO Sim i dont think im gonna let folks like you try to make me feel small for not "doing our part"...its time the leadership around here took some responsibility and quit releasing more wild horses from their barns.
so far you have supported them completely...have all their moves been superb then or can you only see that the community is the problem?
Aside from the jab at the end, thanks for a reasoned and responsive post.
I'm with you 100% in thinking having fun with friends is the entire point. Nothing else matters; and in the end, nothing is more important than the people.
We just need to remember that applies to people who arent in our groups, too. So, when we see that our side outnumbers the others by a lot, it would be good to switch things (arenas, countries, whatever) so THOSE guys have the same opportunity for fun that we do.
And as a community, we didnt do that. So, since WE didnt take the needs of others into account, HT had to make a rule to do it for us. The game was "broken" (your word), and though we could have "fixed it" without force we chose not to, for whatever reason. Now its a rule.
I forget where the problem was?
The whole thing seems pretty obvious to me, to be honest. (BTW, the new "rule" completely negates your "this isnt basketball" analogy, doesnt it -- unless since enforced balancing is now a "rule", and thus a standing part of the game, you're all in favor of it now? )
Never had intended to make you feel small, and I never mentioned you at all -- sorry you took it that way. There was no personal attack involved. I'm really glad to hear that you no longer consider side switching to be an unpardonable sin, since that will both make it easier for your squad to fly together AND minimize the negative impact on everyone else with the new rules in place.
Which gets to the "you've supported HTC" comment. I dont support them uniformly -- I noted the horde risk when the Orange experiment was started -- but i DO have empathy for them.
You're a doc, Falc...imagine what it would be like if you're every decision was hammered before it was even tried. Imagine if you wrote a prescription for a standard first line antibiotic, and patients screamed at you, questioned your competence and assigned malicious motives if that Rx didnt work. Thats what HT deals with every week, frankly from guys with your attitude.
So I figure I'll cut him slack. I DONT agree with every move, but I can see what he's aiming for and I think its a good target. He's programmed flight sims about as long as I've been a practicing doc myself, so I figure I'll treat him with the same professionalism and respect I'd want to be given. Nothing more than that, I'm no blind fanboy. Empathy and respect...a good combination, IMHO.
Like I said, its not that hard.
-
S! Stiletto,
extremely well thought and clearly presented argument. Many of your observations hit right on the nail.
-
May I insert my own low-level protest?
I protest against people who protest that they shouldn't be told how to play the game. The rules of ANY game restrict how you can play the game. HTC is changing the rules. That happens in most games, sooner or later. There is nothing unusual about this, in any game (or in any simulation, for that matter).
Your actual complaint is that you don't want to have the rules changed from what they were before. That's a perfectly valid point of view. And it has the added benefit of deleting all of the "I am a victim" crap that oozes out of these boards.
- oldman
-
the new system is working perfectly, blue is caped out at 120 so i went to orange, it was balanced, 9 in each country.
-
Originally posted by BlauK
EXCELLENT IDEA, Tilt!
Allowing people to sign up as volunteers being switched to another country on demand and rewarding them for being mercenaries :aok :aok :aok
Carrots always work better than sticks!
Mercenaries. Their own icons. Extra incentives for becoming mercenaries. I like it! :aok
-
Originally posted by john9001
the new system is working perfectly, blue is caped out at 120 so i went to orange, it was balanced, 9 in each country.
Question about how this new system works:
If you're in an arena for your squad ops and you dump, when you re-log, are you going to run the risk of having to switch countries because somebody else joined the arena while you were rebooting? Or is there a "grace period" built in?
-
Originally posted by 4deck
My only Question to HITECH is...
Why cant we have One Areana untouched, with a cap of say 600, No rules or regs, No ENY, with Only BIG Maps, and do whatever you want to the other areans.??
This is not for anyone else to answer, but the developing team. Thanx in advance.
They cant do that because everyone would be in that arena...no one left to participate in the grand experiment.
-
Originally posted by HomeBoy
I think the biggest problem we have is the lack of understanding of exactly what the problem is!
HT obviously sees a problem and is going about solving it by splitting the arenas, the "orange experiment", and now the latest ENY adjustments. From everything I've read of what he as said, there are two problems that need to be solved:
1. Too many players in a single arena which creates a "slum" effect (hordes, milkruns, etc).
2. Imbalance between the countries.
From everything I've read of the response from the community, my conclusion is that the majority of players are concerned with staying together with their squads.
I would love to see us begin to reach consensus as to what we are trying to solve. When I read things like "why not put things back the way they were?" then it becomes clear to me that we are not understanding the problem or that maybe the problem is not what we think it is. I worry sometimes that HT is listening to particular groups of players and getting an understanding of the "problem" that not neccessarily reality but then realize that he is a pretty sharp guy and should be able to see through that sort of thing.
Compound all of this with the natural tendency (especially among men) to resist change.
If someone would clarify exactly what problem we are trying to solve I would appreciate it.
Have a great day!
Nice post ... What I think you are missing is ...
"From everything I've read of the response from the community, my conclusion is that the majority of players are concerned with staying together with their squads."
The ones screaming the loudest are the squads, who do want to stay together, but under no circumstances do they want to switch to another country ... there ya have it ... in a nutshell. It's the "loyalty to a chess piece" that is the real bone of contention here.
Guppy has pointed out in many post, along with others who are members of other squads (including the BOPs) that for some strange reason ... none of the changes has really put a damper on their squad operations.
One thing you might not know ... you can create a squad of 1 ... you can create a squad and be the only person in it ... so the "let the lonewolfs balance first" ... can be circumvented very easily.
-
Originally posted by 4deck
My only Question to HITECH is...
Why cant we have One Areana untouched, with a cap of say 600, No rules or regs, No ENY, with Only BIG Maps, and do whatever you want to the other areans.??
This is not for anyone else to answer, but the developing team. Thanx in advance.
HT and Pyro already answered this question ... do a search.
-
Originally posted by Stiletto
Question about how this new system works:
If you're in an arena for your squad ops and you dump, when you re-log, are you going to run the risk of having to switch countries because somebody else joined the arena while you were rebooting? Or is there a "grace period" built in?
I have the same question. It's a bummer if you get disco'd and can't get back the the fight(s) you were in.
-
Originally posted by Grits
LIES! ALL LIES!!
PS: Plank, did you hear about Rocky Road ice cream?
Yes, zee almonds!
Walnuts be damned!
-
I'm fine with all of it but the country switching business. It's not the chess piece thing, I've flown for all countries, I just think you build up a comaradarie with your friends and ruining all that just to keep numbers even is overkill. Not to even mention the effect it has on squads, as has been aptly mentioned.
I'd rather fly a 51B or a 38G than have to switch and fly with a bunch of guys I don't know, and wind up killing guys I do know, or worse, getting killed by them.
Not like I have a choice, but that's my opinion.
-
Originally posted by Bode
Rivalry is a part of Human Nature, This Harmonous Community thing HTC is talking about will never occur,... Peolpe like to dislike other people for what ever reason, It fires the coal in the belly of our souls. ... I don't want nor will I enjoy fighting against my squad mates. ...People will only want to be on the side that is winning, ...But on thing I'm sure of is that being in a squad is going to be useless, unless you wait for God knows how many minutes or hours to fly with your buddys. Peolpe enjoy belonging to something that will never change.
Well Said!
-
and you know what else, what about "winning the war"? Isn't that, as hitech declared, the ultimate point of the game? Has that been forgotten? What's the point anymore if you log some sorties as rook in the afternoon, come back in the evening and are forced to fly knight, and then come back late night and have to fly rook again? The fun is in logging in later and seeing how your country has progressed since you last flew, not flying later in the evening to help undo the progress you helped earlier. Why should we even care about the new emphasis on strat?
It seems like releasing a new strat layout (supposedly to make "winning the war" more immersive) alongside this side cap (effectively making "winning the war" a pointless endeavour) really demonstrates that this whole idea was not well thought out at all.
-
bye bye Squad Night
country balance will never be rite
so we bite our tongue...and live with it
is the price going to be drop?
-
I fly for my country with my squad and will not fly any other way,So it is written SO IT SHALL BE.............
-
same here sirvlad
-
Originally posted by Stiletto
Question about how this new system works:
If you're in an arena for your squad ops and you dump, when you re-log, are you going to run the risk of having to switch countries because somebody else joined the arena while you were rebooting? Or is there a "grace period" built in?
Good question Stilleto... I hope someone has thought about this.
Note: no loyalty to chess piece agenda, no following a horde, no tool shedding innuendo necessary.:noid
-
See some people have loyalty to squad and country, but wait a minute isn't that why people join the military.
-
Originally posted by DadRabit
(Obi Wan) "I've not heard the term spit factory in a long time.........a long time."
Ah, yes. We should not forget the other memorable Obi Wan quote: "C-land: you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy." :)
-
New ENY wait system - I LOVE IT! :aok
New Orange arena changes - Not for me, but will try it and be open minded :p
PEOPLE GIVE HT A HARD TIME - but he is putting a lot of thought into this and though he dont always get it right, it aint for LACK OF TRYING PEOPLE!!!!!!!!
Originally posted by hitech
Monday we will be implementing a new balancing system. It works with the existing ENY number. It will no longer limit what planes you can fly. But rather when it reaches a preset value, people entering the arena will not be able to fly in that arena for their current country.
You will get a message similar to you are 3rd in a queue of 3 .
Your choices will be
1. go to another arena.
2. change countries.
3. wait until more people come onto the other side, or some one from your country leaves.
People waiting will always be able to change countries regardless of their last country change time.
People waiting in queue will not be counted in the ENY values.
This new balancing system will be implemented in all main arenas.
The test capture lines will be taken down until we can layout and code some different options.
1. The current zone / strat setup does not lend it self very well to the current setup,We will be change the supply system to work on all your countries fields, hence hitting the strat targets will have a larger effect.
2. The war win criteria will be changed from having to capture almost all of 1 country , to having to capture around 30 - 40% of both countries fields.
3. Will also make some core fields uncapturable in each country.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by BlauK
EXCELLENT IDEA, Tilt!
Allowing people to sign up as volunteers being switched to another country on demand and rewarding them for being mercenaries :aok :aok :aok
Carrots always work better than sticks!
I agree. If we HAVE to have this, then at least let people who don't mind switching "volunteer" to be mercs. It would accomplish what HT wants, make far fewer people mad, and create an additional dimension to the game.
You'd know the guy flying next to you is a merc, because of his icon. Whether you chose to respect him or not is your own business. Just like in real life.
I like it, as a fix to the fix of the original fix.
-
Originally posted by hooper69
bye bye Squad Night
country balance will never be rite
so we bite our tongue...and live with it
is the price going to be drop?
no HT has a good idea - if you choose to stay with country then you just wait, and others who want to switch to fly right away will switch - so everyone wins
It will work because it gives us CHOICES
:aok
-
I like the idea. People having to even the numbers out instead of the countries with overwhelming numbers at time with another country with hardly any numbers. This, however, will bring the whines over seperating squads and breaking their total devotion to a virtual chess piece.
Good idea about the percentage of the fields being captured so countries arent ganging one side and maps can be reset much quicker if a bad map.
Suggestion, could the uncapturable fields be put together for a FT? :aok
-
Originally posted by hooper69
is the price going to be drop?
If enough people actually leave it might.
-
Originally posted by President
no HT has a good idea - if you choose to stay with country then you just wait, and others who want to switch to fly right away will switch - so everyone wins
It will work because it gives us CHOICES
:aok
So you are equating the "choice" to wait with that of the "choice" to switch?
:huh
-
Originally posted by DadRabit
sorry,
but i never saw a problem. in the old days ht fixed bugs, graphics, not the "herds".
in the old days we flew and fought each other and had fun doing it. now all i see is complaining. i miss wednesdays when skuzzy would come on and we give him crap (all in good fun).
where did those days go? :(
They went to make better gameplay.:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Donzo
So you are equating the "choice" to wait with that of the "choice" to switch?
:huh
the alternative is no choice, you are forced to go to the lower country
so....
Hi tech could 1) leave it all imbalanced cause you narfs cant balance the sides yourselves, and that includes ME since im a player too
2) give you choices, like he is doing
3) force you to change to the lower country which would suck
SO WHAT IS YOUR POINT AGAIN MY FRIEND? or do you still nto get it?
:noid :noid :noid
-
Originally posted by President
the alternative is no choice, you are forced to go to the lower country
so....
Hi tech could 1) leave it all imbalanced cause you narfs cant balance the sides yourselves, and that includes ME since im a player too
2) give you choices, like he is doing
3) force you to change to the lower country which would suck
SO WHAT IS YOUR POINT AGAIN MY FRIEND? or do you still nto get it?
:noid :noid :noid
Narfs?
<--Knight
-
All HTC is trying to do is make the game fair. I don't think it's fair to throw darts at them for trying to do that. Fairness starts with relatively even numbers of players per side. Two things that muck up the works are squads and countries.
I think it's reasonable to say that most people who join squads do so to fly with them, and most people fly for a country because of familiarity with the other players or some perceived personality of that country.
HTC is trying to shuffle the deck to make the numbers more fair. If the numbers are more fair and the deck is shuffled, you have to play the hand your dealt, just like any game.
I wonder if shuffling the deck using squads as part of the algorithm, instead of them suffering the consequences of the shuffling would work?
The number of active members of a squad is known and also general patterns of their activity, including days and time blocks of that activity. If squads are then categorized by activity (>15 active members during time block A, 10-14 active in time block A, 5-9 active in time block A, etc.) you could probably come up with a pretty good way of assigning squads to a country for week and have the number be fairly even.
What I'm saying is to shuffle the deck with that data once per week. Squads would fly with each other in a country for that week, no changing. Dynamic filling of an arena to further even out sides would be done with people not assigned to a squad. A rolling history and data set could be carried over and country assignment of squads could be self correcting.
Since the entire nature of a "country" is changing from week to week as the deck is shuffled, the "country" loyalty issue goes away. If the sides were even, within a reasonable deviation, no capture or ENY system would be necessary, and I suppose that is the goal of HTC and the players.
Anyway, just an idea.
-
"narfs"? first time i been called a narf, what is a narf? did you make that up?
attack of the narfs............sounds cool
to arms to arms the narfs are coming.
hide your gold and women, the narfs will burn and pillage.
-
Originally posted by john9001
"narfs"? first time i been called a narf, what is a narf? did you make that up?
attack of the narfs............sounds cool
to arms to arms the narfs are coming.
hide your gold and women, the narfs will burn and pillage.
i get tired of 'dweeb' :D
:rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Sure is funny how much is 'suddenly' broken in the game. (and I've probably missed a few out)
Kev...
There was nothing 'sudden' about the changes. HT has know there were problems for a long time....he simply hasn't had the time to deal with them until now.
Originally posted by doc1kelley
If everything pans out right with the artificial balance, it would ultimately creat the ultimate stalemate, and that my friends would lead to stagnation.... The whole experience is going downhill for me at this rate. Warfare in itself is fluid and when we start to put restrictions on it, well we saw how that worked in Vietnam didn't we?
Doc...
Totally even numbers would definitely cause 'stagnation'. Totally even numbers is not the goal. The goal is to not have long term imbalanced numbers.
As a former AOHell AWer, you should remember what I like to call the "Carlos Effect". Organize your buds to be on without competition and capture all but one of the fields in both countries. Then vulch the crap out of anyone that logs in later. In a lot of ways, very similar to whats been happening here for the last few years.
Originally posted by Stiletto
On Balance: I hear people say that balance is so very important. I simply don't agree with this at all. We've had just as much fun in fighting against a horde as in being part of one. This is an attitude issue - not a balance issue.
Stil...
First, HIYA..din't know you were still around.
The problem with your statement is that all too often, the only opportunity people have is to "fight the horde" or simply avoid it. Some of the changes were made to try and promote combat...which, after all, is supposed to be the point of the game. :)
The changes have nothing to do with hardware. They are about the overall gaming environment. HT felt is was not conducive to keeping new players in the game.
-
:mad:
Ok, this is BS, on the HTC web page it says welcome to the internet's premier WWII Combat Experience. Well WWII was not balance. 1st HTC tried to tell us in what order to take bases, in odrer to win the war. We'll no one really went into that arena. The all the post from the people who have Aces High CM Staff after there names are wining about side balancing. Very few are comments are positive for the side balancing other then those. If we wanted to play an arcade game we would go out and buy one. What Are you doing? Trying to make a PS 3 game out of this.
-
Originally posted by President
the alternative is no choice, you are forced to go to the lower country
so....
Hi tech could 1) leave it all imbalanced cause you narfs cant balance the sides yourselves, and that includes ME since im a player too
2) give you choices, like he is doing
3) force you to change to the lower country which would suck
SO WHAT IS YOUR POINT AGAIN MY FRIEND? or do you still nto get it?
:noid :noid :noid
Who Died and made you President?
-
are all these changes in game now? the war winning criteria? the uncapturable core fields?
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
HT has know there were problems for a long time....he simply hasn't had the time to deal with them until now.
Maybe a little more time should be taken between dealings then ;)
I have a question as I just experienced the system for the first time. I was #1 in the queue for the MW, clicked OK. Went to the base, felt like a mindless tank free-for-all at the island. Loaded up a panzer, clicked spawn and queue message pops up again (numbers were something like 14 16 24). Since I wasn't flying, I didn't feel like switching. Clicked the spawn again, poof... I'm in the middle of GV hell, loving every minute.
Bang, I'm dead. Now my question, am I linked to the country from this flight forward or does the anti-horde logic run everytime I want to spawn? (Not that I saw this happen, just curious)
-
IMHO--
ENY has not worked for quite some time...last night the bish had 30-40 head lead and an ENY of 16, and (did the right thing) brought superior numbers to bear, steamrolling bases...no real defence to that.
War balanced? No. WWII taught us that while technology, better training, and morale ALL had parts to play, in the end, it could very well mean JACK against a high superiority in numbers (...and by NO MEANS saying that to take anything away from the bravery and sacrifice made by Soviet Soldiers).
What the GAME has suffered from is the old "piling on" mentality...many players simply want to be on the "winning" team, no matter how many times they have to change countries. It's not always fun being on the short end of the stick at the "Alamo", so those who were predominaltly outgunned either just took it, or left in frustration.
I'm one who agrees that the "Orange Arena" system doesn not work either...and am willing to toodle around in another (EW, MW, or AVA) until a knight slot opens in my (Blue) arena of choice.
Naysayers...give it a shot for awhile, and let your own loyalties and squad friendships mingle in the new system for awhile. Just like "New Coke", "Pepsi Light" and the"Orange Arena"...the market will eventually dictate the product needs....not the other way round.
I appreciate the fact that HTC has given us more options and more choices in the last few months than ever before.
Good Hunting!
ROX
**PigStompers**
-
Thanks Hitech, for breaking my adiction to the game...:cry
-
Originally posted by Tilt
What currency does AH have to offer fighters of a 4th group (a nation without a land .........Pawns?) who switch sides (or are switched) to balance the battle...... these Pawns could have automatic perk multipliers (always 1.5?) and carry their own Pawn icon into battle under the colours of their present master country. (red yellow or green)
I quite fancy being such a Mercenary Pawn.
I like the idea of there being some group of volunteers who are called upon first to switch sides. Then, if it isn't enough to balance, others are called upon to switch.
It would be harder to implement. Perhaps, though, it could be done as follows. Players can sign up to be side switchers. When an imbalance condition is triggered, for the next N minutes (15 minutes, say), only volunteers get the "switch sides" message upon replaning. After that, everyone replaning gets the message until the side is balanced, then the clock is reset.
I'm not sure what the inducement should be to entice people to volunteer. Some folks (like me) would do it just to help out. Others might need something (like larger perk multiplier, as suggested by Tilt). Or maybe there are other benefits that could be doled out -- not sure what they'd be, though.
-
Originally posted by Casinoman
I'm one who agrees that the "Orange Arena" system doesn not work either...and am willing to toodle around in another (EW, MW, or AVA) until a knight slot opens in my (Blue) arena of choice.
I agree with this idea.
What we need is a paging system that alerts you to an opening based on when you signed up with a preference to a particular arena/country. Kinda like those pagers resturants give you to let you know a table is available. You would have a fixed amount of time (1-2 mins) to respond to the opening. Either quit what you are doing and accept the opening or it goes to the next person in the queue.
-
Originally posted by President
the alternative is no choice, you are forced to go to the lower country
so....
Hi tech could 1) leave it all imbalanced cause you narfs cant balance the sides yourselves, and that includes ME since im a player too
2) give you choices, like he is doing
3) force you to change to the lower country which would suck
SO WHAT IS YOUR POINT AGAIN MY FRIEND? or do you still nto get it?
:noid :noid :noid
My POINT was that the "choice" to wait is not the same value as the choice to switch.
And here in Narfdom we Narfs are curious as to where you got your 1,2,3 list.
As seen here:
Originally posted by hitech
Currently having 2 different thoughts.
1 Go back to my original idea of having a wait time between flights based on country balance. This would put the same numbers in the air at one time.
2. Write the cant fly in this arena unless you changes sides.
3. Say screw it, turn off ENY and let everyone complain.
I don't see your #3. Improv?
Let me add that I have never once given any thought to being out numbered. I guess people are just different. I always looked at being on the short end of the stick number-wise to be a challenge.
-
Overall, it seems the greatest difficulty is that balancing sides and allowing people to fly with their squads are goals that pull in opposite directions.
That's why I liked the ENY system, only strengthened and allowed to go farther. The first ENY experiment didn't result in people switching sides to balance the sides. I think that is because the ENY limit didn't go far enough. People were mostly willing to stay with higher ENY planes than switch. They could still get some good planes, even by late-war standards.
The current system -- forcing a switch or a wait -- is sort of the extreme of what would happen if the ENY system were allowed to raise the ENY limit to 0 (where no planes are available).
I think an ENY-based system that allowed the ENY limit to keep being lowered, even all the way to 0, would provide a graded response that would give at its limit something equivalent to the current system, but it would allow those with very strong preference for staying in on the current side no matter what a way to achieve that.
Also, when one side has nothing but 1940's vintage aircraft available, a bit of side imbalance can be tolerated. It could be set up so that, at more extreme ENY limits, a side has only A6M2's, Hurri I's, P-40's, etc. -- no F4U-1's, etc.
If an ENY-based system that is allowed to go all the way to zero is not done, though, I think the current system would result in a bit more flexibility if it allowed for volunteers to be the first picked for switching.
-
Originally posted by Rolex
All HTC is trying to do is make the game fair. I don't think it's fair to throw darts at them for trying to do that. Fairness starts with relatively even numbers of players per side. Two things that muck up the works are squads and countries.
I think it's reasonable to say that most people who join squads do so to fly with them, and most people fly for a country because of familiarity with the other players or some perceived personality of that country.
HTC is trying to shuffle the deck to make the numbers more fair. If the numbers are more fair and the deck is shuffled, you have to play the hand your dealt, just like any game.
I wonder if shuffling the deck using squads as part of the algorithm, instead of them suffering the consequences of the shuffling would work?
The number of active members of a squad is known and also general patterns of their activity, including days and time blocks of that activity. If squads are then categorized by activity (>15 active members during time block A, 10-14 active in time block A, 5-9 active in time block A, etc.) you could probably come up with a pretty good way of assigning squads to a country for week and have the number be fairly even.
What I'm saying is to shuffle the deck with that data once per week. Squads would fly with each other in a country for that week, no changing. Dynamic filling of an arena to further even out sides would be done with people not assigned to a squad. A rolling history and data set could be carried over and country assignment of squads could be self correcting.
Since the entire nature of a "country" is changing from week to week as the deck is shuffled, the "country" loyalty issue goes away. If the sides were even, within a reasonable deviation, no capture or ENY system would be necessary, and I suppose that is the goal of HTC and the players.
Anyway, just an idea.
It's more like they are patronizing the elitist. The good of the few over the many thing.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Stil...
First, HIYA..din't know you were still around.
The problem with your statement is that all too often, the only opportunity people have is to "fight the horde" or simply avoid it. Some of the changes were made to try and promote combat...which, after all, is supposed to be the point of the game. :)
The changes have nothing to do with hardware. They are about the overall gaming environment. HT felt is was not conducive to keeping new players in the game. [/B]
Hey NB,
I'm still here. Some of the original Damned who became Tigers are still flying together. Maybe this is the crux of the matter: Some of the changes were made to try and promote combat...which, after all, is supposed to be the point of the game. :)
I've never seen a single one of my squaddies log on, look at the war, see that our country is under massive attack, and then log out of disgust. We have always played the hand we were dealt. That is war - sometimes you get the bear, and sometimes the bear gets you. Some people might say that this isn't war, that it's a game, but it's supposed to be a combat simulation - not an arcade game. As a good sim does, it never artificially managed numbers to make things even. Hell, that was one of the things I liked about it - you never knew when you logged on if it was your country's turn to be overrun, or if it was your turn to do the smack-down. It made it interesting. There were times when a small number of us were able to turn the tide of battle, and out last the horde until it ran out of steam. That makes for an awesome evening, don't you agree?
But you also say the decision was about a feeling HT had about numbers. Not saying gut feelings are bad - just not a very good basis upon which to make business decisions. But if what you mean is that he looked at the numbers, ran some exit polls of people who quit to find out why they left, surveyed existing customers to see what they wanted, and made decisions accordingly, then that's a different ballgame. Is that what happened?
How bad was the horde problem, actually? Honestly, NB, was AH hemorrhaging players because of the way the old MA was set up, or have the numbers been decreasing since the splitting up of the arenas? (I don't know the answer to this question - just asking.)
Stil
-
So, are any changes going to happen? I thought today was the big day. Maybe Hitech just wants to watch us squirm?
:noid
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Kev...
There was nothing 'sudden' about the changes. HT has know there were problems for a long time....he simply hasn't had the time to deal with them until now.
1) The old MA very, very, rarely (apart from close to reset, RJOs') got as unbalanced as the rolling cap arenas.
Thats our fault?
We didn't change the arenas.
2) More choice - How anyone would even think we have 'more choice' now is beyond me.
3) Time to deal - Nope and I guess he hasn't got time to deal with the bugs that are STILL around from AH1. Warpy buffs, gear appearing down in missions etc.
Sorry, all these changes have been necessitated by the original premise "the MA was broke".
Sooner or later you reach a point were you realise it's not worth the time trying to force people into a certain gamestyle.
Were they are lucky is that there isn't another game of this type even close to it out there, so you either like it or lump it.
Whats going to happen if one of the 'big boys' decides to get in on it and gives a viable alternative?
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
The problem with your statement is that all too often, the only opportunity people have is to "fight the horde" or simply avoid it. Some of the changes were made to try and promote combat...which, after all, is supposed to be the point of the game. :)
You want that kind of 1 or 2 vs 1 or 2...go to the DA. HT was nice enuogh to make one of those.
-
Originally posted by Stiletto
I've never seen a single one of my squaddies log on, look at the war, see that our country is under massive attack, and then log out of disgust. We have always played the hand we were dealt. That is war - sometimes you get the bear, and sometimes the bear gets you. Some people might say that this isn't war, that it's a game, but it's supposed to be a combat simulation - not an arcade game. As a good sim does, it never artificially managed numbers to make things even. Hell, that was one of the things I liked about it - you never knew when you logged on if it was your country's turn to be overrun, or if it was your turn to do the smack-down. It made it interesting. There were times when a small number of us were able to turn the tide of battle, and out last the horde until it ran out of steam. That makes for an awesome evening, don't you agree?
Sure I agree. The problem arises when the same people are continually fighting against the odds. As you stated, most don't log off, they simply avoid the odds (hence, they avoid combat).
Originally posted by Stiletto
But you also say the decision was about a feeling HT had about numbers. Not saying gut feelings are bad - just not a very good basis upon which to make business decisions. But if what you mean is that he looked at the numbers, ran some exit polls of people who quit to find out why they left, surveyed existing customers to see what they wanted, and made decisions accordingly, then that's a different ballgame. Is that what happened?
You misunderstood. HT doesn't have to go on 'gut feelings' where the numbers are concerned.
Originally posted by Stiletto
How bad was the horde problem, actually? Honestly, NB, was AH hemorrhaging players because of the way the old MA was set up, or have the numbers been decreasing since the splitting up of the arenas? (I don't know the answer to this question - just asking.)
Stil
The change from the large MA wasn't about 'hordes'. It was about a poor environment for retention of new customers. HT is convinced (note, I didn't use "feels" :D) that very large single arena we had isn't good for the growth of his business. The last time I asked (about a month ago) the arena usage numbers were up slightly.
Stil...
You've been around. Give the changes a chance to settle in. You never know, strange as it may sound, HT might actually know what he is doing. :)
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
1) The old MA very, very, rarely (apart from close to reset, RJOs') got as unbalanced as the rolling cap arenas.
Thats our fault?
We didn't change the arenas.
2) More choice - How anyone would even think we have 'more choice' now is beyond me.
3) Time to deal - Nope and I guess he hasn't got time to deal with the bugs that are STILL around from AH1. Warpy buffs, gear appearing down in missions etc.
Sorry, all these changes have been necessitated by the original premise "the MA was broke".
Sooner or later you reach a point were you realise it's not worth the time trying to force people into a certain gamestyle.
Were they are lucky is that there isn't another game of this type even close to it out there, so you either like it or lump it.
Whats going to happen if one of the 'big boys' decides to get in on it and gives a viable alternative?
Kev...
One of us seems to have a problem reading what I wrote to you. I merely pointed out that your statement that the changes were "suddenly" made was incorrect. But, for Heaven's sake, don't let facts stand in the way of your rant!! :D
Redtop...
You obviously are also suffering from some sort of reading comprehension problem.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Sure I agree. The problem arises when the same people are continually fighting against the odds. As you stated, most don't log off, they simply avoid the odds (hence, they avoid combat).
Hey NB, I'm probably dense, but what do you mean? That people logged on and sat in the tower, rather than fight?
You misunderstood. HT doesn't have to go on 'gut feelings' where the numbers are concerned.
How do you mean? You can look at numbers, but how do you know why people are quitting, without asking them? How do you know what your loyal customers want, without asking them?
The change from the large MA wasn't about 'hordes'. It was about a poor environment for retention of new customers. HT is convinced (note, I didn't use "feels" :D) that very large single arena we had isn't good for the growth of his business.
Can you explain what "poor environment" means? I thought the massively multi-player environment was what made the sim awesome.
The last time I asked (about a month ago) the arena usage numbers were up slightly.
Well, that's good.
Stil...
You've been around. Give the changes a chance to settle in. You never know, strange as it may sound, HT might actually know what he is doing. :)
My hat's off to HT, NB. He's made this business model work, so he must be doing something right. But that isn't what we're discussing, is it? We're talking about keeping players that we have and adding new ones. That's my problem. I have squaddies in two different squads wanting to go elsewhere, and I'm trying to keep us together. I'm not hearing any encouraging prospective moves to take back with me. Help me out, bro. How does the new plan support squads?
-
well at least a lot of people on tonight checking it out, counted over 700, not bad. 263 in one arena, 348 in another, plus around 75 in midwar.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Redtop...
You obviously are also suffering from some sort of reading comprehension problem.
My reading comprehension is fine thanks.
-
See Rules #5, #4
-
This BBS is sounding a lot like the WB's BBS before HiTech left.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
What would be the negative effects of putting things back the way they were?
Ah.. there isn't enough crow in the frozen food sections of Safeway, Frys, Food Giant, etc. to fill plates that will need to be eaten?
-
Originally posted by Killjoy2
This BBS is sounding a lot like the WB's BBS before HiTech left.
when did WB break tho?
before or after?
if it was before, then maybe AH is going the same way.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Has anyone taken into account who has the most to lose if the changes don't work?
Wouldn't that be the guys who design and own the game?
Earlier tonite some guy was ripping into HT, wondering what was wrong with Hitech and how HT didn't have a clue what people wanted in this game.
I asked him how long he'd been flying.
He replied 'about a year".
I then asked him if he thought that HT and company, who have been designing these games and playing them longer then most of us, might just have a clue as to what they want?
I then got the 'Oh, so I don't get to have an opinion' reply.
Sure it's fine to have an opinion, but to suggest the folks with the most to lose, have no clue about what they are doing and that somehow we know better, seems a tad bit over the top.
That they even participate in these discussions and look for help or suggestions speaks volumes about how they operate. I appreciate that they have the patience to wade through some of the BS we spew at times.
I'd suggest relaxing and seeing how this plays out.
No offense, but being able to code a cool air combat game is one thing. Adding cool features like carrier battlegroups and wicked tank battles is one thing.
It takes a lot of talent and imagination.
But regulating gameplay is something completely different. Takes a different set of skills.
I give HT and company props for their ability to bring a cool game like this to the Web. But this rolling set of tweaks and retweaks and changes attacking the very basis that many people play AH for - cameraderie and fellowship - make me question just how well they do understand their customer base or why the game, which they are able to code beautifully, has been so much fun to play.
-
I think basically what we are seeing is the original ideas to upgrade the game have failed, and all this "tweaking" is totally changing the concepts we were told was for the future of the game.
Now you hardly ever see people you flew with all the time, squad or no squad. I rarely see or find those I learned to fly with, and like as individuals. I could learn to like new people, and would like to, but no one is ever consistently on the same side or in the same arena. Multiply the number of arenas by the number of countries, and you are lucky if you see someone once a week.
The effort to upgrade the game is a good thing. The results have been ah, less than successful.
Now how in the H*** is one country, even with a numbers advantage going to win a "war"? It will become a treadmill, and those like myself who like the idea of a goal beyond a dogfight, are left to wonder, what is going on!
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Why are you guys so hung up on this idea of switching? You didn't know **** about the country you started out with, and you didn't know most of the people on it. Somehow, despite this overwhelming adversity, you met people, and formed squads, and had fun. Why can't you do this now?
While I am a "squad" guy by nature.... the biggest thing that comes to me out of all of this "tweaking" is a continued progression of telling me how, where, what to fly.
ENY.. (what or where)
Arena w/cap (where)
Arena with limited plane set (what)
Arena with specified order of base capture (where, how)
We continue to make changes seeking someone's vision of Nirvana.
For those that wanted EW plane set.. HT gave it to them. Whoever wanted it sure isn't supporting it... or the numbers wouldn't be so low. Or, there weren't that many that wanted it to begin with.
For those that seek the "fair fight" the thrill of combat verse one other opponent, win - lose - draw, shake hands afterwards etc. There has always been the DA. Whoever wants that... well it's there but they sure aren't supporting it or the numbers wouldn't be so low.
For those that wanted historical plane matchup, the A vs A arena. You guessed it.... for all those that wanted it, they sure aren't supporting it or the numbers wouldn't be so low.
So how do we keep coming up with a vision of Nirvana, try to provide that opportunity and have it soundly REJECTED by the customers?
Simply, the numbers tell the story. The majority of the customers don't share the vision of Nirvana. The LW Arenas are where most of the folks fly. Those that don't like that type of flying (call it any derogatory name that you think fits the LW arenas) have ample opportunity to fly in one of the other arenas as mentioned above that offer a different experience. But for some reason those alternatives don't work.
So I offer for thought to everyone who comes on here and says...
"The players need to fix it".
Yes they do, they need to use what we currently have, that provides them a chance to fly as they wish and stop trying to manipulate the WHOLE game to be EVERYTHING they want.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
The last time I asked (about a month ago) the arena usage numbers were up slightly.
I wonder if this is still the case? I thought at the time it was a little early for an honest/accurate evaluation.
There is naturally a spike in usage whenever a new product is "re-introduced" as new and improved. The question is about sustainability. When the arenas were first split, 80% of the players went to the EW and MW arenas. Despite the claims a couple days into the split that "the players have voted with their feet, and EW and MW are big hits," it appears now they were temporary hits with no "legs."
Now that the split arenas have been around a while, have those that came back because of the changes actually stayed? Have their numbers been enough to cover those who hated the changes and left? That is, now that the novelty has (completely) worn off, what do the usage numbers show?
I just hope the continued and constant tweaking doesn't mean HTC ended up shooting themselves in the foot in this regard.
-
Originally posted by Torcher
Just rename them Az, Bz and Cz. Ehh, on second thought, people would gripe about that, too.
Ahh, the days of a Cz Mossie raid on the Az scum's spit factory.:cool:
Well following our current path.. there would be no GANG THE Bz on Sunday Night. Side limits would have put paid to that little weekly event.
AW wasn't perfect, but as a community I thought they "got it".
They were just a little slow on code development.
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
So coming next week is....perking troops? ;)
I hope all this tweaking gives you what you're looking for.
When I can fly with my squaddies, in the same area consistently, I'll wander back.
-
Originally posted by 4510
See Rules #4, #5
I think it's a lot of the cry babies left there and came over here.:aok
PS: OHHHHHHHZZZZZZZ NOOOOOOOOOOOZZZZZZZZZ The sky is falling!#!@#!@:cry
-
I can't fly anyway, so I'll just sit here outside on my laptop (70 degrees here at night :p ) enjoy the weather, a few cold beers and get a kick out of all the whining.
Thanks all!
;)
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
I hate the changes, its not fun to sit in the tower and twiddle my thumbs. The squad I fly with flies rooks all the time, therefore I will stay a rook all the time.
If I did get kicked to another country without my permission, I would always PM the cv locations to a squad member, especially if that cv is being hidden somewhere
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Originally posted by JB89
See Rules #4, #5
JB89 = JB88 + 1???
:noid :noid
-
Sloehand..
Sir couldn't agree with your last post more..you idetified the real problem. sir
999000
-
Originally posted by 4510
AW wasn't perfect, but as a community I thought they "got it".
They were just a little slow on code development.
Soup...
Slow??? More like glacial! :D
-
Ok went to another arena orange 188/270 has room but cant fly, so went to another arena green 17/350 still cant fly remind me why i pay for this and why i fly with a squad and we can not fly together.
-
Originally posted by Stiletto
Hey NB, I'm probably dense, but what do you mean? That people logged on and sat in the tower, rather than fight?
People will just horde up and go attack another undefended field rather than fight.
Originally posted by Stiletto
How do you mean? You can look at numbers, but how do you know why people are quitting, without asking them? How do you know what your loyal customers want, without asking them?
I went up to visit about a month ago. I asked and was shown the numbers. I believe HT even posted some here.
Originally posted by Stiletto
Can you explain what "poor environment" means? I thought the massively multi-player environment was what made the sim awesome.
The 'problem' is the 'massive' part. It can make it difficult for new people to get 'involved' in the game.
Originally posted by Stiletto
My hat's off to HT, NB. He's made this business model work, so he must be doing something right. But that isn't what we're discussing, is it? We're talking about keeping players that we have and adding new ones. That's my problem. I have squaddies in two different squads wanting to go elsewhere, and I'm trying to keep us together. I'm not hearing any encouraging prospective moves to take back with me. Help me out, bro. How does the new plan support squads?
The new 'plan' doesn't specifically support squads. However, HT has been willing to attempt to accommodate them, whenever possible.
HTC needs to try to retain more of the '2 weekers' to continue to grow, expand and improve the game. THAT is why things are being changed.
-
Originally posted by Overlag
stick us all in 1 arena and we will HAVE TO FIGHT.
Now that is rubbish. We had 1 arena with large groups on all sides avoiding combat in their efforts to "win the war".
-
Originally posted by Meatwad
I hate the changes, its not fun to sit in the tower and twiddle my thumbs. The squad I fly with flies rooks all the time, therefore I will stay a rook all the time.
If I did get kicked to another country without my permission, I would always PM the cv locations to a squad member, especially if that cv is being hidden somewhere
Ive been a Rook for 7 years, and tonite I went Nit in MW and had a blast killin my buddies in TT for some 3 hours--- You CANT tell me its fun to have numbers like 100 to 50 to 40
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Originally posted by hitech
Monday we will be implementing a new balancing system. It works with the existing ENY number. It will no longer limit what planes you can fly. But rather when it reaches a preset value, people entering the arena will not be able to fly in that arena for their current country.
You will get a message similar to you are 3rd in a queue of 3 .
Your choices will be
1. go to another arena.
2. change countries.
3. wait until more people come onto the other side, or some one from your country leaves.
People waiting will always be able to change countries regardless of their last country change time.
People waiting in queue will not be counted in the ENY values.
This new balancing system will be implemented in all main arenas.
The test capture lines will be taken down until we can layout and code some different options.
1. The current zone / strat setup does not lend it self very well to the current setup,We will be change the supply system to work on all your countries fields, hence hitting the strat targets will have a larger effect.
2. The war win criteria will be changed from having to capture almost all of 1 country , to having to capture around 30 - 40% of both countries fields.
3. Will also make some core fields uncapturable in each country.
HiTech
these sound like great additions HT keep up the good work.. now when the field capture chain is implemented in all the arena's everything will be all set :D
-
Well flew for awhile tonight and so far it isn't too bad. When I first logged in I had was 3rd in a queue of 4 and had to wait about two minutes. Flew for a couple of hours and lost UDP. Relogged and was 8 in the queue.
I only wish you could get a grace period of a couple of minutes before you went back in the queue just in case of something like lost UDP or CTD. With my awful connection it could become quite a pain in the arse.
-
Originally posted by Excaliber
See Rules #4, #5
Let's see here, AW for all it was to those that enjoyed it is no longer available. As far as the community aspect of it goes, that is totaly dependent on the individuals in it and what they wish to make of it. It can be a community of whiners and name callers or it can be a community consisting people out to enjoy each other's company and lend a helping hand where it is needed.
The Aces High community for the most part is a helpfull and friendly group that enjoys the company of other players. A few fall into the whiner, name-calling group but fortunately those are exceptions.
I've been here since the beginning and you won't find a company that will care for it's cutomers like HitechCreations will. They will not, however, cater to a few self interested individuals. Thier goal, as I've seen it, is to provide the best atmosphere for the group as a whole.
Mark
-
Originally posted by Mark Luper
I've been here since the beginning and you won't find a company that will care for it's cutomers like HitechCreations will. They will not, however, cater to a few self interested individuals. Thier goal, as I've seen it, is to provide the best atmosphere for the group as a whole.
Mark
BURN HIM!!! HE SPEAKS THE DEVILS WORDS1!!!!
Hitech is destroying MY fun that I pay $$$$ for every month.
-----------
As a side note, I logged into 1 of the LW arenas, had to wait 1.2 milliseconds, found my squaddies and joined them for some uberfun in a Spit 16.
Hitech has destroyed AH :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Mark Luper
I've been here since the beginning and you won't find a company that will care for it's cutomers like HitechCreations will. They will not, however, cater to a few self interested individuals. Thier goal, as I've seen it, is to provide the best atmosphere for the group as a whole.
Mark
In your opinion Mark... what magic ingredient are we currently missing?
What game play hasn't been offered with the current number of arenas?
Why have we not "arrived" at whatever solution we currently are seeking?
-
Originally posted by 4510
In your opinion Mark... what magic ingredient are we currently missing?
What game play hasn't been offered with the current number of arenas?
Why have we not "arrived" at whatever solution we currently are seeking?
In my opinion?
Nothing is "missing" it is just different. I don't think I mentioned that anything was missing. I have not been able to play the game much since all the recent changes have come to pass but as soon as I have the time to I will get a better feel for how it has affected my personal gameplay if at all.
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Don't think the side balancing changes had kicked in as of tonight, at least in LWblue. Bish 129, Knights 119, and rooks 80! :aok
I got my 40 kills over 7 sorties though! :D
-
Originally posted by Excaliber
See Rules #4, #5
:lol
-
I think this all started with the spotted owl and Yul Gibbons eating endangered pine trees or something......SAVE THE CLOCK TOWER!
-
Originally posted by HomeBoy
I think the biggest problem we have is the lack of understanding of exactly what the problem is!
HT obviously sees a problem and is going about solving it by splitting the arenas, the "orange experiment", and now the latest ENY adjustments. From everything I've read of what he as said, there are two problems that need to be solved:
1. Too many players in a single arena which creates a "slum" effect (hordes, milkruns, etc).
2. Imbalance between the countries.
From everything I've read of the response from the community, my conclusion is that the majority of players are concerned with staying together with their squads.
I would love to see us begin to reach consensus as to what we are trying to solve. When I read things like "why not put things back the way they were?" then it becomes clear to me that we are not understanding the problem or that maybe the problem is not what we think it is. I worry sometimes that HT is listening to particular groups of players and getting an understanding of the "problem" that not neccessarily reality but then realize that he is a pretty sharp guy and should be able to see through that sort of thing.
Compound all of this with the natural tendency (especially among men) to resist change.
If someone would clarify exactly what problem we are trying to solve I would appreciate it.
Have a great day!
I would love a problem definition.
Regards,
Peru
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Originally posted by Excaliber
See Rules #4, #5
yup 14.95 for ur last whine cya :D
-
you still dont get it , sorry, but,
bigger fubar otw.....
the simplest solution it has already given to you..
leave everything as is, just give a higher than 400 cap to the LW blue arena
and fix a little the eny. everyone will have what he wants.
if not , be prepaired for awfull results of wrong decisions
just my opinion
-
I dont see what all the fuss was about. Game seems just about the same to me.
Now lets poke the staff abit and hurry them on giving us some new planes and tanks. I want the ME410, A sherman, JU52 and a german troop carrier like the Sdkfz 251/1 :D
And how about some float planes for the ports?
-
Quick WB history. HTC had long left. WB 2 came out many players moved there. New clipboards new dar system and way way better graphics. WB2 was that good that if you had a low end computer you couldn't use it :rolleyes:
1/2 the guys in WB 1 other 1/2 in WB2. Some imbalances occurred as you would expect and some guys just left. WB2 started to dominate after a while an WB1 became unpopulated as you would expect. Surprisingly some really gamey watermelon went on. Maybe not enough players to stop it ...dunno:huh
WB2 had a few mini changes. Artillery...bleeding useless. Last one was all fighters had to taxi to runway. I broke more planes taxiing than planes I was shot down in:rolleyes:
WB1 was a ghost town WB2 was emptying out also. Dunno where they were going:D
I was rolling my 3rd fighter after snapping the gear on the previous 2 when the blasted gear snapped again. You know what lads ? I said to myself "this is not what I signed up for".....here endeth history leason.
-
Originally posted by SkyRock
Don't think the side balancing changes had kicked in as of tonight, at least in LWblue. Bish 129, Knights 119, and rooks 80! :aok
I got my 40 kills over 7 sorties though! :D
Interesting.
The side balancing HAD kicked in last night, it just is FAR less punitive than the BBS ...anticipatory complainers?...expected.
The other thing that I find interesting is that there was almost equal imbalance in the Orange last night. Played for hours with the Rooks 80 Bish 80 Nits 40 (in flight...I dont remember totals).
It seems that for the low side, the log ins = log outs, and the higher sides drop veeeery slowly.
It also seems that any Knights that got bumped from Blue would have been more than welcome to try out Orange; and that any squad that found itslef split sould have easily moved en mass to another arena.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Monday we will be implementing a new balancing system. It works with the existing ENY number. It will no longer limit what planes you can fly. But rather when it reaches a preset value, people entering the arena will not be able to fly in that arena for their current country.
You will get a message similar to you are 3rd in a queue of 3 .
Your choices will be
1. go to another arena.
2. change countries.
3. wait until more people come onto the other side, or some one from your country leaves.
People waiting will always be able to change countries regardless of their last country change time.
People waiting in queue will not be counted in the ENY values.
This new balancing system will be implemented in all main arenas.
The test capture lines will be taken down until we can layout and code some different options.
1. The current zone / strat setup does not lend it self very well to the current setup,We will be change the supply system to work on all your countries fields, hence hitting the strat targets will have a larger effect.
2. The war win criteria will be changed from having to capture almost all of 1 country , to having to capture around 30 - 40% of both countries fields.
3. Will also make some core fields uncapturable in each country.
HiTech
If your going to make 30 to 40% of both for win we will have to go back to Map rotation week. new map each arena each week. also might help to get planes in other arenas. that all 4 arenas have dif map rotation. Tooo many times you log on every map is same. your new capture system can make it so same map will never be in each arena same time.
-
See Rules #4, #5.
-
Originally posted by killnu
are all these changes in game now? the war winning criteria? the uncapturable core fields?
Not sure, last night in LWO there was about 100 bish/rook and about 60 nit, this situation lasted for at least two hours. My guess is yes, but when folks came there to log on and saw they'd have to fly for the outnumbered country they simply chose another arena.
The problem all along was similar...folks would see one country being in the hole and go join whichever team was "winning".
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Sooner or later you reach a point were you realise it's not worth the time trying to force people into a certain gamestyle.
C'mon Kev, that's a rediculous statement. If the gamestyle intended is simple fairness then it it never "not worth the time".
EVERY game and sport has rules, and every rule of every game is in place for the sake of fairness. Would you like to play chess with me if I get twice as many peices as you, how about just one more Queen, or play poker when I get 7 cards and you get 5?
-
See Rules #5, #4
-
I don't wanna go back and read a whole bunch, my question is simple. Does the balancing keep all three country's even or just prevent one from growing to big?
I saw that it was 80-80-40.... one side isn't balanced?
-
Originally posted by Simaril
Interesting.
The side balancing HAD kicked in last night, it just is FAR less punitive than the BBS ...anticipatory complainers?...expected.
The other thing that I find interesting is that there was almost equal imbalance in the Orange last night. Played for hours with the Rooks 80 Bish 80 Nits 40 (in flight...I dont remember totals).
It seems that for the low side, the log ins = log outs, and the higher sides drop veeeery slowly.
It also seems that any Knights that got bumped from Blue would have been more than welcome to try out Orange; and that any squad that found itslef split sould have easily moved en mass to another arena.
Wow, I didn't think it had kicked in because of the numbers I was seeing in blue LW. I have been switching countries to the lowest numbered one for over a year now. Occasionally I'll forget tolook and be in a horde, but I usually just have to check prices in the hangar to find out! I really gon't get much fun out of flying with a country that is steamrolling because of numbers. It ends up being 10 ganging on one and peeeps mad cause of assists and kill stealing or someone arguing over how fast town not down, or who cut in front of the other on that last upper. Whole time there is no challenge in anything that is being done, just ganging! BBBBOOOORRRRRRIIIINNNNGGGG!:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by E25280
I wonder if this is still the case? I thought at the time it was a little early for an honest/accurate evaluation.
We the players don't and won't have access to the real data. But as for what we DO have access to, let me suggest the score page. If you look at pilot score and find a category where there's a zero (like for me it is almost always field capture, I think I've captured 3 bases in 7 years) you can see how many people sortied that category that tour. For example (today is only th 12th so the numbers will grow by the end of the month) right now there have been 3,423 paying subscribers that have upped a bomber in the last 12 days (all my bomber numbers are zero...LOL), and there have been 3,339 individual players who have logged at least one GV sortie, there have been 2,452 players who have sortied as a Jabo. Some of you guys might have at least one "zero" in fighter and could check to see how many individual subscribers have a fighter sortie.
But generally speaking there have been around 5,000 (give or take 500) people who have logged into the arenas and had a sortie of some kind per tour. This has been true for quite a while and does NOT take into account those who go a month without loggin in as I have a coule of times and as more than half my squad has this tour alone.
Rest assured though, HTC has highly detailed demographics about us, our habits and our styles...and despite what many folks in this thread think...THEY DO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING. They certainly know what is better for the game than any of us do.
PS...I knew WB was broken at the con in 1998 when Jay Littman gave the keynote, I was sitting at the table with ack-ack who was a squaddie at the time.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
You CANT tell me its fun to have numbers like 100 to 50 to 40
Oh yes they can, they've been saying that since the first change was made. I'm sure you can guess which side of the 100-50-40 they had fun being one too.
OMG...I just made my 2,000th post...what a dweeb!
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Originally posted by Mark Luper
I've been here since the beginning and you won't find a company that will care for it's cutomers like HitechCreations will. They will not, however, cater to a few self interested individuals. Thier goal, as I've seen it, is to provide the best atmosphere for the group as a whole.
Mark
I haven't actually done the math, but reading the last EIGHT PAGES or so, the complaints seem to well outnumber the "atta boys". And many complaints are very well written, not "whines". Stilletto and Kev367. The most I've seen in support of the new plan is "I hate UNFAIR, and way to go HT!"
I'm just wondering who the whiners really are and who the "few self interested individuals" are?
SINNER
-
mostly because, why do people feel like they should go on and on about how they like changes, when the changes are coming? even so, i see quite a few that agree with the changes. i would agree there are some costructive posts, but many are just whaaa's and quite a few #4 and #5's. at any rate it doesn't matter, the bbs is not end all say all like some believe. we are only but a small fraction. when you consider there may be 3500-4000 AHers (just quessing), and the most on bbs at one time was around 200.
p.s you might be seeing only what you want to see.
-
Originally posted by SINNER I'm just wondering who the whiners really are and who the "few self interested individuals" are?[/B]
I would love to know that too. I'm getting more suspicious, not less, as to who is getting HT's ear the most based on the way the factions are polarized.
I must tell you, the things Stiletto has said in this thread make as much sense as anything I've heard. He's beginning to win me over some what. I've been in support of this idea of fixing the "balancing problem" and the "slum problem" but mostly out of wanting to be a good citizen and trying to see things from the "other guy's" perspective. Frankly, I've not really seen them as big problems myself. As far as I'm concerned, those that gripe about these problems have three arena to choose from now: EW, MW, LWO. Maybe the best solution is to leave LWB alone and let it become the old MA. If I see "I_won't_mention_his_name" showing up in LWB and then coming here whinning about whordes and toolshedding then I'll know what the REAL problem is.
Just thinking out loud a bit here. I'm still not sure I understand the problem.
-
Originally posted by SINNER
I'm just wondering who the whiners really are and who the "few self interested individuals" are?
I'd say we all are; me, you, the supporters, and the detractors. In fact, I'd say Dale is too. His self interest regarding AH is in having a roof over his head and food on the table (among many others I'm sure).
Being self interested is normal human behavior which we all do daily, nothing really suprising there. With regard to us mere players it only becomes an issue when you try to force your interest onto someone else. With regard to HTC's decisions (many of which are contrary to MY interests like having tanks and troops in the 1st place) his self interest is in growing the game and making enough dough to retire with a few cases of Craggenmore. So if growing the game (increasing total customers) is contrary to your self interests then it is you who should realize you're being selfish (or me in the case I mentioned above), and either keep playing or quit.
-
Edbert,
Sure can't argue with you on much of that!
Edit: I changed "any" to "much" because I guess I am still wondering if there is not a "sqeaky wheel" that is generating a lot of this. Not saying there IS, just not sure at this point.
-
Originally posted by Mark Luper
Let's see here, AW for all it was to those that enjoyed it is no longer available. As far as the community aspect of it goes, that is totaly dependent on the individuals in it and what they wish to make of it. It can be a community of whiners and name callers or it can be a community consisting people out to enjoy each other's company and lend a helping hand where it is needed.
The Aces High community for the most part is a helpfull and friendly group that enjoys the company of other players. A few fall into the whiner, name-calling group but fortunately those are exceptions.
I've been here since the beginning and you won't find a company that will care for it's cutomers like HitechCreations will. They will not, however, cater to a few self interested individuals. Thier goal, as I've seen it, is to provide the best atmosphere for the group as a whole.
Mark
Well said, sir. By the way...are you Skuzzy's grandpa? :D
-
Originally posted by HomeBoy
I would love to know that too. I'm getting more suspicious, not less, as to who is getting HT's ear the most based on the way the factions are polarized.
I must tell you, the things Stiletto has said in this thread make as much sense as anything I've heard. He's beginning to win me over some what. I've been in support of this idea of fixing the "balancing problem" and the "slum problem" but mostly out of wanting to be a good citizen and trying to see things from the "other guy's" perspective. Frankly, I've not really seen them as big problems myself. As far as I'm concerned, those that gripe about these problems have three arena to choose from now: EW, MW, LWO. Maybe the best solution is to leave LWB alone and let it become the old MA. If I see "I_won't_mention_his_name" showing up in LWB and then coming here whinning about whordes and toolshedding then I'll know what the REAL problem is.
Just thinking out loud a bit here. I'm still not sure I understand the problem.
You are bulls eye, dead center, in the hart of problem :)
-
I'm just wondering who the whiners really are and who the "few self interested individuals" are?
I would define self interest as the point at which you put your particular desire above all other peoples desires.
So on the balance issue it is really simple for me to see.
Believing that you should have the right to fly where ever you wish, at the expense of all other players would by simple definition be "self interested".
So any post like this I just ignore. And most people call them whiners.
2nd posting ideas on how to solve an issue, but your remedy always involves not yourself, but what some one else should do, is again only "self interested"
Again I just ignore the idea for what it is, wanting to make someone else fix the problem.
On the balancing issue it really is very simple. The people on the low numbered side can do absolutely nothing to solve the issue. Their only choice is to join the problem and make it worse.
Previously we had tried the ENY and perk plane cost systems, as the least intrusive way to motivating side balancing. They were not a strong enough messure to keep things in check. If side unbalance was only a occasional spike I would not have needed to change any thing, but it has not been an ocasionals spike, but had become the norm.
Also do not judge the balancing on a 1 day test. It should settle the waves in balance as people adjust, and after things settle some what, very rarely will you have to wait in queue.
Also where the queue kicks in also might need to be tightened up.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Also where the queue kicks in also might need to be tightened up.
HiTech
Great now we get to hear more whine about your draconian limits. :rolleyes:
Note to silat: Can I get the teen squelch upgraded to the squelch unwarranted whine please.
My ears thank you in advance.
Bronk
-
:rofl
-
Originally posted by TW9
these sound like great additions HT keep up the good work.. now when the field capture chain is implemented in all the arena's everything will be all set :D
ever thought it was ditched for a reason?:huh
-
Laurie: Do not believe I ever said it was ditched. Only on hold for other mods.
-
Originally posted by hitech
On the balancing issue it really is very simple. The people on the low numbered side can do absolutely nothing to solve the issue. Their only choice is to join the problem and make it worse.
Previously we had tried the ENY and perk plane cost systems, as the least intrusive way to motivating side balancing. They were not a strong enough messure to keep things in check. If side unbalance was only a occasional spike I would not have needed to change any thing, but it has not been an ocasionals spike, but had become the norm.
Also do not judge the balancing on a 1 day test. It should settle the waves in balance as people adjust, and after things settle some what, very rarely will you have to wait in queue.
Also where the queue kicks in also might need to be tightened up.
HiTech
HT,
If you know anything about me, you know I've been an AH customer since Air Warrior was orphaned by EA, and I flew Air Warrior on EA, on AOL before that, and on Compuserve before that. That's, what? 16 years of multi-player air combat flight sim experience. Many of the people I fly with have flown with me for that entire time, and we moved here as a group from Air Warrior.
The decision we made to move to AH wasn't an easy one, let me tell you, because we had no idea about the community here, or about the flight model, or about the management. We had just be burned, royally, and we were gun shy. It's a real testament to the power of squads that the Flying Tigers AVG, as well as the SkyKnights, moved en masse to Aces High. many of our squaddies have traveled across the country to visit each other, and we've been there when the real life sixes of our squad mates have been threatened by illness, death, divorce, unemployment, loneliness, depression - you name it, and we've been there.
Now our squads are in a crisis, because the air combat flight simulation seems to be moving toward an artificially-controlled stasis that is more like a video game than a simulation. This idea of balance is more like a standoff than a war scenario, with no highs, no lows, just good old-fashioned furballing. Furballing is fun, but it's not the object of a wargaming scenario. Wargaming, like war itself, is always about taking territory, and it's never about artificially maintaining a balance of force strength. There have been times when we have picked up the phone and called friends and squaddies to log on to fight back against overwhelming odds, and other times, we're part of the overwhelmers. That's just the way war - and wargaming - is. You play the hand you're dealt when you log on. There have also been times when a small but determined force has attacked the horde fields to prevent them from capturing fields and wining the reset, and to blind them by taking out their radar, etc., etc. That's been part of the fun of the overall AH experience. To me, and to my friends, numbers and balances have nothing to do with it.
Please answer one question for me: Why did you decide that imbalance was a bad thing? I asked NB this question: Did you conduct exit polls of people who decided not to subscribe after the 2 week trial, or who decided to cancel their subscriptions? Did you use solid marketing tools to determine how to attract and keep subscribers? Did you send out surveys to people who have flown AH for years, to see what we want? You must know that "screwing" with the game in what seems to be an arbitrary manner is going to produce dissatisfaction in many of the people you are trying to retain, so you will lose subscribers in the process of implementing code meant to keep them. Already, 4 of the squad members of The Flying Tigers AVG and SkyKnights have quit over this.
I can't speak for other squads, but if it comes down to choosing between AH and my squaddies, it will be no contest.
All of that said, it's your ballgame, and your park, and you have to do what you think is best for you and your business. I just need something I can take back to my mates that will encourage them to stay. Is there any way you can keep one arena in the MA style, and just see how popular it remains? What do you have to lose by doing this? That would be enough to stop this attrition, and it might demonstrate what the majority of people want and need to remain loyal to you.
Sincerely,
-
Stiletto, you tell your friends about the "wargame" you play...I tell my friends about the WW2 "flight sim" game I play. The differences look small from a distance but when you look close they are miles apart. I don't know that the distance between the different sides can ever be narrowed.
You say that if forced to choose between your squaddies here in AH or the game itself that it is an easy choice...How can that be? If you choose your squad over the game then you won't have the enjoyment of their company either way.
HTC can say what they want but the sides were never this far out of whack before the arena splits. You don't have to change sides but you will have to make some concessions whether we like it or not, that's a fact that won't change.
-
though i'm sure you're interested, i'm sure HT is not going to give you, nor should he have any reason to share with you his data which led him to his decission. it wouldn't matter if it was completely logical and 100% accurate, it would just give people something else to question....we've been down this road before.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Also do not judge the balancing on a 1 day test. It should settle the waves in balance as people adjust, and after things settle some what, very rarely will you have to wait in queue. [/B]
Ah [Light_Bulb_Icon]!
So you're banking on the tendency we have to "find something that works and stick with it" right? A squad that normally flies as rooks will get tired of waiting in the queue and decide to move all its members to knights. Then, because us guys hate change, they will just stay there and never go back. (Or something like that). In this way, you implement a "volunteer version" of the "squad divvying" idea. You're counting on various degrees of stubborness. Some squads (who are not at all attached to their chess piece) will immediately jump to another country. [Balancing act phase one] Other squads that are partial to their chess piece but will reluctantly change will eventually do so. [Balancing act phase two] The really stubborn ones will just sit tight. Most of the "freelancers" will happily flit about wherever they will/can and thus complete the balancing act. Over time, you'll have squads distributed fairly evenly across the countries but you have allowed them to do it somewhat in a "volunteer" way rather than you assigning them to those countries.
Am I on the right track here? Sorry, I'm a little slow. The gene pool is a little thin around here.
:aok
-
get rid of the current countries and mix it up, voila, no more loyalty problems!
-
Originally posted by Ball
get rid of the current countries and mix it up, voila, no more loyalty problems!
I'm with you on that one Furby :aok
-
Originally posted by DaPup
you tell your friends about the "wargame" you play...I tell my friends about the WW2 "flight sim" game I play.
Nicely put DaPup.
It seems to me that all these threads and posts swirl around these two questions (issues):
1. Is Aces High a war game or a flight sim?
2. If Aces High is a flight sim then how do we fairly balance the sides and limit the populations in each arena?
Apparently, somewhere along the way, question #1 was answered "flight sim." Not sure exactly where that happened but since we are deep into question #2 at this point, question #1 must have been answered already.
It seems to me that if we were to only implement all the balancing, etc,etc,etc, stuff in the EW, MW, LWO but are scared to death to change LWB to a traditional MA because everyone will flock there and abandon the other arenas, then maybe question #1 is not really answered. Now, HT was defining the "self interest." It sure looks to me like the "self interest" crowd is huddled in the "flight sim" camp at this point. Otherwise, there would not be this fear of bringing in a MA into the mix. Is what I'm saying making any sense?
The question I have at this point is "Can Aces High accommodate both games?"
Things are clearing up for me a little. These last few posts have been great!
-
Originally posted by DaPup
Stiletto, you tell your friends about the "wargame" you play...I tell my friends about the WW2 "flight sim" game I play. The differences look small from a distance but when you look close they are miles apart. I don't know that the distance between the different sides can ever be narrowed.
You say that if forced to choose between your squaddies here in AH or the game itself that it is an easy choice...How can that be? If you choose your squad over the game then you won't have the enjoyment of their company either way.
HTC can say what they want but the sides were never this far out of whack before the arena splits. You don't have to change sides but you will have to make some concessions whether we like it or not, that's a fact that won't change.
DaPup,
It's pretty much the same thing. If it's a WWII "flight sim" and it includes all of the major aircraft, then the goonies have to have paratroopers and cargo to drop, which means dropping them has to mean something, which means tactical ground situations, which ultimately leads to resupply and territory capture.
It also means bombers and bomber formations and escorts and interceptors, which leads to tactical and strategic bombing, which ultimately leads to territorial domination and a struggle for air supremacy that results from territorial capture and severing of enemy supply lines. Call it what you want, it's still wargaming. Now, could you have a "WWII flight sim" that was nothing but fighters and dogfighting? Sure. but AH is not that.
-
Originally posted by pluck
though i'm sure you're interested, i'm sure HT is not going to give you, nor should he have any reason to share with you his data which led him to his decission. it wouldn't matter if it was completely logical and 100% accurate, it would just give people something else to question....we've been down this road before.
Hey pluck,
You're right. HT doesn't owe me or anybody else an explanation or justification for any decisions made. But let's let HT decide if he has a reason to share anything or not.
-
Originally posted by Stiletto DaPup, it's pretty much the same thing.
You're showing your naive side now Stiletto. They are not the same. Not at all! Those in the "flight sim" (let's call them) camp will belittle and ridicule you to no end if you start bombing and gooning where they are furballing. Terms start flying around like "toolshedding", "whording", "milk running", and worse if you start trying to turn their game into a "war game." In fact, sarcastic comments like "Winning the prize" abound in this forum describing those who seek to "win the war."
No, they are definitely not the same thing.
-
Originally posted by HomeBoy
if you start trying to turn their game into a "war game." In
Exactly, why are you trying?????
-
Hey pluck,
You're right. HT doesn't owe me or anybody else an explanation or justification for any decisions made. But let's let HT decide if he has a reason to share anything or not.
Stiletto:
How much do you make a year.
How much have you paid in taxes last year.
How much did you pay for your house.
How much do you spend on drinking each year.
How much do you spend on food each week.
Can you please post all your bank account transactions for the last month?
Hope you understand the drift of my post.
HiTech
-
--------
Exactly, why are you trying?
--------
Because the wargame aspect gives a reason for the engagement. Without the reason for the engagement, you are just flying around and shooting at each other.
Regards,
-
I would agree with Stil that total balance would produce stalemate which would produce boredom.....................
we need IMO ebb and flow
but HT has not introduced a system that has to be tuned to achieve exact balance..................he has engineered a system that can be tuned to limit the extremes of inbalance...........
I would expect that he would tune it over the coming days and weeks................. as he says right now we are on day 1.5
-
Some of you WILL NEVER have the sack to admit what was going on. You'll continue to "play dumb", keep "deflecting the light" onto someone else, and keep on whining in here.
HTC doesn't have to tell ANY OF US a damn thing if he chooses NOT TOO. Why? Some of you "Alpha male wannabe's" ask yourselves? Because he created it, continues to graft it, and all of us pay to play. But some of you think you write code for him and "DEMAND ANSWERS".
I've always despised ego-driven people, and I see there are a few in this thread who will "vanish" from my eyes.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Stiletto:
How much do you make a year.
How much have you paid in taxes last year.
How much did you pay for your house.
How much do you spend on drinking each year.
How much do you spend on food each week.
Can you please post all your bank account transactions for the last month?
Hope you understand the drift of my post.
HiTech
Are you paing him for a service HT? And if you are, are the items you asked for related to the service you pay him for? If not, I don't get the drift of your post.
-
Originally posted by BugsBunny
Are you paing him for a service HT? And if you are, are the items you asked for related to the service you pay him for? If not, I don't get the drift of your post.
OK, Bugs aint getting the drift either, who's got the link saved? you know that special link
-
Originally posted by BugsBunny
Are you paing him for a service HT? And if you are, are the items you asked for related to the service you pay him for? If not, I don't get the drift of your post.
IM going to have to go ahead and agree with Bugs here. While some love the fight and some love the loyalty, I dont think we should be denied some explanation of why this has all happened.
I am all for looking for the best way to run this online game, but it feels odd to penalize the community aspect that some players love with the new method...so an explanation could help maybe? Dont need to see any account transactions or whatever :)
-
HT has told us over and over this is not a war game, it's a flight sim with WW2 airplanes. I wish it was a war game, but until someone has a war game online we will have to pretend this is it by "winning" the war, (getting the reset). So turn off CH200 and ignore those who say you are ruining their fun by capturing bases.
-
BugsBunny: Ahh I got your view now BugsBunny, If I buy anything you have worked on in your entire life I am then entitled to ask for all your personal information. Bugs (think of what you do for work) some customer has to pay you something for that work either directly or indirectly. So you really believe that a customer has a right to ask for your personal information? And you really do not see how it is almost rude to even ask?
HiTech
-
http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,72119-0.html
The Majority Stockholder
Seems to believe that $15 a month buys you a seat on the board of directors. Doesn't realize that a hundred thousand other people are ponying up the same amount.
Sample Quote: "I've e-mailed the developers several times telling them that Fire Paladins should have the axe-throwing skill. They haven't changed it, but they're still taking my money!."
Punishment: Forced to work customer service for an online game company.
-
Originally posted by hitech
BugsBunny: Ahh I got your view now BugsBunny, If I buy anything you have worked on in your entire life I am then entitled to ask for all your personal information. Bugs (think of what you do for work) some customer has to pay you something for that work either directly or indirectly. So you really believe that a customer has a right to ask for your personal information? And you really do not see how it is almost rude to even ask?
HiTech
Because HT, he's a shades account who only lurks and trolls posts. I believe he was PNG'd on top of it, and now expects all to agree with him or they are "deemed idiots" as he puts it in about 70% of his posts.
-
HT's new spell checker works really good. :D
-
Originally posted by Stiletto
Sure. but AH is not that.
I kind of snipped this part. It was just that in the beginning, the other frills were added to offer some choices and make the game more fun for more players that wanted that style of play. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with either way but I still look at AH as a "flight sim" game.
I'm not into taking bases and could do without that ability, I don't care how many troops it takes to take a base or how much ord I have to drop on a hanger before it pops. If that is what you like then have it but it isn't the part of the game that captures my fancy.
The inability for some to get over some loyalty issue is the real problem here and it will continue to be a problem until either they leave and some new players come in or the players that won't change sides to create a more enjoyable game for all either learn to or are forced to do it.
I coach youth basketball here in my town, my son asked me why he wasn't able to play on whatever team he wanted. I told him that if all the good players were on the same team that there would be alot of unhappy kids on the other teams. No one wants to get beat up on every day just so that some can have fun while others log off and look for something else to do.
We all are the "good" team and we haven't figured out that we must be split up to create a friendlier enviroment for all of us to play in.
just my $0.02
-
Originally posted by hitech
Stiletto:
How much do you make a year.
How much have you paid in taxes last year.
How much did you pay for your house.
How much do you spend on drinking each year.
How much do you spend on food each week.
Can you please post all your bank account transactions for the last month?
Hope you understand the drift of my post.
HiTech
let me take stab at hitechs answer to above question. (ps ) i wouldn't have problem answering any of the above questions) but no account numbers or ss #
How much does dale make in year around 180k
How much does Hitech creations pay in taXES 375,000
DALES HOUSE 300K
cOST OF DRINKS (R WE COUNTING BRIBES) 2500 YEAR
DEPENDING ON CHILDREN I'D SAY HE SPENDS 160 WEEK
BANK STATEMENTS WHO CARES ITS MOSTLY GOING INTO AH FOR US
PAYMENTS TO EMPLOYEES XMAS 401K PROGRAM pRICELESS
-
Originally posted by rod367th
let me take stab at hitechs answer to above question. (ps ) i wouldn't have problem answering any of the above questions) but no account numbers or ss #
How much does dale make in year around 180k
How much does Hitech creations pay in taXES 375,000
DALES HOUSE 300K
cOST OF DRINKS (R WE COUNTING BRIBES) 2500 YEAR
DEPENDING ON CHILDREN I'D SAY HE SPENDS 160 WEEK
BANK STATEMENTS WHO CARES ITS MOSTLY GOING INTO AH FOR US
PAYMENTS TO EMPLOYEES XMAS 401K PROGRAM pRICELESS
PAYMENTS TO MENTAL HEALTH FOR rOY AKA SKUZZY BECAUSE OF PLAYERS 2K MONTH
-
Originally posted by DaPup
I coach youth basketball here in my town, my son asked me why he wasn't able to play on whatever team he wanted. I told him that if all the good players were on the same team that there would be alot of unhappy kids on the other teams. No one wants to get beat up on every day just so that some can have fun while others log off and look for something else to do.
i hope no one makes me unhappy by shooting me down. I'll be in that badly flown P38 with the blue trim.
44Mag
-
DaPup: The reasons for the change is no more complex than your post.
And it does amaze me that some people do not seem to really understand what the word "Game" means as opposed to what war is.
-
Originally posted by john9001
HT has told us over and over this is not a war game,
Hmm, thanks for that "two-by-four" John. I don't recall ever seeing that from HT but I haven't read all that many posts over the years so I will definitely take your word on that. From what you say, the burden of adjustment rests squarely on the shoulders of those of us who have though of this game as a war game. I have mistakingly approached Aces High as a war game (the bombers, reset concept, missions, etc. have not helped) and obviously have a bit of "retraining" to do. I honestly did not realize this and I've been around here since the beginning. I'm not kidding, I am a slow learner! :eek:
Think I'm going to just slip back into obscurity again......
-
Originally posted by john9001
i hope no one makes me unhappy by shooting me down. I'll be in that badly flown P38 with the blue trim.
44Mag
I'll be watching for ya' :cool:
-
Originally posted by HomeBoy
Hmm, thanks for that "two-by-four" John. I don't recall ever seeing that from HT but I haven't read all that many posts over the years so I will definitely take your word on that. From what you say, the burden of adjustment rests squarely on the shoulders of those of us who have though of this game as a war game. I have mistakingly approached Aces High as a war game (the bombers, reset concept, missions, etc. have not helped) and obviously have a bit of "retraining" to do. I honestly did not realize this and I've been around here since the beginning. I'm not kidding, I am a slow learner! :eek:
Think I'm going to just slip back into obscurity again......
well it can be a war game and a flight sim. you can still capture bases, bomb the ever loving cr@p outta toolsheds. you up gv's roll them around blow up stuff etc. etc. but again it is not a war. it is a game. games tend to have some form of equality, you are given tools, you decide how to use these tools. in war, nothing is fair, nothing is fun, and their is no reason why it should be. just because a game is played with somewhat equal terms doesn't mean it can't be a war game. just my thoughts.
-
john9001:
HT has told us over and over this is not a war game
Do not believe I have ever said that.
What I have said is more along the lines of it is not a simulation of WWII.
HiTech
-
OK I didnt read the rest of the post on this topic. Half are kissing HiTech rear-end to the point of disbelieve the other half not liking the changes,
HiTech I am going to put this to you straight and forwartd. Dont call theses changes call them the death of squads changes. Instead of people forming squads as one of your selling points in your TV commercials it should say you can form a squad but cant fly with them when you want to. As far as the balance issue. Well when you created mutliple arenas YOU opened a can of worms. Now when people are getting the butts handed to them they switch areans which in turn cause the side imbalance. So are you going to make changes so people who are losing have to face and eal with that fact instead of logging off. Come on you can do it. You already taken away our ability to fly with squaddies and friends and restriced as form flying in the arena of our choice.
I am sick of hearing the same lame answers. If we dont like the changes then yes we could leave. But if you didnt like the game before you should have left along time ago.
Hitech I went form enjoying the gameplay and having fun to sitting here waiting to fly with squaddies in an arena to be told you cant fly with your squad because I dont think it is fair you outnumber the other guys. Well HiTech stated once more take away peoples choice of logging off because they dont want to lose.
As Far as people complaining about the Horde. The funny part is you watch one side complain about the horde whilt he people complaining about it are attacking the same country the horde is. The Horde is easy to stop. Shot em down and pork there fields. Bingo Horde Stopped.
Yes I know dont let my rear end hit the door on the way out. But the sad part of this HiTech and Skuzzy. You are giving up on a Customer Base that has kept you in Business for years and you turned your back on them. Truely Sad. I can leave with the changes made before these. But even these are making me wonder if you had a nervous breakdown or are listneing to people who need to be lined up and shot for there stupidity.
-
**What I have said is more along the lines of it is not a simulation of WWII.
HiTech** :confused:
-
Originally posted by Warchief
OK I didnt read the rest of the post on this topic. Half are kissing HiTech rear-end to the point of disbelieve the other half not liking the changes,
HiTech I am going to put this to you straight and forwartd. Dont call theses changes call them the death of squads changes. Instead of people forming squads as one of your selling points in your TV commercials it should say you can form a squad but cant fly with them when you want to. As far as the balance issue. Well when you created mutliple arenas YOU opened a can of worms. Now when people are getting the butts handed to them they switch areans which in turn cause the side imbalance. So are you going to make changes so people who are losing have to face and eal with that fact instead of logging off. Come on you can do it. You already taken away our ability to fly with squaddies and friends and restriced as form flying in the arena of our choice.
I am sick of hearing the same lame answers. If we dont like the changes then yes we could leave. But if you didnt like the game before you should have left along time ago.
Hitech I went form enjoying the gameplay and having fun to sitting here waiting to fly with squaddies in an arena to be told you cant fly with your squad because I dont think it is fair you outnumber the other guys. Well HiTech stated once more take away peoples choice of logging off because they dont want to lose.
As Far as people complaining about the Horde. The funny part is you watch one side complain about the horde whilt he people complaining about it are attacking the same country the horde is. The Horde is easy to stop. Shot em down and pork there fields. Bingo Horde Stopped.
Yes I know dont let my rear end hit the door on the way out. But the sad part of this HiTech and Skuzzy. You are giving up on a Customer Base that has kept you in Business for years and you turned your back on them. Truely Sad. I can leave with the changes made before these. But even these are making me wonder if you had a nervous breakdown or are listneing to people who need to be lined up and shot for there stupidity.
I lost three pitons on this wall of text.....
Of course, you're right, you have to blame someone. Why blame yourself?
-
Originally posted by hitech
john9001:
Do not believe I have ever said that.
What I have said is more along the lines of it is not a simulation of WWII.
HiTech
HT I thought it was "This is a game, games are ment to be fair, war on the other hand is neither fun or fair"
:p
BTW:My thoughts on the changes
I like anything that will create more fights, The ordered field capture did this.... But I feel that we have too many arenas... I like EW but the last few times I have logged on there have been < 10 ppl in there, so I find myself logging into the LW arena with the highest numbers... or just logging off AH all togeather....
Never the less to you and the crew mate, I know ya cant please everyone, just whish I could think of a good idea to solve the EW population problems....
Later
EDIT: thanks for taking the Perks off the TA152... I love turning and burning in that bird.... Just ask the poor soles I gave hell to yesterday
-
From the man himself back in August of '04. Some of you will remember what happened back then. ;)
Originally posted by hitech
Working together is not penalized. We are not trying to implement a system where consentrating your forces is hampered.
But it realy is a basic game concepts that all sides have the same number of players. If you don't belive that concept, please sight one case where a game is not designed with that in mind. And please do not tell me AH is war, because it is not, it is a War game. And games are ment to be fun and fair. While war is not ment to be either fair or fun.
With equal sides, doing what it takes to win , is what game play is. In AH there are multiple levels of winning, makeing a capture,just shooting down more people than shot you down, ending the war. All are items of game play in AH.
Having more on your team gives your side an unfair advantage to all other sides. All items of game play are effected by that imbalance. And there realy is nothing that the sides with less numbers can do about it. They can not swith countries to even the numbers, if they move to the country with more numbers it just makes everything worse. They could make a treaty, but that only works in a defensive mode.
Equal sides is such a basic consept that over the life of AH the sides have maintained a fairly equal number, the resone is realy simple, people have more fun when the sides are equal.
So now the question becomes not IF the sides should be equal,
but how to accomplish that equality with least impact to the social apspect of the game.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
From the man himself back in August of '04. Some of you will remember what happened back then. ;)
Wait, no way!!! you're saying that the "whorde mongers" had 2 years to "change it themselves", but "failed to do such a thing because the getting was good?!!!"
I get it now.
-
Originally posted by hitech
john9001:
Do not believe I have ever said that.
What I have said is more along the lines of it is not a simulation of WWII.
HiTech
I'm not claiming that this is verbatim but the famous statement was very close to this:
Please do not try to tell me that AH is a war, it is not, it is a game. Games are meant to be fun, wars are not.
That is pretty accurate, minus the speeling errars.
-
Some of you just need to get over it and suck it up. The game is changing. The game needs to change. There are more and more people playing this game and others like it. The games has to change and we will have to change with it. If this game doesnt change it will die slowly but surely. Someone will come along and make something that the masses want and Aces High will die just like the others before. Aces High was my first Online game of any kind and it will probably be the only one I ever play on a regular basis.
When I first started June 2001 it was a small group (usually about 150 to 175 at night) that played and most of those guys had history from other similar games in the past. There has always been an issue of side balance since I started playing. First it was the Rooks, and then the Bish, and then the Knights. But it was never as bad as this last year. Each side as had its turn in the bucket several times over. Search the board, go back to 2001, 2002 the whines are there. The answer then is the same answer today. Switch countries. Back then we all switched countries. It didnt happen alot but it happened. Some squads regulary rotated each month. And lets end this myth that one country is better than another country. Pure BS. There is no difference. Good sticks, bad sticks, noobs, horders, milkrunners, furballers, strat queens, whiners, generals, alt monkeys, every country as the same cast of characters.
As these games evolved there have always been basic rules for playing and then there were unspoken rules. As the player base grows new types of players are coming up. 4-5 years of people playing Castle Wolfenstein and MOH online, Warcraft and Command & Conqur have grown up and now play games like Aces High. They play to win and a lot of those games were side balanced.
Hitech is trying to find the answer. He's asked you all for input, suggestions even though he doesnt have to. It isnt going to happen overnight, and not everybody is going to be happy with whatever the solution turns out to be. Hitech makes a change and doesnt tell ya, you whine he should have told ya first. Hitech tells ya hes gonna make a change, you whine. Instead of crying about it think about how to make it work. Maybe in order for Aces High to survive Mega Squads have to be sacrificed. I belong to a small squad 7 guys 12 tops. I also fly with a lot of guys that aren't in my squad. One month I fly with them, another month I fly against them. So what. We talk, we have fun, we meet up at cons and have more fun. Its just a damn game. Instead of coming in here and trying to pick it apart why dont you try to help fix it.
-
Originally posted by Warchief
Hitech I went form enjoying the gameplay and having fun to sitting here waiting to fly with squaddies in an arena to be told you cant fly with your squad because I dont think it is fair you outnumber the other guys. Well HiTech stated once more take away peoples choice of logging off because they dont want to lose.
Have you flown AH since yesterday? The only reason you HAVE to wait for anything is because you choose to. If you have flown please tell us your CPID, nobody named warcheif has flown this tour.
-
Originally posted by Warchief
OK I didnt read the rest of the post on this topic. Half are kissing HiTech rear-end to the point of disbelieve the other half not liking the changes,
HiTech I am going to put this to you straight and forwartd. Dont call theses changes call them the death of squads changes. Instead of people forming squads as one of your selling points in your TV commercials it should say you can form a squad but cant fly with them when you want to. As far as the balance issue. Well when you created mutliple arenas YOU opened a can of worms. Now when people are getting the butts handed to them they switch areans which in turn cause the side imbalance. So are you going to make changes so people who are losing have to face and eal with that fact instead of logging off. Come on you can do it. You already taken away our ability to fly with squaddies and friends and restriced as form flying in the arena of our choice.
I am sick of hearing the same lame answers. If we dont like the changes then yes we could leave. But if you didnt like the game before you should have left along time ago.
Hitech I went form enjoying the gameplay and having fun to sitting here waiting to fly with squaddies in an arena to be told you cant fly with your squad because I dont think it is fair you outnumber the other guys. Well HiTech stated once more take away peoples choice of logging off because they dont want to lose.
As Far as people complaining about the Horde. The funny part is you watch one side complain about the horde whilt he people complaining about it are attacking the same country the horde is. The Horde is easy to stop. Shot em down and pork there fields. Bingo Horde Stopped.
Yes I know dont let my rear end hit the door on the way out. But the sad part of this HiTech and Skuzzy. You are giving up on a Customer Base that has kept you in Business for years and you turned your back on them. Truely Sad. I can leave with the changes made before these. But even these are making me wonder if you had a nervous breakdown or are listneing to people who need to be lined up and shot for there stupidity.
I am clearly doing something wrong. I keep flying with my squad mates, and we always seem to end up in the same arenas when we fly. Granted we go to the low numbers country every time. Is this a mistake?
Help me! What am I doing wrong? I want so desperately to become a part of the 'Hitech is ruining Squads" campaign!
-
my feelings on the MA are and have always been that the MA is more like a "top gun" school where you can fly different planes, try different tactics, improve your skills, the real "game" is the scenarios where you have limited lives, objectives to accomplish, orders to follow, wingmen to fly with, and you will win or lose the war.
The scenarios are the real thing, all else is just practice, so don't get so upset about changes, sign up for the scenarios and live life as a virtual WW2 pilot. (more or less). :D
-
Look through some of Warchief's posts from September on. I get the impression that he thinks HTC is really trying to force all squads to disband and quit. At least that's the point of his posts for the last few months.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Look through some of Warchief's posts from September on. I get the impression that he thinks HTC is really trying to force all squads to disband and quit. At least that's the point of his posts for the last few months.
I noticed that. But, "we're the whiners" and the "evil empire that has started the demise of AH Skuads":noid
-
Edbert dont fly under the ID Warchief anymore look up Chief31.
As far the other points go.
So as far as the squad goes. If my squad my country is flying for is getting the rook or knits butts. The rooks and knit log off because they are losing and try to log in I must fight my own squaddies and friends. As stated before how about stopping people from Logging off because they are losing. Which seems to be the newest tactic. Well were losing time to log off in mass and wait for them to logg due to ENY pissing them off then we can come back when we have the numbers to win.
Airscrew most other games have a spawn delay system depending on the amoung of people on at a time. But it is rare to see a game tell who or what you can do as far as logging into an arena.
-
Originally posted by SkyRock
Don't think the side balancing changes had kicked in as of tonight, at least in LWblue. Bish 129, Knights 119, and rooks 80! :aok
I got my 40 kills over 7 sorties though! :D
If all sides were equal the bish would get totally slammed. It takes 3 bish to equal 1 rook. Even at the above numbers the bish have the short end of the stick.
-
Originally posted by hitech
john9001:
Do not believe I have ever said that.
What I have said is more along the lines of it is not a simulation of WWII.
HiTech
Maybe it's a simulation of what WWIII might be like should that ever happen.
Question:
Let's say that the objective of having balanced sides is achieved (numberwise). Would next step be to evaluate the skill level of each side and rearrange people dynamically to make it more fair?
-
Originally posted by Warchief
Airscrew most other games have a spawn delay system depending on the amoung of people on at a time. But it is rare to see a game tell who or what you can do as far as logging into an arena.
Yep they sure do, so theres an idea for ya. Next time you die, you set in the lobby and wait for a fellow country man to die before you can rejoin the game :aok oh but you're about the 5 guy in line so it might be a few minutes, :t In the meantime, here you can watch everybody else play...
-
Well Hubsonfire that is some of the post made not all of them.
But the reason I think is that seems to where this is all going. First the arena splits that limit the amount of people can fly in them. Well your squad is in this arean and sinc eit is full you cant fly with them. And that is being more re-enforced with the latest changes. OD I think HiTech is delibrately setting out to kill squads? NO!! But I do think that will be the end results. Squads and Guild or whatever you may call them are a group of people who fly for this or that side. Now you cant do that as much as you would before.
I have been flying since AH1 days. At first I hated all the changes made. But then sat back and said ok I see HiTechs point but it really doesnt effect my gameplay or who I can fly with with the exception to ENY. Then this is thrown into it. Cant fly with my squaddies because the Bish as this many people and unless I want to fly as I want I have to switch countrys. Sorry nto me. I am a loyal to a chess piece? Nope think again. Then why dont I switch sides. I have flown with Bish since I came into AH. Join the 31st FG and have been a mainstay of the Bish side. Hvae lots of friends there and just dont want to fly with rook or knits dont see the point in switching all the time.
One other thing I forgot. ANother reason for the imbalance is this. When one side is winning not only do people logg off because they dont want to lose some will switch sides so they cant say look mommy I won or get those ever precious perks. And that is why I dont switch sides. If the Bish win they win. If the Bish lose they lose. I take the wins with the loses.
-
See Rule #4 (please refrain from the personal attacks)
-
OK I didnt read the rest of the post on this topic. Half are kissing HiTech rear-end to the point of disbelieve the other half not liking the changes,
For someone who didn't read the stuff, you sure are hasty to arrive to a conclusion that all yay-sayers are a bunch of prettythang-kissers. As if we didn't have our own reasons, right?
HiTech I am going to put this to you straight and forwartd. Dont call theses changes call them the death of squads changes. Instead of people forming squads as one of your selling points in your TV commercials it should say you can form a squad but cant fly with them when you want to.
Squads are a part of the game - it is subject to change with the game if the game itself ever changes. Being in a large squad and having one's own identity as a part of a bigger group can be fun, but that doesn't make any squad's opinion entitled to more than any of what the individual, lone gamer has to say about it. Originally the squads started out small, a way of people of common interest to group together to make the game more enjoyable, not to become the leviathan of an entity it has become that hampers and objects every change to the game in regards to its own interest.
As far as the balance issue. Well when you created mutliple arenas YOU opened a can of worms. Now when people are getting the butts handed to them they switch areans which in turn cause the side imbalance.
Flawed analogy.
The imbalance in numbers is due to a low arena cap vs. the high demand. Why the demand is so high for the Late-era arena is pretty much evident and obvious, so I won't discuss it any further unless required to do so.
So are you going to make changes so people who are losing have to face and deal with that fact instead of logging off. Come on you can do it. You already taken away our ability to fly with squaddies and friends and restriced as form flying in the arena of our choice.
Just how important it is to fly with people you'll probably never meet offline is not so clear to me. But this sense of friendship and loyalty can be only permitted as far as it doesn't disrupt the fun for other people. Unfortunately, the recent tendencies of the MA has led HT to certain measures which were highly unpopular to the gigantic squads.
When changes happen, not all of it happens for the better for everyone. However, if it will ultimately benefit more people, instead of just making only the mega squads happy, is that not a good thing?
I am sick of hearing the same lame answers. If we dont like the changes then yes we could leave. But if you didnt like the game before you should have left along time ago.
I'm sure the others are as much sick of giving answers to lame questions.
Hitech I went form enjoying the gameplay and having fun to sitting here waiting to fly with squaddies in an arena to be told you cant fly with your squad because I dont think it is fair you outnumber the other guys. Well HiTech stated once more take away peoples choice of logging off because they dont want to lose.
Just what is this with the squads anyway? Is every member blood-related? Is having to change sides or move to other arenas really such a bad thing? Does your relationship with other gamers exist only exclusively with squad members alone?
Just what the heck is this implied "loyalty" to a non-real, fantasy organization within a game?
s Far as people complaining about the Horde. The funny part is you watch one side complain about the horde whilt he people complaining about it are attacking the same country the horde is. The Horde is easy to stop. Shot em down and pork there fields. Bingo Horde Stopped.
The point is to make the horde fight the horde. Stop the horde by crushing them with comparable number of forces. Fight the other guy and beat him down to achieve what you want.
However, the old MA was unable to do that. Mobilization and deployment followed a chaotic pattern of whim. People flock to their friends while avoiding the enemies. Gaining grounds in territorial combat, trying to "win" without fighting any of the actual threats.
Now, if this was a real-war, that would be something worthy of praise. "Winning the war without fighting" - Sun Tzu's ultimate ideal. However, in retrospect, this is also a game. A format of competition. Therefore, people should contend in the air, and must actually fight each other before any amount of victory is achieved, instead of finding some nefarious method of marching into unprotected enemy lands like the Armageddon locust.
If AH2 gave the impression that creating the horde and just barging into a one gigantic milk-run was something to be considered "fun", then I believe that is clearly not what HT had in mind - therefore, he is changing it.
Yes I know dont let my rear end hit the door on the way out. But the sad part of this HiTech and Skuzzy. You are giving up on a Customer Base that has kept you in Business for years and you turned your back on them. Truely Sad. I can leave with the changes made before these. But even these are making me wonder if you had a nervous breakdown or are listneing to people who need to be lined up and shot for there stupidity.
Then are those who object to your opinions and support HT's idea not also a customer base? What are we then, chopped liver? What of the numerous number of veterans who have become sick and tired of the mindless land-grabbing hordes, disappointed at how degenrate the MA has become?
In a sense, AH is trying to go back to its origins without shrinking the game to the small community it was. There are bound to be changes, some good, some bad. Some will work, others will fail, and this cycle will go on until HT finally comes up with a new paradigm to work with the MA. Getting worked up on every change along the way is not gonna help anyone.
ps) The grand irony of all this is that I'm not even a furball guy. I'm a squad-oriented, strat/tactics lovin', roleplaying geek who wants to see the MA run according to realistic warring conditions such as economy, logistics, and attrition rates.
However, despite all that there is no justifying the old MA and how it was. It was neither strategic nor tactical. It deprived the very essence of air combat, and motivated the dweebs to a gigantic land-grab competition by every horde storming into each other's empty back yard.
I like strat and I like cooperation. But that doesn't mean I can't tell the difference between active tactical cooperation and instinctive animal herds. There's a clear line of difference between people who organize themselves to win a war, and sheep who flock to each other to avoid the wolves.
Anyone who calls that stampede of sheep "cooperation" is clearly out of his mind, because that ain't no "cooperation".
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
[BNow you're gonna whine about "not being able to fly with your squad"? I call BS on every point you bring to the table. [/B]
What is wrong with wanting to fly with your squad?
-
What is wrong with wanting to fly with your squad?
Nothing - as long as the loyalty towards the "squad" does not outweigh the balance of numbers, to make the game enjoyable for everyone in the arena, not just the squadsfolk in the largest numbering country.
However, if being a part of a fantasy country and fantasy squad is more important than stopping the game from becoming a lop-sided gangbang, then there's something wrong with that.
-
Hitech,
I don’t think balancing number is going to get you what you are looking for. There are basically three types of players: the Gamer who sees Aces High as a combat simulator; the War-Fighter who sees Aces High as a war simulator; and the Newbie who doesn’t know what Aces High is about.
The Gamer generally doesn’t care about the strategic elements of the game, likes to fight one-on-one, and does not have any deep loyalty to a country. He flies alone even when flying in a group of others. He may give and expect check-six calls but does not apply any team tactics. Kills are nice but out-flying the opponent is more important. Gamers can usually handle a War-Fighter one-on-one. Gamers generally don’t capture bases but will at times put an ad-hoc mission together.
The War-Fighter enjoys the strategic elements of the game, expects the fights to be many-on-many, and can be fiercely loyal to a country and squad. Always flies as a team or in support of a goal even when flying a single-ship mission. War-Fighters will corner and kill Gamers. Some War-Fighters are pure fighter types that wing up with others to gain air superiority in a sector. (It is not always about the capture.) Since the War-Fighters are generally the ones capturing the bases, they alter the look of the map, and thus have the greatest impact on the game.
The Newbie basically doesn’t know what he wants to be when he grows up. He is not sure what to do or even what is possible. He will follow a group of dots that look like they are going somewhere. Usually the group of dots is War-Fighters and the newbies makes the group looks like a horde. The Newbie will at times bomb the base after it has been captured. He is usually meat on the plate for both Gamers and War-Fighters and is generally left to learn the game on his own.
Even if you are able to get the numbers to balance, there is no guarantee that you will have an even mix of individuals. I have been frustrated when I see my country has numbers but is losing fields on every front. The other countries have War-Fighters that are organized and they are kicking our unorganized horde right off the map. I would think the War-Fighter is who you should want playing your game. They are the ones that are trying to use the elements you engineered in the game to their fullest. And yet the changes you have been making only inhibit/hurt the War-Fighters. You really want to convert the Newbies and Gamers into War-Fighters. But how?
Get some of your CM Staff into the country with the low numbers, put some missions together and get the 50 or so individuals organized. Joining a mission is of course optional but the Gamer just might see the advantages of winging with someone else. The War-Fighters would join if not already doing their own thing. And the Newbies would join (once they are shown how to join a mission) so they can be part of something and learn the game. Whole squads might even join. But these missions can’t be the usual amateuristic, brute-strength-and-awkwardness missions. These missions need to be put together by professionals who can incorporate all the aspects – fighters, bombers, GVs, etc. – into them so there is something for everyone.
I guarantee* that if you, Hitec, put up a mission, people would jump countries to join.
MachNix
*Void where prohibited. Discontinue use if a rash develops. Not responsible for lost or stolen items.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Nothing - as long as the loyalty towards the "squad" does not outweigh the balance of numbers, to make the game enjoyable for everyone in the arena, not just the squadsfolk in the largest numbering country.
However, if being a part of a fantasy country and fantasy squad is more important than stopping the game from becoming a lop-sided gangbang, then there's something wrong with that.
I understand and respect your response. But I now do not have the choice to fly with my squad when I want to if they are all in a country that has superior numbers. The only choice I have at that point is to wait or go do something else. Either way I am not permitted to fly with my squad. Just a point.
-
i am giving HTC a free two week trial starting today.
if they like my participation and subscription they can keep it. if they don't, they are under no obligation to continue on with it and ill just have to be happy to take my 180 clams a year and go elsewhere. i am a person of my word so i will do it.
see, i just want to fly. i love the game, i love all of you guys. (except ball, hes a poof and i wouldnt want to give him the wrong idea about things) but i am afraid that i am just at the point of frustration over these constant changes and stresses that are getting put on the arenas.
should i support a company that feels that it is OKAY to serve me a product that i did not buy rather than the one that i actually did.
(and yes, yes, i know, there are those of you who will say "what a whiner."...but hey, sorry, but i don't like paying for a product and having it suddenly change...so sue me. its my dime...and yes, it is yours too.)
logged on today at lunch. had a half hour to fly. got stuck in a que (in the only arena that had any people in it). i logged off and made up my mind right then and there.
no more beta testing or no more me.
i am assuming that this post will be deleted like my thread on the subject and that i may even get banned for saying this, but it is the truth as i see it and it is how many of us feel and if you feel that you need to delete this than you may as well delete my subscription and then proceed to delete everyone elses who actually cares enough to tell you that enough is enough.
why not just make a new game and let people choose to get into it rather than this constant irritation?...why not just create another generation?
in this birds opinion the old way was far better than the "gee what are the rules today?" approach that we have now.
ive had enough.
all
88
-
Originally posted by MachNix
Since the War-Fighters are generally the ones capturing the bases, they alter the look of the map, and thus have the greatest impact on the game.
Was very much with you up until this point. But I see no correlation between altering the look of the map and having the greatest impact on the game. In fact, I would go so far as to say that one of the greatest negative impacts on the game is caused by the War-Fighters swarming to capture bases.
Was a great explanation of different styles up until that point, though!
- oldman
-
I understand and respect your response. But I now do not have the choice to fly with my squad when I want to if they are all in a country that has superior numbers. The only choice I have at that point is to wait or go do something else. Either way I am not permitted to fly with my squad. Just a point.
How are you and your squad restricted from all moving to the country with the lowest numbers??
IMH these kind of issues are not issues at all. The only issue is you and your squad not wanting to side balance and needing to be on the side with overwhelming numbers. Lose the crutch and balance out the sides. :aok
-
Originally posted by Oldman731
In fact, I would go so far as to say that one of the greatest negative impacts on the game is caused by the War-Fighters swarming to capture bases.
So would your assessment of the new capture system be that it negatively impacts the game? I mean, it does force the War-Fighters to swarm in specific areas.
-
Originally posted by Quah!
How are you and your squad restricted from all moving to the country with the lowest numbers??
Practical example:
I know my squadmates are flying Bish.
I log on and cannot join Bish.
Now the burden is on me to talk my squad into dropping what they are doing at the moment and switch sides so I can fly with them.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Practical example:
I know my squadmates are flying Bish.
I log on and cannot join Bish.
Now the burden is on me to talk my squad into dropping what they are doing at the moment and switch sides so I can fly with them.
Hardly crisis mode though. Shooting down a squaddie can be good for your health :)
-
JB88: Thanks for stating the obvious, you have had that choice from the first day you started playing AH.
And do not expect your "threat" changes my view point in any way shape or form.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Practical example:
I know my squadmates are flying Bish.
I log on and cannot join Bish.
Now the burden is on me to talk my squad into dropping what they are doing at the moment and switch sides so I can fly with them.
this is the problem to me..Limiting sides is ok, but having to fight alone when your mates are online is VERY frustrating, same thing with arena cap.
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Practical example:
I know my squadmates are flying Bish.
I log on and cannot join Bish.
Now the burden is on me to talk my squad into dropping what they are doing at the moment and switch sides so I can fly with them.
I'm NOT trolling, slamming, or bringing up old dead horses here. But I dont know any other way to make the point except this.
Lets say that all your squaddies choose to fly Bish, even though the Bish are chronically the high side. That is NOT the system's fault.
Read what HT said about rough number balance....can any part of that concept be proved false? No successful game routinely gives one side a disadvantage. (Handicaps, in fact, hinder the stronger player so weaker ones get a MORE even game, not less even.)
If you routinely find yourslef excluded because you will play bish, you have a simple choice. Which is the more important value for your squad...playing together, or playing for your chosen country? Whatever you choose, there will be consequences; but it is simply your choice. In other words, if you switched to the chronically low side then the entire BOP crew could likely log on at once
And id you say that you shouldnt have to choose, that you should be able to fly together even if grossly outnumbering others, then you are completely disregarding the rights of others, like someone who yells "fire" in a theater or who deliberately farts in the air lock.
-
Originally posted by Simaril
I'm NOT trolling, slamming, or bringing up old dead horses here. But I dont know any other way to make the point except this.
Lets say that all your squaddies choose to fly Bish, even though the Bish are chronically the high side. That is NOT the system's fault.
Read what HT said about rough number balance....can any part of that concept be proved false? No successful game routinely gives one side a disadvantage. (Handicaps, in fact, hinder the stronger player so weaker ones get a MORE even game, not less even.)
If you routinely find yourslef excluded because you will play bish, you have a simple choice. Which is the more important value for your squad...playing together, or playing for your chosen country? Whatever you choose, there will be consequences; but it is simply your choice. In other words, if you switched to the chronically low side then the entire BOP crew could likely log on at once
And id you say that you shouldnt have to choose, that you should be able to fly together even if grossly outnumbering others, then you are completely disregarding the rights of others, like someone who yells "fire" in a theater or who deliberately farts in the air lock.
My post was about flying with my squadmates, not about not switching countries.
Let's say we follow your advice.
The members of my squad that were online decided to switch to the lower number country. I come along and now the numbers are skewed the other way and I cannot join the country they are in. Once again, I cannot fly with them when I want and now I have to convince them to drop what they are doing and switch countries.
And to your example of Bish "chronically" being on the high side...there have been many times where we've been on the receiving end of a numbers imbalance.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Shooting down a squaddie can be good for your health :)
With all due respect, that is your opinion.
Did you ever think that maybe there are others who do not want to shoot squaddies down?
-
Wow loads of posts on this subject and having read a fair few I certainly wouldn't want to wade through them all. Such a small proportion being helpful
Well I'm here because I couldn't get into Blue, and Orange has no real appeal to me (and I have tried it a few times), so it was a case of log on log off. After getting the drift of the reason for change (at least some of it) I thought what would have happened if I had logged onto Blue and suddenly found myself on one of the "other" sides. Bear in mind I have never switched sides in living memory. Would I have logged off ? Honestly, in my case no I don't think I would.
I am not in a squad although have been years ago. Could it be (Suggestion) that anyone logging in and not in a squad goes to the minority side as well as new starters. If you are in a squad you default to your current squad country. Then if the balance is within limits you can change countries if you want to.
If there is an balance problem due to either people logging off or too many squaddies for one country showing up, then the ENY kicks in. I don't mind this too much - as I can still chose to fly albeit not in the best planes
I suppose I don't mind being guided and gently pressured by the game to even things up, but I do object to being shoved around or kept waiting when I have paid to fly and enjoy myself.
I do like staying with one country because you get to know others who fly at similar times and have an idea if they have a style and gameplay you can support and run with. But this is not a critical factor to me, just useful.
I do not regard choice of having to wait or be forced to change sides a pleasant choice, it has the feel of being pushed around. Slotting me into a country when I log in so I can just fly, even on another side would not feel so bad especially if I also had a soft option to change sides if balance of numbers permitted it.
Thats my thrupence worth for the evening (BTW it was worth more than 2 cents ;) )
-
Originally posted by Donzo
With all due respect, that is your opinion.
Did you ever think that maybe there are others who do not want to shoot squaddies down?
That's entirely possible.
I still think the key here is what is best for the largest number of people in the game.
Catering to a select group may please that crew but make the game that much less enjoyable for the rest.
Since none of this is life and death, and there are any number of avenues to keep BS'ing with your buddies online, it seems less important to support the guys who have no desire to bend to help the overall health of the game.
-
Greetings,
Side balance - two simple words that bring so much moaning and gnashing of teeth. Many ways to do this:
Some we are currently trying -
Raw Numbers
ENY
Reduction in cost of perk planes
Lines of advance (on hold for now - but does have potential!)
Some to consider -
Variable Ack accuracy / density at bases - Defending country dedicates more resources to defense
Not enabling planes / vehicles / ack at recently captured bases - Reflecting difficulty of getting logistical structure in place at recently captured fields.
Further restrict side switchin to once a week instead of once and hour - to reduce people joining the 'winning' side
Increase the number of troops required to take a field the closer it is to the City - reflect the difficulties associated with entering enemy home territory
Reduce availability of quality aviation fuel for over balanced side(s) - reflecting the over demand on production capability
Reduce ordance availability on the over balanced side(s) - reflecting the demand exceeding the available resupply rate.
Just a couple of thoughts from an old wargamer . . . . who is not a programer! ;)
Regards,
-
BTW having only just posted I then read MWL's posting and would add that I think there are more than a few good points in the suggestions made.
Cheers Blagard
-
theres a simple and easy way to fix this problem at hand,you already have 2 late wars arenas,1 mid and 1 early,everyone has their own taste as to where and what they fly and who they fly with,so jjust make 1 unlimited un perked uncapped un balanced areana for people to have as an option to goto if they chose whether the sides are balanced or not,some like to steamroll,some like to gv,some like to furball,some like to be in overwelming odds against them,as i have seen in the other post to this problem,that others will just flock to this 1 and only arena then so be it those who choose to can those who dont have the other limited arenas to fly in as well,just my 2 cents,but it beats switchin sides or becomin a "mercanary" and still beable to fly with your squad if your with one it just opens the option up for people,that way they cant complain that their bein steamrolled,their gettin lag cause of to many people the only thing they will be able to whine about is gettin shot down by a better pilot or plane,if they dont like it then they have other places to go.......Corpse
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Originally posted by Oldman731
Was very much with you up until this point. But I see no correlation between altering the look of the map and having the greatest impact on the game. In fact, I would go so far as to say that one of the greatest negative impacts on the game is caused by the War-Fighters swarming to capture bases.
Was a great explanation of different styles up until that point, though!
- oldman
But the whole game engine is setup to reward the War-Fighter.... so of course they have the greatest impact.
-
Originally posted by Oldman731
In fact, I would go so far as to say that one of the greatest negative impacts on the game is caused by the War-Fighters swarming to capture bases.
Oldman731,
Sounds to me like we are in agreement.
I did not qualify “impacts” as positive or negative because it depends on what kind of player is judging the results. What I was referring to is that everyone can bring up their clipboards and see the state of the map. The people that are doing the capturing and the people doing the defending control the look of the map. And, most likely, those people are the War-Fighters. After all, the Gamers are off engaging in one-to-one combats that does not change the map. The Gamers don’t have any, or they say they don’t have any, loyalty to their countries so if a base should fall and a map reset, it should not negatively impact them in the least. If it does bother them that some “swarm” is taking a base somewhere and they feel powerless to do anything about it while flying solo, then they need to stop being a Gamer. Two Gamers winging together can really put the hurt on a “swarm.” Eight Gamers working together (Heaven forbid) could stop most “swarms” in their tracks. Of course they are now in danger of being called a “swarm” themselves and accused of ruining the game.
If the “swarm” is comprised of War-Fighters, it will tick them off at getting stopped. But since they enjoy the strategic elements of the game, they will be thinking; “How to we get past the Oldman and his seven war-fighting amigos?” For my squad we already have the answer – Viper215.
MachNix
-
Greetings,
Was very much with you up until this point. But I see no correlation between altering the look of the map and having the greatest impact on the game. In fact, I would go so far as to say that one of the greatest negative impacts on the game is caused by the War-Fighters swarming to capture bases.
Was a great explanation of different styles up until that point, though!
- oldman Originally posted by Oldman731
Currently, the Grand Tactial Player has the most significant impact on the game. With the new changes, maybe the Strategic Player will have more. Don't know will have to wait and see.
The Gamer has an impact on the game until he runs out of fuel / ammo or is damaged enough to RTB. His glory is fleeting, where the War Gamer, by targeting Bases, Factories and Cities effects the choices available to the Gamer and the opposing War Gamers.
In my opinion, Strategic Campaigns should drive Grand Tactical Operations which drive the need / purpose of the Tactical Engagements. While that is not quite true today, it maybe even more so in the future as the lines of operations / advance enter the terrain files.
The impact of the 'thinker' verses the 'turner and burner' over the execution of the game will always be greater until we reduce the options to the War Gamer until the options are meaningless.
Regards,
-
Originally posted by MachNix
Oldman731,
Sounds to me like we are in agreement.
I did not qualify “impacts” as positive or negative because it depends on what kind of player is judging the results. What I was referring to is that everyone can bring up their clipboards and see the state of the map. The people that are doing the capturing and the people doing the defending control the look of the map. And, most likely, those people are the War-Fighters. After all, the Gamers are off engaging in one-to-one combats that does not change the map. The Gamers don’t have any, or they say they don’t have any, loyalty to their countries so if a base should fall and a map reset, it should not negatively impact them in the least. If it does bother them that some “swarm” is taking a base somewhere and they feel powerless to do anything about it while flying solo, then they need to stop being a Gamer. Two Gamers winging together can really put the hurt on a “swarm.” Eight Gamers working together (Heaven forbid) could stop most “swarms” in their tracks. Of course they are now in danger of being called a “swarm” themselves and accused of ruining the game.
If the “swarm” is comprised of War-Fighters, it will tick them off at getting stopped. But since they enjoy the strategic elements of the game, they will be thinking; “How to we get past the Oldman and his seven war-fighting amigos?” For my squad we already have the answer – Viper215.
MachNix
Lots of folks who apparently be classified as 'gamers' under this description, do just what you describe. What would happen was as soon as there was any resistance, the horde moved elsewhere.
I do recall a night not too long ago where one of those big groups in the guise of fun was upping the horde, then landing and upping the horde elsewhere, just to see if folks were responding. They had no intention of attacking anywhere
I had someone on one occasion say they weren't coming back because there weren't enough of us to make it worthwhile too even though we'd come up to 'defend'
LOL sometimes ya just can't win.
-
See Rule #6
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Originally posted by JimJones
I guess rule #5 five only applies to the users
To begin with Rule #5 says this:
Flamebaiting, trolling, or posting to incite or annoy is not allowed.
HT didn't do any of those things.
In second place, he owns the board, why would any rule apply to him?
I find it good that those rules are basic rules for politeness that the HTC staff all follow and would like us users to follow.
I find it interesting and HT must find it frustrating that this whole thing has turned into a a whine-fest of the magnitude it has.
Just speaking from my perspective.
Mark
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Greetings,
Guppy -
I had someone on one occasion say they weren't coming back because there weren't enough of us to make it worthwhile too even though we'd come up to 'defend'
LOL sometimes ya just can't win.
That is a problem with the current maps - no base is really more important than another. We have maps, not terrain. We lack Key and Decisive Terrain. The Line of Advance matrixes can help focus the attacks and solve this problem by defining key bases that must be taken prior to an further advance. Granted, it doesn't need to be a single line through out the entire 'country', but it does need to have key logistic nodes and choke points that focus the attack after a given amount of advance.
Regards,
-
See Rule #2
-
Originally posted by JB88
See Rules #4, #5
JB, I understand you are upset because the game is in a changing mode but I don't see where he was inciting anger in you. Basicaly just stating how he felt. I don't really understand what all the hoopla is about anyway. I suppose if I played the game the hours that some people here do I might feel differently. I am taking a lot for granted saying what I think he means when I really have no right to. I just never read him as an individual that way. I really need to butt out of this "wailing wall" because I don't understand why people feel negatively the way they do about this game.
It's a game, nothing more, nothing less, and a game I enjoy because I love airplanes.
Good luck JB, hope things work out the way you want them to.
Mark
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Practical example:
I know my squadmates are flying Bish.
I log on and cannot join Bish.
Now the burden is on me to talk my squad into dropping what they are doing at the moment and switch sides so I can fly with them.
If you chose something OTHER than a 'squad' of SIX wings with a total potential membership of 192 people, it might be easier to fly with them. It appears there are going to be fewer and fewer opportunities to plunk as many people as you guys have into any one arena at once---There is a reason that squads have a cap of 32 (If a squad actually HAS 32 guys, you rarely see more than 12 or 13 on squad night)
Believing that you should have the right to fly where ever you wish, at the expense of all other players would by simple definition be "self interested".
I think that gives us a clue where this is heading
(edit) I have been alternately joyous and furious at each of the changes over the last few months--They often come up with different results than I surmised. But HT isn't doing this because we are lab mice and he's trying to amuse himself by re-arranging the maze
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Hardly crisis mode though. Shooting down a squaddie can be good for your health :)
This is simply not a feasible solution...
...besides I tried once and Lazer hurt my feelings.....
:)
-
See Rule #4
-
I think the fact that all planes I try to shoot down begin manuvering to avoid my bullets takes the fun factor away. I think I should have dbl or triple the loadout of ammo.
I think the arenas should be identical and everyone only fly Big Blue Planes.
You can only kill the ones that begin evasive moves. If they fly straight and level, you can shoot only the cockpit or parachute. BTW,This would be on tuesday only.
On the other days of the week, My plane will be exempt from all rules. This will allow me to fly and not have the added stress of being shot down.
I know that if my changes are made, It will bring everyone to my superior level of pilotmanship.
My self esteem is completly dependent on the implementation of these changes.
If they are not made right now, I will hold my breath and fly in a straight line without manuvering my plane
javascript:smilie(':noid')
-SR-
paranoid
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #6
-
Ahem, well from a newb perspective after 5 days of flying, i can see the whole issue of loyalty & commradeship going down the tubes just by reading the posts here on your bulletin board as well as what i've heard ingame.
After flying for 3 days i was subject to the "new" changes as well and although i don't fully understand them completely, i would never subject myself to paying for an online game service that restricted my usage. I have already become frustrated by not being able to go to the arena i want to & fly the planes i like so i log off & go play other more "user" friendly games online and the services are free.
It seems to me that a great disservice has been thrust upon those who are grouped into squadrons & like to play together. That is the type of crux that most popular & enjoyable games all share and one which this game claimed to have in it's advertizing but is in serious crisis from what i have gathered. To play a game is one thing, to belong to a game is another.
I don't see myself signing up past my 2 week free trial period. Too much seems to be in limbo here and i've read some really nasty posts from company authors that are not condusive towards their customer base.
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #2
-
Originally posted by bj229r
If you chose something OTHER than a 'squad' of SIX wings with a total potential membership of 192 people, it might be easier to fly with them. It appears there are going to be fewer and fewer opportunities to plunk as many people as you guys have into any one arena at once---There is a reason that squads have a cap of 32 (If a squad actually HAS 32 guys, you rarely see more than 12 or 13 on squad night)
Never a dull moment with you.
Show me where said anything about different "wings". I believe I said squad. I am in a squad. Did you ever stop and think I was refering to members of the squad I am in (the official HTC regulation squad)?
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by BlauK
S! Stiletto,
extremely well thought and clearly presented argument. Many of your observations hit right on the nail.
Ditto! I am fed up with balancing and being fair. It is...err...was an air war simulation!
Now it is a game with a lot of PC crud.
I doubt I will be here for much longer. A few of my squad mates have left the game. SKDenny has left. So it must be bad...
Of course I shall most likely live up to my name and be a little too slow in killing my account. Warbirds is now looking worth a try....
-
Originally posted by ZagaZig
Ahem, well from a newb perspective after 5 days of flying, i can see the whole issue of loyalty & commradeship going down the tubes just by reading the posts here on your bulletin board as well as what i've heard ingame.
After flying for 3 days i was subject to the "new" changes as well and although i don't fully understand them completely, i would never subject myself to paying for an online game service that restricted my usage. I have already become frustrated by not being able to go to the arena i want to & fly the planes i like so i log off & go play other more "user" friendly games online and the services are free.
It seems to me that a great disservice has been thrust upon those who are grouped into squadrons & like to play together. That is the type of crux that most popular & enjoyable games all share and one which this game claimed to have in it's advertizing but is in serious crisis from what i have gathered. To play a game is one thing, to belong to a game is another.
I don't see myself signing up past my 2 week free trial period. Too much seems to be in limbo here and i've read some really nasty posts from company authors that are not condusive towards their customer base.
OK, this just seems like too much of a plant to take seriously, even though I agree with everything said.
As for Stils asking for more information about the reasoning that went into changes that has once again thrown the customer base into great turmoil, I think that's a natural question and in no way shape and form rude. Uncomfortable, maybe, but it seemed to have been asked in a polite way and could have been answered in a way that did not involve revealing income (too little) amount spent on house (too much) amount paid in taxes (way too much) amount spent on food (too much, but they'll throw me in jail if I ever try to implement my "feed the children on an odd/even day" system).
It's a question people have been asking since these ongoing "improvements" were first implemented and more people are asking as they scratch their heads and wonder how the designers of this game seem to have missed the fact (despite it being everywhere on these boards) or _ more likely _ just don't care that flying together with the people they like is one reason a segment of this community logs on to the game week after week. How large a section of the community that is, I don't know. Given the way it is being treated, I would suspect that the secret data says it's of a size not worth worrying about.
-
Originally posted by MachNix
I don’t think balancing number is going to get you what you are looking for. There are basically three types of players: the Gamer who sees Aces High as a combat simulator; the War-Fighter who sees Aces High as a war simulator; and the Newbie who doesn’t know what Aces High is about.
Actually, there is a 4th. The group that just wants to have some fun. This type of player will generally tolerate the actions of the other types. That is, until those actions begin to impact the fun.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Lots of folks who apparently be classified as 'gamers' under this description, do just what you describe. What would happen was as soon as there was any resistance, the horde moved elsewhere.
I do recall a night not too long ago where one of those big groups in the guise of fun was upping the horde, then landing and upping the horde elsewhere, just to see if folks were responding. They had no intention of attacking anywhere
I had someone on one occasion say they weren't coming back because there weren't enough of us to make it worthwhile too even though we'd come up to 'defend'
LOL sometimes ya just can't win.
Roger Guppy. No one likes to beat their head against a wall – I’m sure there are some exceptions – and if you can mount an effective defense, they will either quite, or attack the other country, or change their tactics to counter your defense. And don’t let them mess with your head when they say; “Your puny little defense isn’t worth messing with.” Sounds to me like your defense work but didn’t result in a fight. I’m sure if you put up enough numbers, they would have called you a horde and wouldn’t want to fight either. Sometimes you just have to take the fight to them. Then they log off, complain about the numbers being out of balance, and you still don’t get your fight. Hmmm...that’s a puzzler alright. They’re paying $15 not to fight; you’re paying $15 to fight. Sounds like in some situations, the best action is right here on the BBS.
I’m still not a fan of forcing the numbers to be balance. Two countries could still gang up on one and race for the reset. Like the idea of having the few un-capturable bases but they need to be un-bombable too. Otherwise they could end up not having any equipment or troops. Also like the idea of needing a certain percentage of the other country to win the war. The game might not be too fun for the low-number country until they get down to their remaining, un-capturable bases. Once the other two counties start fighting each other to determine the ultimate winner, it would give the low-number country a chance to break out.
-
Is AH a war game or a WW11 flight sim?
I think of it as wargaming, otherwise why have capture devises like C47s, and bombers to level ememy abilities to react, and so on.
If people just want to fly and dogfight, have a dog fight arena, and for others have a war game arena.
Opps, think we already had that choice before. Just that almost everyone went into the MA to win a war. MY, MY!
I loved the ability on one night or within one night to find fights, or join with friends to capture the other guys (and girls) stuff. I enjoyed going off to hit troops and ord at rear bases while others did their thing.
Now, last night I flew rook for the first time, I had fun, killed 5 or 6 Bish, but I didn't know any of the rooks, and none of the Bish I killed were known to me either.
People are spread all over the place now, so having comrades you know and understand, is gone. Is that a good thing?
Change the game to make it more balanced, sure! Take away what it is people seem to want, hmmmm, maybe not so good. Hope it all works out.
There may not be a right answer for all the "self interest" going on, but hopefully there is a right way to accomodate all. (or most)
-
Hitech,
Great stuff, we had some minor problems 1 guy waited 15 min and 1 waited 5 out of all the people in the squad. After that no problems what so ever.
Just an idea you might concider.
Is there anyway possiable that when a person is waiting in que for there time to come up and fly they can man a gun somewhere on a field,bomber or CV. This way when a person is waiting they can do something until there number comes up to fly.
just an iadea like on squad night that 1 guy had to wait for 15 min and we still switch country and tried to get him in. We where in about 21 b24's and it would be great if that pilot could of maned a gun in one of the bombers or field ack until his number comes up. Is this possiable with out throwing off the side balancing system?
Thanks and keep up the good work:aok
-
Jim Beam, they have turned this game in to nother one i knew (EA) 7 years ago it was all squads squads and now it has turned in to to (EA sports) lmao and it will be no more squads just fur balls sad to think after all hitec has been through it ends up like this sad very sad we had i total of 4 squad members out of 12 thats could fly with us because of this set up arenas with early ,late years we all pick one and this happends bad enough with the arena change but guess this is what it turns in to and you wont change them its all about the money for every old timmer they think they will get 3 noobe and they might but this is the same thing we old timers went through in the other game, god to fly wit ya see how long it last <
>
-
i keep hearing about people who don't want to fight, i havn't found them , everyone i come across wants to fight me , in fact they all want to fight me at the same time, they must just be looking for "fun".
-
See Rule #4
was actual question...not response to anything...post was made late on monday...day they said changes was going into effect...in first post of this thread.
Thanks for play on name of squad...cute.
-
I started playing aces high after seeing a commercial on the discovery wings or maybe the History channel sometime in 2001 or 2002. I thought “great a way to use the computer to in some small way get a sense of what it was like to fly in WWII”. I love aviation, my dad is a private pilot, (I got my pilots license in 2004 mostly because of my love for the game). I live near the U.S. Air force museum and had been there hundreds of times in my life. But it took on a whole new meaning after the game I truly felt that I had an understanding of the aircraft, how they stacked up against each other, their strengths and weaknesses.
When I started playing I thought it was the greatest thing in the world, really I did. I drove anyone who would listen crazy with talk about its realism. A friend of mine, who’s dad was a B-24 pilot would never believe that it wasn’t “just a video game played by a bunch of kids” I would tell him “most of these guys are my age (41 or so then) or older. They know a lot about the planes, pilots, and history of WWII. He would literally lose his patience and say things like “they are kids lying to you about their age”. I played the game constantly making me exhausted every day at work because of playing so late the night before. And I might add my wife was the classic Aces High widow.
The game made me a knight by default the first time I played it. I have never and will never play as anything else because in my Walter Mitty world of aces high that was where I was born. If I were born in Germany and came of age during WWII I would have fought against overwhelming numbers but I would not have quit or changed countries. If I were born an American or Russian I would have been part of an overwhelming horde, a simple matter of chance.
I told my cousin (SirPyro) about the game on Christmas in 2003 I told him "it’s like a drug don’t start if your not willing to devote a lot of time to playing it". The first time he got on he played for 72 straight hours. He joined the squad I was in the 113th Lucky Strikes. And he was always on. Another of our squad members was GunRunner he could always be counted on to show up for our Saturday Squad night.
I haven’t seen SirPyro on for a couple of months, since the changes started kicking in. GunRunner sent the squad an email last week that “the game had lost its luster” and he had cancelled his account. I myself signed up for the free trial of Warbirds and WWII online to check them out but didn’t really like either of them. So now I never play except on Saturday Squad night mostly out of a since of obligation to the 1 or 2 guys that still show up.
You guys and my friend are right, it is just a game now but man it used to be so much more.
-
Originally posted by NoBaddy
Actually, there is a 4th. The group that just wants to have some fun. This type of player will generally tolerate the actions of the other types. That is, until those actions begin to impact the fun.
There is a 4th but not as you describe and they are not worth mentioning. A person can have fun flying/GVing alone. They can have fun flying/GVing in a group. What else is there group-wise?
I definitely see that the race to the reset as being a problem. I think requiring a percentage of the other country to win the war address this problem. What I see, or rather hear about on the BBS, is the solo pilot running into two other guys flying as a team. The solo pilot gets shot down on the second move and then starts screaming about “hordes” and “number imbalance” ruining his fun. Then the solution to this issue is to not allow those two guys to fly together. And no one cares that those two guys where having fun working together because, after all, they where ruining the game for all the other 700 members that where logged on at the time.
Maybe that is an over simplification but I feel that having HTC dictate what you can fly, where you can fly, when you can fly, and who you can fly with hurts more than it helps.
-
Greetings,
What I see, or rather hear about on the BBS, is the solo pilot running into two other guys flying as a team. The solo pilot gets shot down on the second move and then starts screaming about “hordes” and “number imbalance” ruining his fun. Then the solution to this issue is to not allow those two guys to fly together. And no one cares that those two guys where having fun working together because, after all, they where ruining the game for all the other 700 members that where logged on at the time.
Exactly. To me this game is about having a wingie and working as a team. Not about 'turning and burning'.
The squad / communittee aspect is exactly what is missing for me. That was the heart of the game. Heck if I was only interested in kills I wouldn't be flying Jugs all the time!
I just think we can design a map that will encourage the type of play that HTech wants without the mandatory fly with x team to even the numbers and balance the needs of the Gamers and the War Gamers! :)
Regards,
-
Originally posted by MachNix
There is a 4th but not as you describe and they are not worth mentioning. A person can have fun flying/GVing alone. They can have fun flying/GVing in a group. What else is there group-wise?
I definitely see that the race to the reset as being a problem. I think requiring a percentage of the other country to win the war address this problem. What I see, or rather hear about on the BBS, is the solo pilot running into two other guys flying as a team. The solo pilot gets shot down on the second move and then starts screaming about “hordes” and “number imbalance” ruining his fun. Then the solution to this issue is to not allow those two guys to fly together. And no one cares that those two guys where having fun working together because, after all, they where ruining the game for all the other 700 members that where logged on at the time.
Maybe that is an over simplification but I feel that having HTC dictate what you can fly, where you can fly, when you can fly, and who you can fly with hurts more than it helps.
Sorry, but not all of the people that I am talking about are your version of 'solo' pilots.
I will agree that the 'race to reset' is the part of the problem. However, another part is that too many players these days are unwilling to play the game without the crutch of superior numbers. Whether it's because of a lack of skill, low virtual testosterone, simple laziness or a desire to "play the game realistically" makes no difference. When those players decide to dominate the game, "fun" will often disappear for their opponents. When those players try to dominate the game on a long term basis....HTC decides to try some behavior modification.
The point is that what HTC is attempting to do is to make the game fun for as many people as possible. As with any change that has come in this (or any other game), the changes bring out a storm of pissin' & moanin', threats to cancel accounts and prepubecent temper tantrums. If you want to change things here, come to the table with clear, well thought out suggestions. The "this sucks, change it back" and "I'm gonna quit if...." posts are guaranteed to be ignored.
When it comes to your oversimplification, HTC has always, in one fashion or another, limited game options for the good of the game. Nothing new there, excepting of course that these are the most draconian limits thus far. Since this stuff started a few years ago, HT has made numerous attempts to 'encourage' behavior changes....all to no avail. Well, doubtless these changes have gotten the attention of the horde monkeys. Now, I plan to kick back for a bit and see what happens.
Who knows, HT might actually have a few clues. (Heater..if you read this...note I said a "few"):D
-
What is next? No fair, no fair! I keep getting killed due to lack of ability and SA. We need to balance this. If one sucks, then the enemy can only shoot rubber bullets (low velocity, will always bounce and do no damage). On the other hand, you get a positive balance of a hit bubble of 300 feet around the enemy. Close would count for you.
Warfare, balance, fairness. Sounds like peace to me.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Stiletto:
How much do you make a year.
How much have you paid in taxes last year.
How much did you pay for your house.
How much do you spend on drinking each year.
How much do you spend on food each week.
Can you please post all your bank account transactions for the last month?
Hope you understand the drift of my post.
HiTech
Do you pay me a monthly fee for a service?
Have you been paying it faithfully, month after month, year after year?
Have I changed the service radically, without sending you a survey to fill out, and without explanation?
Do I have a subscriber-based business that relies on the good will of my subscribers in order to survive?
Would I be an idiot to offend you for no reason?
Hope you understand the drift of my post.
-
What I see, or rather hear about on the BBS, is the solo pilot running into two other guys flying as a team. The solo pilot gets shot down on the second move and then starts screaming about “hordes” and “number imbalance” ruining his fun. Then the solution to this issue is to not allow those two guys to fly together. And no one cares that those two guys where having fun working together because, after all, they where ruining the game for all the other 700 members that where logged on at the time.
Maybe that is an over simplification but I feel that having HTC dictate what you can fly, where you can fly, when you can fly, and who you can fly with hurts more than it helps. [/B]
<> FINALLY!!! well said.... :aok
-
Over the years I have posted very little about what I do like and don't about the AH game. I don't get into flaming on the R/T nor on the Fourms.
When I want to just fly a Flightsim I fly Microsoft FS for General Aviation flying. That is a Flightsim. When I fly AH I'm flyng an Air Combat sim. Without the comradeship of the Sq or Group I wouldn't have paid to fly any online sim. I can just fly a Combat sim against the AI. AH is an Air Combat sim. It take statagy,tatical, leadership,and skill. And yes for the game to keep people to spend money month after month for years it takes people wanting to belong to more than just a sim. I have had the great privage of flying with some very good people over the years. I have learned alot and still learning and enjoying their company when in sad times and good times. At times it has been good threopy as when my wife's heart attack, when my Son in Law was killed and just life sometimes. Also the good times I have shared such as the birth of my Grandsons and Granddaughters. And I have shared The good and bad of those hume I fly and fight with. My Sq.
Those of you who haven't flown in a good Sq I can't explan what it means to be lucky enough to have that comrandship.
When the SkyKnights moved the AH we looked at the countries. Very few wanted the Rooks. The rook were always the lowest in numbers. So we thought it was a good place to start as an underdog. We done good working with other Sqs. Well I can go on and on. But the Sq and country is an important patr of and "Combat Flightsim". I hope Dale, things will workout for AH. I know you work hard. I have watched you work. And I hope this will give at least a bit of reading for you to consider.
Thank you
Seadog SkyKnights Bomber Fighter Group
Thank you.
-
Somebody needs to say this...
Great post Gunston! :aok
Originally posted by Gunston
I started playing aces high after seeing a commercial on the discovery wings or maybe the History channel sometime in 2001 or 2002. I thought “great a way to use the computer to in some small way get a sense of what it was like to fly in WWII”. I love aviation, my dad is a private pilot, (I got my pilots license in 2004 mostly because of my love for the game). I live near the U.S. Air force museum and had been there hundreds of times in my life. But it took on a whole new meaning after the game I truly felt that I had an understanding of the aircraft, how they stacked up against each other, their strengths and weaknesses.
When I started playing I thought it was the greatest thing in the world, really I did. I drove anyone who would listen crazy with talk about its realism. A friend of mine, who’s dad was a B-24 pilot would never believe that it wasn’t “just a video game played by a bunch of kids” I would tell him “most of these guys are my age (41 or so then) or older. They know a lot about the planes, pilots, and history of WWII. He would literally lose his patience and say things like “they are kids lying to you about their age”. I played the game constantly making me exhausted every day at work because of playing so late the night before. And I might add my wife was the classic Aces High widow.
The game made me a knight by default the first time I played it. I have never and will never play as anything else because in my Walter Mitty world of aces high that was where I was born. If I were born in Germany and came of age during WWII I would have fought against overwhelming numbers but I would not have quit or changed countries. If I were born an American or Russian I would have been part of an overwhelming horde, a simple matter of chance.
I told my cousin (SirPyro) about the game on Christmas in 2003 I told him "it’s like a drug don’t start if your not willing to devote a lot of time to playing it". The first time he got on he played for 72 straight hours. He joined the squad I was in the 113th Lucky Strikes. And he was always on. Another of our squad members was GunRunner he could always be counted on to show up for our Saturday Squad night.
I haven’t seen SirPyro on for a couple of months, since the changes started kicking in. GunRunner sent the squad an email last week that “the game had lost its luster” and he had cancelled his account. I myself signed up for the free trial of Warbirds and WWII online to check them out but didn’t really like either of them. So now I never play except on Saturday Squad night mostly out of a since of obligation to the 1 or 2 guys that still show up.
You guys and my friend are right, it is just a game now but man it used to be so much more.
-
Originally posted by hitech
john9001:
Do not believe I have ever said that.
What I have said is more along the lines of it is not a simulation of WWII.
HiTech
What you said is in my signature.
-
See Rule #4
-
This side balancing scheme isn't a new idea. It is an accepted method that has been in use for some time in other games - Sony's Planetside game for example (as is the capture chain idea).
-
Originally posted by JB88
should i support a company that feels that it is OKAY to serve me a product that i did not buy rather than the one that i actually did.
no more beta testing or no more me
Seriously...and directed at all those with the "this is not the game I subscribed to" mentality (not just JB88)
Thinking and speaking only for myself...if I looked at it that way (no more changing/testing while I pay)...
I should have quit 100+ times over the last 7 years. When I "signed up" there were 6 planes and one map. They've added TONS of stuff I don't like or use over this time. The game and, even more so, the way the game is played has changed many times over this period as well. I have read and heard all the predictions of doom and the "end of AH as we know it" when things like GVs were added, when large maps were added, when bomber formations were added, when CVs were added, when the graphics were updated, when TOD started consuming HTCs resources, there's probably a good dozen more I could name that had a bigger impact on gameplay than side-balancing too.
Yeah, you're right...this game is changing, and doing so while we pay, and nobody here likes every change they've made, but change itself is not new. It has been changed hundreds of times in the past and probably (hopefully) will in the future as well. We as players can try to dig in our heels and protest the changes and threaten to quit or we can learn to live with them and adapt. It really boils down to that. Do you trust that HTC knows what they are doing and trust that the future of AH is safe in their hands or do you plan to create your own MMOL air-combat sim and design it your way since you're so sure that you know better?
-
Originally posted by MachNix
Oldman731,
Sounds to me like we are in agreement.
I did not qualify “impacts” as positive or negative because it depends on what kind of player is judging the results. What I was referring to is that everyone can bring up their clipboards and see the state of the map. The people that are doing the capturing and the people doing the defending control the look of the map. And, most likely, those people are the War-Fighters. After all, the Gamers are off engaging in one-to-one combats that does not change the map. The Gamers don’t have any, or they say they don’t have any, loyalty to their countries so if a base should fall and a map reset, it should not negatively impact them in the least. If it does bother them that some “swarm” is taking a base somewhere and they feel powerless to do anything about it while flying solo, then they need to stop being a Gamer. Two Gamers winging together can really put the hurt on a “swarm.” Eight Gamers working together (Heaven forbid) could stop most “swarms” in their tracks. Of course they are now in danger of being called a “swarm” themselves and accused of ruining the game.
If the “swarm” is comprised of War-Fighters, it will tick them off at getting stopped. But since they enjoy the strategic elements of the game, they will be thinking; “How to we get past the Oldman and his seven war-fighting amigos?” For my squad we already have the answer – Viper215.
MachNix
I was quarreling with your notion that changing the look of the map, in itself, is the most important part of the game. For many of us it has nothing to do with the game, simply because our goals are different from those of the people who want to win the reset. I think you're correct in the sense that the War-Fighters, with their quest to change the look of the map, are the cause of our current problems and HTC's attempts to fix those problems. As you say, when the swarm arrives, the Gamers are faced with three unpleasant choices: be overwhelmed, leave the area, or change their own goals to match those of the War-Winners (by somehow instantly amassing an adequate defense force). This is what makes the current string of "don't force us to play your way" whines ironic. The War-Fighters have been forcing that choice on others all along. As I gather the story, when the swarms not only reached huge proportions, but also avoided fighting each other (even I have seen this), the fundamental combat aspect of the game was frustrated and changes were implemented.
As the expression goes, I really don't have a dog in this fight. There are many war games that offer far more challenge, as war games, than this one ever can (or should). The grand strategic war here is very basic, and I'm not sure that people should be congratulating themselves for being clever generals (or admirals, whatever), just because they've figured out that they can capture territory by employing overwhelming force or sneaking captures of undefended bases. The purpose of AH, for me, is what it has been for me in all multi-player air combat games, which is to engage in air combat. I think AH2 excels at this, at the same time as it encourages you to make new friends - no matter what side they fly for. Getting vulched and ganged - as happened "in the real war," and as propounded by some of the thoughtful AH strategists - has virtually nothing to do with air combat, and so, whenever possible, I avoid places where these thing occur.
- oldman (btw, what ever happened to Lazs - I tended to agree with him on this)
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Seriously...and directed at all those with the "this is not the game I subscribed to" mentality (not just JB88)
Thinking and speaking only for myself...if I looked at it that way (no more changing/testing while I pay)...
I should have quit 100+ times over the last 7 years. When I "signed up" there were 6 planes and one map. They've added TONS of stuff I don't like or use over this time. The game and, even more so, the way the game is played has changed many times over this period as well. I have read and heard all the predictions of doom and the "end of AH as we know it" when things like GVs were added, when large maps were added, when bomber formations were added, when CVs were added, when the graphics were updated, when TOD started consuming HTCs resources, there's probably a good dozen more I could name that had a bigger impact on gameplay than side-balancing too.
Yeah, you're right...this game is changing, and doing so while we pay, and nobody here likes every change they've made, but change itself is not new. It has been changed hundreds of times in the past and probably (hopefully) will in the future as well. We as players can try to dig in our heels and protest the changes and threaten to quit or we can learn to live with them and adapt. It really boils down to that. Do you trust that HTC knows what they are doing and trust that the future of AH is safe in their hands or do you plan to create your own MMOL air-combat sim and design it your way since you're so sure that you know better?
Most of the changes you mentioned were in hardware, performance and additional "choices". Few until recently were actually retrictions on the individuals interaction with the game. Once you logged in, got your weapons of choice and spent the rest of the day getting the smile off your face. Now its the new world order. As has been quite well said many many times in this thread, the game is not changing, it's leaving behind the core group that made it and the format that drew us to it in the first place. There is nothing wrong with change, but this has been completely unnessasary and counter productive. I still suggest a retro MA be put up. Then HT can see how many will be in Ew, MW and LW arena with their overbearing controls. But they won't, it would overload the MA and confirm their mistake.
-
Originally posted by Oldman731
I was quarreling with your notion that changing the look of the map, in itself, is the most important part of the game. For many of us it has nothing to do with the game, simply because our goals are different from those of the people who want to win the reset. I think you're correct in the sense that the War-Fighters, with their quest to change the look of the map, are the cause of our current problems and HTC's attempts to fix those problems. As you say, when the swarm arrives, the Gamers are faced with three unpleasant choices: be overwhelmed, leave the area, or change their own goals to match those of the War-Winners (by somehow instantly amassing an adequate defense force). This is what makes the current string of "don't force us to play your way" whines ironic. The War-Fighters have been forcing that choice on others all along. As I gather the story, when the swarms not only reached huge proportions, but also avoided fighting each other (even I have seen this), the fundamental combat aspect of the game was frustrated and changes were implemented.
As the expression goes, I really don't have a dog in this fight. There are many war games that offer far more challenge, as war games, than this one ever can (or should). The grand strategic war here is very basic, and I'm not sure that people should be congratulating themselves for being clever generals (or admirals, whatever), just because they've figured out that they can capture territory by employing overwhelming force or sneaking captures of undefended bases. The purpose of AH, for me, is what it has been for me in all multi-player air combat games, which is to engage in air combat. I think AH2 excels at this, at the same time as it encourages you to make new friends - no matter what side they fly for. Getting vulched and ganged - as happened "in the real war," and as propounded by some of the thoughtful AH strategists - has virtually nothing to do with air combat, and so, whenever possible, I avoid places where these thing occur.
- oldman (btw, what ever happened to Lazs - I tended to agree with him on this)
I would be interested in knowing what other games you talking about, I'd like to check em out.
-
Nice to see a little sanity finding its way back into these last few posts. Gives me a little hope.
S! Edbert, Excaliber, Oldman, Seadog, et al
-
Originally posted by hitech
Monday we will be implementing a new balancing system. It works with the existing ENY number. It will no longer limit what planes you can fly. But rather when it reaches a preset value, people entering the arena will not be able to fly in that arena for their current country.
You will get a message similar to you are 3rd in a queue of 3 .
Your choices will be
1. go to another arena.
2. change countries.
3. wait until more people come onto the other side, or some one from your country leaves.
People waiting will always be able to change countries regardless of their last country change time.
People waiting in queue will not be counted in the ENY values.
This new balancing system will be implemented in all main arenas.
The test capture lines will be taken down until we can layout and code some different options.
1. The current zone / strat setup does not lend it self very well to the current setup,We will be change the supply system to work on all your countries fields, hence hitting the strat targets will have a larger effect.
2. The war win criteria will be changed from having to capture almost all of 1 country , to having to capture around 30 - 40% of both countries fields.
3. Will also make some core fields uncapturable in each country.
HiTech
I hate to say this but: Like most MMO's I've played...if you try to start balancing the game so everyone is on equal footing...you start loosing people. Sooner than you think....your game is worthless and no one will play.
After all...how you gonna balance a LA7 with a F4U-1? Really or balance 5 sets of B-17 or what ever bombers with a Flack 10k below. Really for this game Balance is out of the question. IT WON'T Work...
You can't balance anything or make people play where they don't want to.
:O
-
Originally posted by Excaliber
Most of the changes you mentioned were in hardware, performance and additional "choices". Few until recently were actually retrictions on the individuals interaction with the game. Once you logged in, got your weapons of choice and spent the rest of the day getting the smile off your face. Now its the new world order. As has been quite well said many many times in this thread, the game is not changing, it's leaving behind the core group that made it and the format that drew us to it in the first place. There is nothing wrong with change, but this has been completely unnessasary and counter productive. I still suggest a retro MA be put up. Then HT can see how many will be in Ew, MW and LW arena with their overbearing controls. But they won't, it would overload the MA and confirm their mistake.
Dont' be so quick to paint the entire "core group" as those who don't like these recent changes ... at this point, I think it's a pretty even mix ... for those of the "core group" that still play the game.
As far as I am concerned, most of the "core group" that was here when I first started playing ... DON'T PLAY anymore and I would go as far as to say that this group disappeared when the "horde" mentality became the ruler of the arena.
Why would be put up an MA that resembles the old MA ? ... That would prove nothing except that the people would quickly fold back into their hording milk-running easy chairs ... and this is something that he already knows and has experienced first-hand.
For the life of me, I can't understand how most people honestly believe that HT is just shooting from the hip. I would only be natural for him to sense a problem with the game and then experience the problem personally to see if it was truly a problem.
Do you honestly think that HT and Pyro don't log into the arena(s) under a name that no one know just so they can see what truly is happening or what was happening ? ... or do they just listen to the different "vocal minority" factions and make these types of decisions based solely on 2nd hand and biased opinions ?
People that PUBLICLY ask/demand HT to divulge proprietary information on a PUBLIC forum just because they pay $15 a month is hysterical at best. Maybe you ought to give HTC a phone call, and maybe then HT might be a little more forthcoming with some information (I doubt it tho), but I doubt strongly that anyone would personally call HT and ask/demand that information with the vigor that they do on this BBS.
-
I couldn't agree more Gunston!
I remember those days too. :D
David
(formerly StracCop of the "113th Lucky Strikes")
Originally posted by Gunston
I started playing aces high after seeing a commercial on the discovery wings or maybe the History channel sometime in 2001 or 2002. I thought “great a way to use the computer to in some small way get a sense of what it was like to fly in WWII”. I love aviation, my dad is a private pilot, (I got my pilots license in 2004 mostly because of my love for the game). I live near the U.S. Air force museum and had been there hundreds of times in my life. But it took on a whole new meaning after the game I truly felt that I had an understanding of the aircraft, how they stacked up against each other, their strengths and weaknesses.
When I started playing I thought it was the greatest thing in the world, really I did. I drove anyone who would listen crazy with talk about its realism. A friend of mine, who’s dad was a B-24 pilot would never believe that it wasn’t “just a video game played by a bunch of kids” I would tell him “most of these guys are my age (41 or so then) or older. They know a lot about the planes, pilots, and history of WWII. He would literally lose his patience and say things like “they are kids lying to you about their age”. I played the game constantly making me exhausted every day at work because of playing so late the night before. And I might add my wife was the classic Aces High widow.
The game made me a knight by default the first time I played it. I have never and will never play as anything else because in my Walter Mitty world of aces high that was where I was born. If I were born in Germany and came of age during WWII I would have fought against overwhelming numbers but I would not have quit or changed countries. If I were born an American or Russian I would have been part of an overwhelming horde, a simple matter of chance.
I told my cousin (SirPyro) about the game on Christmas in 2003 I told him "it’s like a drug don’t start if your not willing to devote a lot of time to playing it". The first time he got on he played for 72 straight hours. He joined the squad I was in the 113th Lucky Strikes. And he was always on. Another of our squad members was GunRunner he could always be counted on to show up for our Saturday Squad night.
I haven’t seen SirPyro on for a couple of months, since the changes started kicking in. GunRunner sent the squad an email last week that “the game had lost its luster” and he had cancelled his account. I myself signed up for the free trial of Warbirds and WWII online to check them out but didn’t really like either of them. So now I never play except on Saturday Squad night mostly out of a since of obligation to the 1 or 2 guys that still show up.
You guys and my friend are right, it is just a game now but man it used to be so much more.
-
Originally posted by Mark Luper
Just speaking from my perspective.
Mark
Heya MarkAT, missed you at the last few cons, you doing okay?
-
Originally posted by Machine
I hate to say this but: Like most MMO's I've played...if you try to start balancing the game so everyone is on equal footing...you start loosing people. Sooner than you think....your game is worthless and no one will play.
After all...how you gonna balance a LA7 with a F4U-1? Really or balance 5 sets of B-17 or what ever bombers with a Flack 10k below. Really for this game Balance is out of the question. IT WON'T Work...
You can't balance anything or make people play where they don't want to.
:O
Please ... I have played other online games where the side ARE balanced automatically ... I couldn't join the same team as my buddy due to balancing.
I have also played games where you are allowed to carry/use more powerful weapons than others due to experience and where the side were also auto-balanced.
Balancing the numbers of players vs players (within a certain variance) is what HT is after and only that. To insinuate that he would then need to balance what we use to fight with after that is truly silly and transparent.
You can't balance anything or make people play where they don't want to.
If that were true ... then why all the pissin' and moanin' ?
-
See where all this whining has gotten us? :(
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Dont' be so quick to paint the entire "core group" as those who don't like these recent changes ... at this point, I think it's a pretty even mix ... for those of the "core group" that still play the game.
Why would be put up an MA that resembles the old MA ? ... That would prove nothing except that the people would quickly fold back into their hording milk-running easy chairs ... and this is something that he already knows and has experienced first-hand.
So you think people would "flock" back to the old MA format.... So do I. IF HT is so eager to please, leave everything he's done so far as is so the evolutionarys are happy, add the untweaked arena and sit back in .... his hording, milk-running easy chair.
-
Excaliber: You make 1 huge assumption.
Just because people act in a given fashion (i.e would all jump in the same arena), that the act makes those same people happy.
And that assumption is completely falls.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Excaliber: You make 1 huge assumption.
Just because people act in a given fashion (i.e would all jump in the same arena), that the act makes those same people happy.
And that assumption is completely falls.
HiTech
With this I agree! Well put.
Don't get me wrong, I like Aces High....I came here after Fighter Ace bit the dust. I've been here for more than 6 years...on and off..
I would like to see you implement Tour of Duty as soon as you can. I've been looking forward to that for a long time.
And I would like to see the Pizza map every now and again. Really was a nice map and was playable. Some interesting Veh fights as well as fleet and air fights.
I hope you get it worked out HT
-
I have been around flight sims a little bit so I thought that I would throw in my own two cents worth. Those who argue that this isn't the same old Aces High are absolutely right. It's better, by a whole bunch. And, because of all of the changes, it is not growing stale. The old Main Arena style gameplay carried over from AH1 was getting truly boring. The last few months have been anything but.
I thought when the batch of changes came in previous to this one that the game would suffer a little, and I didn't care for them much, so I could see the validity of some of the complaints. But this new set of changes has my wholehearted approval. I have played it. I like it. A lot.
It's true: this isn't AH1, and it ain't Warbirds and it ain't IL-2 and it ain't Air Warrior. It's AcesHigh2, and it's the best MMOL flight sim out there, and now it has more promise than ever.
:aok
-
A pox on you all for delaying CT for yet one more moment with this gibberish!
Except for Lew.
-
Which one, small pox or chicken pox?
If it was small pox then it'd be a problem since someone would have to break into the CDC and steal the frozen specimens... zounds, the fatality rate would be astounding.
-
Practical example:
I know my squadmates are flying Bish.
I log on and cannot join Bish.
Now the burden is on me to talk my squad into dropping what they are doing at the moment and switch sides so I can fly with them.
Don't know why my original was deleted, it was with respect and a little sarcasm to drive the ridiculousnesses of the whine home. I'll try again without the sarcasm since the sensitive meeter is on high.
So you and your squad switch to lowest numbers for the night. You benefit your squad because, when any other squad members log on they don't have to go through the problem of moving again. Your all inconvenienced once before the switch.
You benefit the community by making the game a better place. And even maybe you make a name for yourselves because you get noticed getting things done on the low number side after you switch.
Maybe after a while the more squads start to do the same and all of a sudden there balance and the problem starts to happen less and less. Or maybe your squad no longer sees the issue because other squads are taking their turns at switching and there is room for all your sqauddies. Either way we get back to some semblance of balance and it is good.
-
Originally posted by Excaliber
I would be interested in knowing what other games you talking about, I'd like to check em out.
Dont ever make the mistake of getting a Grognard wargamer talking about his games....unless you're a grognard in the making!
Wargames are COMPLETELY different than AH. That kind of true strategy, with long term planning and resource allocation, cant really be done in a real time game -- it requires either turn based setup or liberal ability to stop the action completely.
<---cut gaming teeth on the original Third Reich, Panzer Blitz, Tobruk....
-
Originally posted by eh
It's true: this isn't AH1, and it ain't Warbirds and it ain't IL-2 and it ain't Air Warrior. It's AcesHigh2, and it's the best MMOL flight sim out there.
:aok
And thereby hangs the problem.
No competition = Bad for us, good for HT.
What if there was a DECENT alternative to AH2 out there, none of the ones you listed qualify.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
What if there was a DECENT alternative to AH2 out there, none of the ones you listed qualify.
What if santa claus and the easter bunny had kids?
C'mon fellas....why do you think so many other WWII-based MMOL air-combat games have gone belly up, or that the couple that are still hanging on generally suck eggs, or that the few decent boxed sims are not MMOL? Why do you think that Dale and Doug have the only viable product in this genre in the first place?
When you come up with answers maybe you'll be where I am on the topic, and that is trusting their judgement regardless whether it makes sense to me or caters to my desires. Believeyoume (that probably caused our UK friends to shudder), I am no sycophant, if I were in charge there'd be plenty of things I'd rather see or not see in AH, but then "my game" would be in the crapper like all those others that have been named.
FWIW my answer to all the questions I posed in the second paragraph is that Dale/Doug are better at this than anyone else anywhere.
-
Originally posted by Oldman731
I was quarreling with your notion that changing the look of the map, in itself, is the most important part of the game. For many of us it has nothing to do with the game, simply because our goals are different from those of the people who want to win the reset. I think you're correct in the sense that the War-Fighters, with their quest to change the look of the map, are the cause of our current problems and HTC's attempts to fix those problems. As you say, when the swarm arrives, the Gamers are faced with three unpleasant choices: be overwhelmed, leave the area, or change their own goals to match those of the War-Winners (by somehow instantly amassing an adequate defense force). This is what makes the current string of "don't force us to play your way" whines ironic. The War-Fighters have been forcing that choice on others all along. As I gather the story, when the swarms not only reached huge proportions, but also avoided fighting each other (even I have seen this), the fundamental combat aspect of the game was frustrated and changes were implemented.
As the expression goes, I really don't have a dog in this fight. There are many war games that offer far more challenge, as war games, than this one ever can (or should). The grand strategic war here is very basic, and I'm not sure that people should be congratulating themselves for being clever generals (or admirals, whatever), just because they've figured out that they can capture territory by employing overwhelming force or sneaking captures of undefended bases. The purpose of AH, for me, is what it has been for me in all multi-player air combat games, which is to engage in air combat. I think AH2 excels at this, at the same time as it encourages you to make new friends - no matter what side they fly for. Getting vulched and ganged - as happened "in the real war," and as propounded by some of the thoughtful AH strategists - has virtually nothing to do with air combat, and so, whenever possible, I avoid places where these thing occur.
Spot on, Mr Oldguy! :)
I find it hard to believe anyone could disagree with this, yet...
:noid
-
Kev: Your full of it if you do not think we have competition.
The real facts are we have blown the direct competitors out of the water. And the 2nd fact is we have beet them with the strategy we use in making changes just like the ones over the last few months.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev: Your full of it if you do not think we have competition.
The real facts are we have blown the direct competitors out of the water. And the 2nd fact is we have beet them with the strategy we use in making changes just like the ones over the last few months.
lol, pwn!
-
Greetings,
Wargames are COMPLETELY different than AH. That kind of true strategy, with long term planning and resource allocation, cant really be done in a real time game -- it requires either turn based setup or liberal ability to stop the action completely.
The game - not fligh sim - of AH is not that different from Tactics II or Blitzkrieg - both had very basic strategic games with most of the focus on the operational level of conflict. AH is a unique game with a basic over arching strategic methodology which supports operational actions which drive engagements across the map.
I disagree that a 'real' war game requires turn based or ability to stop the action. Using simultainious movement / constant passage of time is one of the significant advantages computer based games have over the cardboard ones.
The biggest difference is that on a board the pieces have to do what I say. Here in AH players tend to ignore el commandante, the self-appointed grand pubah or herr general most of the time. :D
When a self imposed structure (squad) is thrust upon the unconstrained arena, the unorganized mob is unable to effectively counter the organized force over the long haul.
Regards,
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev: Your full of it if you do not think we have competition.
The real facts are we have blown the direct competitors out of the water. And the 2nd fact is we have beet them with the strategy we use in making changes just like the ones over the last few months.
Here is a small problem: BEET them? Did you mean Beat them?
By the way I was gonna order you a case of that scotch, but I think they were out of it at the time. I'll try again next year!
;)
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev: Your full of it if you do not think we have competition.
The real facts are we have blown the direct competitors out of the water. And the 2nd fact is we have beet them with the strategy we use in making changes just like the ones over the last few months. [/QUOTE
Where is your competition?
I can't see any.
Haven't seen any for a good 3+ years.
Even when I first joined AH1 5+ years ago Warbirds wasn't that good.
So where exactly is this competition?
-
I can answer that. HTC's competition is any pay-to-play game that has a customer subscribed there and not here. And even though IL2 is not a pay-to-play (beyond the initial box purchase) it also is serious competition to HTC.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Originally posted by hitech
Kev: Your full of it if you do not think we have competition.
The real facts are we have blown the direct competitors out of the water. And the 2nd fact is we have beet them with the strategy we use in making changes just like the ones over the last few months. [/QUOTE
Where is your competition?
I can't see any.
Haven't seen any for a good 3+ years.
Even when I first joined AH1 5+ years ago Warbirds wasn't that good.
So where exactly is this competition? [/B]
ROFL.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Excaliber: You make 1 huge assumption.
Just because people act in a given fashion (i.e would all jump in the same arena), that the act makes those same people happy.
And that assumption is completely falls.
HiTech
Looks like everyone would have their piece of the Pie to me. But it would be a sure indicator of the popular preference. Easy for you to do too.
-
Originally posted by Westy
I can answer that. HTC's competition is any pay-to-play game that has a customer subscribed there and not here. And even though IL2 is not a pay-to-play (beyond the initial box purchase) it also is serious competition to HTC.
that makes "PONG" competition
-
Originally posted by Westy
I can answer that. HTC's competition is any pay-to-play game that has a customer subscribed there and not here. And even though IL2 is not a pay-to-play (beyond the initial box purchase) it also is serious competition to HTC.
have to disagree sir,
people who play this type of online game, are looking for this type of online sim, its not like warcraft which 'catches-on' amongst people, this is a 'specialist game' one of the main reasons why there is little competition.
you will not find many players who play games like 'runescape' in this game for more than their 2-week trial.
your statement is like saying,
H J Samuel jewelry is competition to Tiffany's:rofl
or a vegetable stall is competition to a fish stall in a market,
<>
-
Hardly.
-
Kev you have just proved my point. When we start AH
The flowing online flight sims all had a lot of players.
AirWarior
Fighter Ace
Warbirds
The direct competitors today are.
Fighter Ace
Warbirds
Target Ware
You saying that they are not real competitors , because you do not like them, is my point about beating the competition. But you just want to say they are not real competition, because we are better, and that is my point, the way we got to be better is doing exactly like we have always done. Continually making changes when we think the changes are for the better. Even at the expense of a period of costumer base complaints.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Westy
I can answer that. HTC's competition is any pay-to-play game that has a customer subscribed there and not here. And even though IL2 is not a pay-to-play (beyond the initial box purchase) it also is serious competition to HTC.
Good answer! Anything PC gamers spend their money playing that is not AH is technically a lost-customer. But the rabid WWII aviation buff (if they are not a rabid buff they'll leave soon after their 2-weeks is up, for sure after 10 months or so) is an incredibly small percentage of the online gamer demographic, not to mention the general PC-gamer. Last I heard there were 7 million (with an "M") folks playin WOW, compare that to the (my estimate) 6,000 paying customers of HTC.
But I beg to differ on that last part Westy, IL2 has a lot to offer the enthusiast no doubt, and I enjoy playing it online from time to time as well. But until Oleg gets the MMOL part figured out they simply are not a direct competitor to AH. According to an old interview MMOL was to be incorporated into Storm of War, but that title is already two years behind schedule, and my money is on it being released WITHOUT support for MMOL.
-
Of course a customer would have some kind of interest in the genre but sorry, you've got to think outside the box and change your perspective if you want to somewhat understand what is competition for HTC and their product titled "AcesHigh". The competition is NOT simply AW, FA, WB or WWIIO. And it is not in the details such as hard or easy to play nor if it is a sim or arcade.
I've know many WWII aircombat types who loved playing Evercrack and other "Men Running Around in Tights" type of games so it would be silly for one to think that customers in other genres would not have an interest in flying simulated WWII aircraft in air-combat.
And IL2 is competition. A LOT of pay-to-play customers dropped online subscriptions and went to that one. Not just from AH either but also from other games such as WWIIO and WB too. If one were to add up those who unsubbed from AH and other pay-to-play venues to play the IL2 series I'd wager the lost income would be substantial.
edited: Right now there are over 550 players on the Hyperlobby system playing IL2 - Forgotten Battles.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev you have just proved my point. When we start AH
The flowing online flight sims all had a lot of players.
AirWarior
Fighter Ace
Warbirds
The direct competitors today are.
Fighter Ace
Warbirds
Target Ware
You saying that they are not real competitors , because you do not like them, is my point about beating the competition. But you just want to say they are not real competition, because we are better, and that is my point, the way we got to be better is doing exactly like we have always done. Continually making changes when we think the changes are for the better. Even at the expense of a period of costumer base complaints.
HiTech
Really isn't a question of whether I like them or not.
Targetware, lol your kidding.
I actually downloaded and tried it a while back (was asked to do some skins for the Vietnam addition), very rough around the edges.
Maybe if it got a huge injection of cash and full time guys dedicated to developing it.
Warbirds, dead it just doesn't know it yet ;)
Fighter Ace, never heard of it, but will go have a look later.
-
Kev: I just listed 3 direct competitors, and you are still even thinking about debating the point?
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Really isn't a question of whether I like them or not.
Targetware, lol your kidding.
I actually downloaded and tried it a while back (was asked to do some skins for the Vietnam addition), very rough around the edges.
Maybe if it got a huge injection of cash and full time guys dedicated to developing it.
Warbirds, dead it just doesn't know it yet ;)
Fighter Ace, never heard of it, but will go have a look later.
Kev, I've always admired your fervor in the MA, but haven't a leg to stand on. HT's named direct competitors (whether you agree or not is NOT the question) and you are coming across as someone who is "madly flailing the sword while his ship is going down."
<> Kev
-
Competition is every where .......out side of HTC the world and its dog would rather we spent time and money elsewhere..............
HT has made a career out of this genre and the fact that he is still here means todate he has got more right than wrong.................
However having said that this is not his hobby its his business and accountants decide how successful it is................
That means subscribers and it does not mean who subscribes, it means howmany subscribe and how those subscriptions cover and exceed his overheads................
Neither is he milking or maintaining some sort of cash cow. He is investing in CT plus much time and energy in upgrading the whole ac set to the latest standards of accuracy and fidelity compatible with this form of game.
I believe he does stuff because he thinks it's right.
I believe that when he thinks somethings wrong he will change it.
Further I believe that with folk like Pyro beside him he will be told when they think something is wrong.
But the criteria or test will always be the contribution to the business model.
And the business model has gone way past key account or personal service modelling. Its about stats, trends and data.
Yet the CEO of this company spends x hours a day reading these forums trying to explain his desicions to the passionate minority who represent but single figure %'s of his annual turn over. Often having to read stuff varying from accusations of incompetance to terms of down right abuse regarding himself and his employees when in fact I'm pretty sure he's got a team that I'd be pretty proud to have in any company of mine.
The subject of this thread is about change.........
Change means stuff is not the same tomorrow as it was yesterday........
HT knows the trials of change.........
It has to be considered thoroughly, implemented carefully................
If it does not work, I am sure, that after thorough consideration it'll change again.
-
Originally posted by Westy
edited: Right now there are over 550 players on the Hyperlobby system playing IL2 - Forgotten Battles.
Just FB? Or are you combining IL2 and AEP and PF and Pe2 and Manchuria and 1946 in that?
I'm going to agree that there's a loss of potential revenue there, that's not really debateable at all. What I meant, and was unable to state clearly, by the word "direct" is that while many folks settle for playing on Hyperlobby it is not good enough to equal much less surpass AH2. Like I said, I play it some, but it is nowhere near the class of product we have here. So while it exists, and it's free, I still keep paying my AH bill since it cannot equal the experience I get from the perpetual MMOL arena(s).
Which goes back to Dale's point that Kev is having trouble grasping...you can have competition that is not really competition.
:D
Edit: I though about deleting this post, since the one Tilt made while I was replying sorta just closes this thread out. Well said mate!
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev you have just proved my point. When we start AH
The flowing online flight sims all had a lot of players.
AirWarior
Fighter Ace
Warbirds
The direct competitors today are.
Fighter Ace
Warbirds
Target Ware
You saying that they are not real competitors , because you do not like them, is my point about beating the competition. But you just want to say they are not real competition, because we are better, and that is my point, the way we got to be better is doing exactly like we have always done. Continually making changes when we think the changes are for the better. Even at the expense of a period of costumer base complaints.
HiTech
HT,
When in the last 6 years have any of your changes threatened the squad base? Of course, you're always going to have people complaining, whenever a change of any kind is made - that's human nature.
But breaking the arenas up into smaller caps is already forcing squads with strong squad ops gatherings to either switch to another arena if the one they're flying in becomes full, or split the squads into pieces, with some people flying in this arena, and others playing in another. Even if you assume the LW Blue arena is going to become full sometime in the evening, and switch to another arena, you're then flying with very small numbers, and the massively multi-player environment that has made AH such an amazingly unique sim is lost. Add to that the fact that you will be forced to fly a different plane set, giving up your favorite ride, and a whole bunch of the fun goes out of it.
Now add an artificial balancing restriction, when even moving to another arena is no guarantee that you can keep your squad intact for the evening. This is a set of changes that attacks the very core of the reason many of us subscribe to AH in the first place. I can tell you with strong confidence that, had these restrictions and complications for squads been in place when AW squads were looking for a new home, we never would have moved here.
I know you don't agree with me, and maybe you think I'm trying to manipulate you in some way, but I'm a loyal customer, and my family's 3 accounts have poured thousands of dollars into your coffers over the years, not to mention my squad mates' contributions, and I don't want to see the foundation of the game suffer, due to lack of consideration for what I believe to be the backbone of AH - the squad. I can't speak for other squads, and I know some people on these boards think a squad is just an artificial, virtual collection of individuals that means nothing in the real world.
But the truth is that for many of us, what began as an online, virtual collection of people has grown over the years to extend into the real world. We've all become friends, and visit one another, we're there for each other in times of sickness, good times, bad times, computer problems, birth, death, weddings, divorce - hell, sometimes we even take up a collection to help a squaddie pay his AH bill, when times are rough.
Here's something else to consider: Maybe you don't realize it, but the squad tends to keep people flying, long after they might have moved to some other game. The camaraderie and esprit d' corps is stronger than the lure of the particular game for many of us. What does that mean for you? It means cash flow from people who would otherwise have long since canceled their accounts, but for their squad mates.
So, HT, my unsolicited (and probably unwelcome) advice to you is:
Make all the changes to the game you feel you need to make, but don't screw with the squads. Squads are your dinner table, and you don't want to crap where you eat.
This is said in all sincerity, for the health of AH and on behalf of my squad. We will move as a group if we have to, to keep our squad and our extended circle of friends intact. We've done it before, and we'll do it again if we have no other options. Please don't put us in that position.
-
Only a couple of "squads" have had issues all along Stiletto. 98% of the squads easily have the opportunity to fly together, or against each other.
-
See Rule #4 (you were doing ok until that last line)
-
Originally posted by Stiletto
We will move as a group if we have to, to keep our squad and our extended circle of friends intact. We've done it before, and we'll do it again if we have no other options. Please don't put us in that position.
All this statement means is that you are willing to "move as a group" to a different game but not to a different chesspeice. Now that individual threats of quitting are not getting you you're way, you've resorted to entire squad threats? LOL
-
What Stiletto said.
DITTO
-
Just when you think it can't possibly get any worse...
What Stiletto said. Well put brother.
-
Originally posted by Stiletto
We will move as a group if we have to, to keep our squad and our extended circle of friends intact. We've done it before, and we'll do it again if we have no other options. Please don't put us in that position.
Bye :aok
-
Originally posted by 2Slow
See Rule #4 (you were doing ok until that last line)
"Where the Sun don't shine"
I thought I kept it rather clean.
-
Stiletto: The change does in no way threaten the squad base. You are viewing things in a very micro chasm.
1. You assume it will be the norm for squads not to be able to fly together.
2. You assume to have a successful squad you must ALWAYS fly together.
3. You assume squads will not adjust to be able to fly together.
4. You assume a static non growing population.
5. You assume I already do not know about the interactions of squads.
6. You assume I do not have other ideas in the works (don't ask I will not tell)
that also will effect things.
7. You assume that squads no matter how large increase player retention.
8. You assume that squads are the only item that increase retention and attract players.
9. You assume that if nothing had changed people do not leave for other reasons.
10. You assume that to have fun with your squad, every member must be able to fly together.
My point is, that I very well understand the attractions and need for social aspect of a "Squad". But also understand there are other needs that have to be balanced with the needs of squads.
HiTech
-
"I never thought I would see the day where people were mad that they had to fight in a combat sim." --Mars01
"There's a clear line of difference between people who organize themselves to win a war, and sheep who flock to each other to avoid the wolves." --Kweassa
"They’re paying $15 not to fight; you’re paying $15 to fight. Sounds like in some situations, the best action is right here on the BBS." --MachNix
Last edited by Edbert on 12-13-2006 at 01:27 PM
Well said Edbert. The entire point. Waaaaa...I got killed because I initiated a 1 v 4 attack. Or because my SA or skills had an issue and I did not extend out of a 4 v 1 attack.
I do rather well in Buffs. I can have my days in a figher. GV's can be fun. I can also have a bad day in all 3 of them. My fighter skills are very rusty (allowing that I ever had any :) )
-
Greetings,
BTW, thanks for your comments Htech - and taking time to read others. You have way more patence (sp) than I and are obviously very interested in the comments on this thread.
Can we have just a hint of the other things so we can start even more 'end of AH as we know it' threads?
:noid
Regards,
-
Originally posted by hitech
My point is, that I very well understand the attractions and need for social aspect of a "Squad". But also understand there are other needs that have to be balanced with the needs of squads.HiTech
Or to quote Spock
"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"
-
See Rule #2, #5
-
and you are coming across as someone who is "madly flailing the sword while his ship is going down."
<> Kev [/B]
I think that you just described AH at the moment
SKDenny
-
Deleted
-
Deleted
-
See Rule #4
-
Originally posted by hitech
Stiletto: The change does in no way threaten the squad base. You are viewing things in a very micro chasm.
1. You assume it will be the norm for squads not to be able to fly together.
2. You assume to have a successful squad you must ALWAYS fly together.
3. You assume squads will not adjust to be able to fly together.
4. You assume a static non growing population.
5. You assume I already do not know about the interactions of squads.
6. You assume I do not have other ideas in the works (don't ask I will not tell)
that also will effect things.
7. You assume that squads no matter how large increase player retention.
8. You assume that squads are the only item that increase retention and attract players.
9. You assume that if nothing had changed people do not leave for other reasons.
10. You assume that to have fun with your squad, every member must be able to fly together.
My point is, that I very well understand the attractions and need for social aspect of a "Squad". But also understand there are other needs that have to be balanced with the needs of squads.
HiTech
Dang.. that's a lot of assumptions....
I very rarley post here but I have to...
We have seen in the last several months the only way for our squad to fly together (yes together) is to go to an almost empty arena. The other arenas are almost always full thus not allowing the entire sqaud to enter the same arena let alone fly for the same chess peice as you all put it. Once we get into one of the less populated arenas, it often does not matter what side we fly for as that side will be penalized for our numbers. We sometimes put more than 30 together for joint operations.
This is what we have flown with for quite some months now. And this is what we forsee in the future (as noted in this dang long thread).
We don't know what's "down the road for AH" as noted by HT and that's ok. We are hoping that the squads can continue to fly together (yes together) on squad ops nights but what we're seeing today (yes today) is that may not be possible (yes not possible).
Stiletto is right in saying many of our squad have stayed on so far due to loyalty to freinds. They don't fly much outside of squad operations nights because we have fun no matter what we're doing as long as we're doing it together.
I really dont think Stiletto was making all (yes all) of those assumptions.. or meant to. I do think he was makeing a few assumptions though...
I'm sure he was assuming the squads would have to make some changes to continue to fly together (we have been for quite some months).
I think he was assuming that when new people came into the arena, it's often squads that take that new person in and help train them and show them the ropes.
I think he was assuming that lone wolfs don't take in newbies very often unless they are buds outside of AH (yes outside of AH).
I think he was assuming that in a main arena every member of the squad does (yes does) need to fly together unless there's special things (yes special things) going on within the squad.. inner squad ladders.. inner squad furballs in an empty arena, training and so on.
I'm sure he was not assuming you're not aware of the interactions of squads but I'm also sure he was assuming the squad operations was not given a high enough priority in the setup of the new arenas as is evident in the above text.
As I look at various business models the goals are often simple (not that the process is) but there are one of two goals in a service... customer retention or (yes or) customer base growth. Those two business models rarely work together well. I certainly wish this company well with the business model they choose, however it's melded (<--that's a good thing).
I'm surely not here to tell you how to run your business (don't assume I am) :)
I'm surely not here to tell you how much you have messed up (you havent).
I'm surely not here to tell you to do this or that or I will quit (it wont matter if I quit I assume)
What I am here to tell you is that the squads are the ones in trouble right now if they want to continue flying together and having fun. (the way the arenas are set up)
What I am here to tell you is this is the weakest part of what we're seeing (squad operations and the ability to fly as a squad).
As micro as this chasm is... that's what we're seeing (and that's no assumption)
FTSeeker
CO Flying Tigers AVG
-
my overall plan on "balance" would work off the ENY system we had.. only more extreme.
a few basic things need changing tho.
1: all top planes (from 43?) onwards perked.....even if its a few perks.
2: ENY starts off "easy" but then gets harder and harder... ie not linear
3: perk modifier also follows this route.
4: each "step" up the ladder on the ENY causes base captures to need more troops.
this means the side with higher numbers (but not badly out of balance) will have to spend a lot of perks to fly most planes.... but also wont earn many perks due to poor perk modifier. Base captures 10-15 troops
as the sides come even more out of balance, ENY kicks in, stopping most of the plane-set being usable. Pilots will also not be able to earn hardly any perks at all, meaning there perks will be forever falling (if they are on the high number side). Base captures will need 15-20 troops.
Low sides will enjoy easy perk farming... cheaper planes (i know its like this now but more pronounced)..
Perks *could* mean something else in this game, to balance the whole system out, however they are currently used just to buy uber planes.
id rather fly a 109E vs LA7s than not fly at all.
but this goes back to the first change of 9/13.... if it aint broke, dont fix it....
1 arena..... relatively balanced....(RJO being exception... but how often has that happned since RJO was canceld 2 years ago?.....)
1 arena, people fight... instead they goto empty (or uneven sides) ones to toolshed and win teh war!!
1 arena = 1 slum. 4 arenas = 2 empty arenas and 2 slums
really what has the first change done, other than **** up so many other things?
-
Originally posted by 999000
Just a thought on "balance"......Just imagine Churchill durring the battle of Britain ...picking up the phone and calling Hitler...."you have too many planes"....will some of your guys come over here so we can have a fair fight?......or will you ground your 190's for awhile to give us a chance?
Thank god in real life these men had the courage..stomach..and tenacity to win out against tough odds....
Seriously don't people playing this "game" enjoy the challenge of haviing the short end of the stick at times?? just to see if you can overcome the odds?
999000
:huh What color are the trees on your planet?
I doubt very seriously you are complaining with this much drama because you want to fight against extreme odds.:rofl
-
Originally posted by Edbert
All this statement means is that you are willing to "move as a group" to a different game but not to a different chesspeice. Now that individual threats of quitting are not getting you you're way, you've resorted to entire squad threats? LOL
You know, it's almost pointless to post here. I'm beginning to see why people get so frustrated. I'm trying to help keep a sizable group of people here, not make threats. This was no threat. We've now lost 3 people, and I'm trying to stop the attrition. We aren't willing to trade squad integrity for some grand business strategy, but maybe it's just us. And we don't so much care what country (chesspiece, in your vernacular) we fly for, but we do care about flying together as a team. Do we train in the training arena and fight against each other? Sure. But not in the combat arenas. Our official motto is "Team First." Maybe we're old-fashioned, or just plain old.
-
As with all major upheavals I am concerned, but Lets not all get bent out of shape until we wee how it works out. I do have concerns, and one of my main concerns is how squad ops could be completely disrupted. It will not take more than a few times of getting 10-15 guys setup for a mission, and then having the system disallow half of them to takeoff before the complaints start. I will happily wait for the dust to settle, but cant say this does anything to help the AH community.
HT is obligated to try new things, and Dale aint no dummy, but he isnt omnipotent either. He will do what he thinks will help, and well thought out, polite comments are indeed considered. Remember, there is a difference between passion and abuse. If you see a real problem popping up regularly, let him know....I know I will:D
-
7. You assume that squads no matter how large increase player retention.
8. You assume that squads are the only item that increase retention and attract players.
9. You assume that if nothing had changed people do not leave for other reasons.
10. You assume that to have fun with your squad, every member must be able to fly together.
My point is, that I very well understand the attractions and need for social aspect of a "Squad". But also understand there are other needs that have to be balanced with the needs of squads.
HiTech [/B][/QUOTE]
The change does in no way threaten the squad base.
HT I'm sorry, but you're just plain wrong there.
These guys aren't making comments with the jerk of a knee. The comments are coming after flying for the last couple of months and trying to enjoy squad nights under the old set of new changes. They've given stuff the good college try without *****in or moaning. Now they - and many of the other people in this 12 pages of comments - see changes that they fear are going to finally do away with the aspect of the game they treasure most.
I don't know if you fly in a squad or not. But if you did regularly you would understand where they are coming from.
You're also assuming that these guys are saying they want to fly together all the time, they don't. But this system does make it difficult, if not impossible on squad nights when they do want to fly together.
I'm not assuming that you do not know about the interaction of squads. But I also know that these guys _ and lots of others in this thread _ are basing their comments on their real experiences over the past several months, not on some perverse desire to give you a hard time. They are speaking from experience. They know what they are talking about.
You say we assume you don't have other ideas in the works.
I think, given the last couple of weeks, most of us are sure that you do. But, since you won't share them and tend to announce them rather abruptly, then you can't blame us for commenting on them as they come along.
You say "I have a roadmap, trust me" but then when people post their concerns in a civil way you go into "I am the great and powerful Oz" mode. An understandable reaction, but one not likely to generate a lot of trust.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think a lot of us, if you do have a plan, would prefer you wait until it was fully formed instead of implementing it in drips and drabs. That's not an assumption, but based on the numerous "I don't want to pay to beta test" posts.
I don't think anyone will argue with you on point 8 and 9. I don't see anyone here doing so.
But you are dead wrong on point 7. I speak from experience. Take a look at my stats (SKBaine). I'm flying maybe 6-10 hours a month these days. Most of that is on squad nights. Without my squad I probably would have cancelled my subscription a while back. I might have come back when you got done with CT and started putting a little more effort into AH again, I might not have. But the opportunity to spend two or three hours a Sunday with guys who are both my virtual and real life friends keeps me playing. (Well, that and the fact that I'm a real procrastinator). So, here you have at least one person who stayed because of his squad. I know of at least two others and I assume that we are not alone.
And finally, we do understand that you have to balance many needs to make the game a success. Remember, many of us have been here since the start, and have played other MM games before. We know the drill.
That's why these guys don't post very often. They are content to let you do what you need to do.
As I said in the beginning of my post - they kept their mouths shut for many weeks and tried to make a go of it. You should consider that when you consider their comments and give them the respect they deserve.
-
Originally posted by SKDenny
I think that you just described AH at the moment
SKDenny
ROFLMFAO....... yep! :rofl
-
Did I suggest a retro MA ....or was that the post that was deleted?:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by ALF
As with all major upheavals I am concerned, but Lets not all get bent out of shape until we wee how it works out. I do have concerns, and one of my main concerns is how squad ops could be completely disrupted. It will not take more than a few times of getting 10-15 guys setup for a mission, and then having the system disallow half of them to takeoff before the complaints start. I will happily wait for the dust to settle, but cant say this does anything to help the AH community.
HT is obligated to try new things, and Dale aint no dummy, but he isnt omnipotent either. He will do what he thinks will help, and well thought out, polite comments are indeed considered. Remember, there is a difference between passion and abuse. If you see a real problem popping up regularly, let him know....I know I will:D
I'm 100% of the same frame of mind, Alf. I'd really like to see this tested out, before people decide whatever they're going to decide. I admit to having jumped to a hasty conclusion, and to be fair to HT and his staff, I'm going to urge patience on my friends to put these changes to the test, and then yell and scream at HT. (Just kidding, Dale.)
-
Originally posted by hitech
Stiletto: The change does in no way threaten the squad base. You are viewing things in a very micro chasm.
1. You assume it will be the norm for squads not to be able to fly together.
2. You assume to have a successful squad you must ALWAYS fly together.
3. You assume squads will not adjust to be able to fly together.
4. You assume a static non growing population.
5. You assume I already do not know about the interactions of squads.
6. You assume I do not have other ideas in the works (don't ask I will not tell)
that also will effect things.
7. You assume that squads no matter how large increase player retention.
8. You assume that squads are the only item that increase retention and attract players.
9. You assume that if nothing had changed people do not leave for other reasons.
10. You assume that to have fun with your squad, every member must be able to fly together.
My point is, that I very well understand the attractions and need for social aspect of a "Squad". But also understand there are other needs that have to be balanced with the needs of squads.
HiTech
I'm not your enemy, Dale. You're making a lot of assumptions about me - none of which are true. I am assuming a few things, though, so let me set the record straight.
1. I'm assuming you are not stupid, and you know how to keep a business going.
2. I'm assuming you don't have a death wish for your business, and are not bent on destroying it.
3. I'm assuming you are a hard-working man who does what he thinks is right to grow his business, while retaining loyal customers (like me).
4. I'm assuming you haven't conducted any formal surveys of loyal customers (like me), or exit polls of people who have quit. (Saying yes or no to that wouldn't be divulging any trade secrets, but since no one I know has been invited to take such a survey, it's pretty clear you haven't done any.)
5. Because I'm pretty sure I'm right about number 4, I'm assuming that you are making these decisions based on logic, experience, the counsel of friends, and these insane bulletin boards that I wish I had managed to avoid posting to.
6. Here's a REALLY BIG assumption: I assume that a very small number of the overall AH population actually post on these boards on a regular basis, so using them to get a handle on what the community as a whole might want or need to keep them happy is a dubious undertaking.
7. Here's another REALLY BIG assumption: That people who work for you are not likely to tell you everything they think or feel.
8. Another REALLY BIG assumption: That a group of buddies around you, no matter how well-meaning and honest, might not know what it's really like to just be a subscriber in the trenches, no matter how many "sunglasses" accounts they might have.
9. And my biggest assumption of all: That no matter how smart you are, you can't see your own business objectively. If you want objectivity, go to the long-time squad leaders and ask them what would make their squads happy. We are the ones who find out before you do when people are so frustrated and unhappy they are about to cancel their subscriptions, and we are the ones who try our best to talk them out of it.
10. And now, for my final assumption: I assume you will read this, because you know, deep down, that I'm speaking the truth, and that I'm not out to make your life miserable.
-
I have lost some members too due (in part) to the changes going on. Hope I don’t lose any more.
Still in the wait and see mode. I trust the HTC staff will weigh quite carefully anything that would improve game play, but subtract from squad play. I think they understand quite well how important squads are to many of us, even if many in the community obviously don’t.
I also understand what is best for the player, may not be what is best for the squad. And that HTC will ultimately do what is best for his business, which may not be dependent on what is best for players or squads.
-
Originally posted by hitech
The direct competitors today are.
Fighter Ace
Warbirds
Target Ware
HiTech
I can't believe you got this wrong! :huh
Your three direct competitors are
My Wife
My Kids
My Job
thought this thread could use a little levity
-
yesterday i had a stressful morning. i havent gotten to fly much recently because i have been busy and i was looking forward to jumping in and taking a ride in my favorite plane.
i look at my watch. half hour to screw off. okay. here i go. joy.
aces high> online arenas> hmmm...latewar blue has 135 people, early war has something like 20-30...> latewar blue> you are number 5 of 5 in que. > WHAT?! > grrr. wait wait wait.> you are number 5 of 7 in que> wait wait. > lets see. do i want to go fly in an unpopulated arena? > no. > not a milkrunner. > wait wait.> grrrr. switch country. > sigh. > radio check> silence. > radio check > silence. > (other guys) who is this guy? > skip radio check > back to me. > plane comes up on me...hey, why isnt anyone clearing my six? > .f wingman > on other team > grrrr. > boom. > hanger> select plane > take off> see plane > kill plane. > boom! wingman dead > wingman: WTF? > me. sorry dude. etc...
all i wanted to do was fly the game that i paid for and thats what makes me think that Hitech is unconcerned with the general wellfare of the people in the arenas as opposed to some unspoken esoteric vision of the game that we do not get to share.
would it have ever been all that hard to set up an email database in the beginning or in registration asking if people would like to know when changes are happening? should we have to go find it or should we just be happy to participate in whatever the new whim is?
how hard could it be to a coder to set up a system to let people know what is happening?
how many people, do you think offhand, would say "hell no" if you ASKED them to participate in some tests rather than subjecting your paying subscribers to them without warning?
fact. we are the other half of this equasion sir, and without us you would not have a business to run and you probably would not have the rescources that you need to create this thing that you have dedicated your life and energy to.
we are your life blood. all of us. and though we have differing opinions, it seems pretty clear that a majority both here and in the arenas are less than happy with the current approach.
all due respect, but is it really so much to ask that you show some of us the same respect that you expect for yourself?
i don't think it should be. and i really don't think that the real people on the other side of your server connections appreciate being viewed as "whines" that come with your changes.
my. .02. edit at will.
88
-
Originally posted by JB88
yesterday i had a stressful morning. i havent gotten to fly much recently because i have been busy and i was looking forward to jumping in and taking a ride in my favorite plane.
i look at my watch. half hour to screw off. okay. here i go. joy.
aces high> online arenas> hmmm...latewar blue has 135 people, early war has something like 20-30...> latewar blue> you are number 5 of 5 in que. > WHAT?! > grrr. wait wait wait.> you are number 5 of 7 in que> wait wait. > lets see. do i want to go fly in an unpopulated arena? > no. > not a milkrunner. > wait wait.> grrrr. switch country. > sigh. > radio check> silence. > radio check > silence. > (other guys) who is this guy? > skip radio check > back to me. > plane comes up on me...hey, why isnt anyone clearing my six? > .f wingman > on other team > grrrr. > boom. > hanger> select plane > take off> see plane > kill plane. > boom! wingman dead > wingman: WTF? > me. sorry dude. etc...
all i wanted to do was fly the game that i paid for and thats what makes me think that Hitech is unconcerned with the general wellfare of the people in the arenas as opposed to some unspoken esoteric vision of the game that we do not get to share.
would it have ever been all that hard to set up an email database in the beginning or in registration asking if people would like to know when changes are happening? should we have to go find it or should we just be happy to participate in whatever the new whim is?
how hard could it be to a coder to set up a system to let people know what is happening?
how many people, do you think offhand, would say "hell no" if you ASKED them to participate in some tests rather than subjecting your paying subscribers to them without warning?
fact. we are the other half of this equasion sir, and without us you would not have a business to run and you probably would not have the rescources that you need to create this thing that you have dedicated your life and energy to.
we are your life blood. all of us. and though we have differing opinions, it seems pretty clear that a majority both here and in the arenas are less than happy with the current approach.
all due respect, but is it really so much to ask that you show some of us the same respect that you expect for yourself?
i don't think it should be. and i really don't think that the real people on the other side of your server connections appreciate being viewed as "whines" that come with your changes.
my. .02. edit at will.
88
WOW ... you almost had me in tears ... I feel so sorry for you and your personal plight ... no seriously man ... I do.
-
good for you.
cookie?
-
Originally posted by Stiletto
7. Here's another REALLY BIG assumption: That people who work for you are not likely to tell you everything they think or feel.
I will not address the others, but I will say this. You do not know HiTech, nor the others at HTC, if you remotely think there is one iota of truth to this.
Not trying to be confrontational, nor disrespectful. Just letting you know.
-
so, let's say that hitech asks you if he looks fat in those pants...nevermind.
bad move 88...bad move....
-
Originally posted by killnu
was actual question...not response to anything...post was made late on monday...day they said changes was going into effect...in first post of this thread.
Thanks for play on name of squad...cute.
Was all in fun killn...mostly noted your Tour Rank and just took the opportunity to say congrats in a "Cute" way.
Im not currently subscribing to AH. Seeing your post here simpey gave me the connect with ya, so i conveyed my congrats here.
Hoped you wouldnt take it as a slam.
HTCs getting rather touchy lately. Who can blame them?
I came to the BBS last evening just to check things out. I was FULLY ready to re-activate my subscription.
I read this thread, and said NO WAY IN ####.
-
Originally posted by Tilt
Competition is every where .......out side of HTC the world and its dog would rather we spent time and money elsewhere..............
HT has made a career out of this genre and the fact that he is still here means todate he has got more right than wrong.................
However having said that this is not his hobby its his business and accountants decide how successful it is................
That means subscribers and it does not mean who subscribes, it means howmany subscribe and how those subscriptions cover and exceed his overheads................
Neither is he milking or maintaining some sort of cash cow. He is investing in CT plus much time and energy in upgrading the whole ac set to the latest standards of accuracy and fidelity compatible with this form of game.
I believe he does stuff because he thinks it's right.
I believe that when he thinks somethings wrong he will change it.
Further I believe that with folk like Pyro beside him he will be told when they think something is wrong.
But the criteria or test will always be the contribution to the business model.
And the business model has gone way past key account or personal service modelling. Its about stats, trends and data.
Yet the CEO of this company spends x hours a day reading these forums trying to explain his desicions to the passionate minority who represent but single figure %'s of his annual turn over. Often having to read stuff varying from accusations of incompetance to terms of down right abuse regarding himself and his employees when in fact I'm pretty sure he's got a team that I'd be pretty proud to have in any company of mine.
The subject of this thread is about change.........
Change means stuff is not the same tomorrow as it was yesterday........
HT knows the trials of change.........
It has to be considered thoroughly, implemented carefully................
If it does not work, I am sure, that after thorough consideration it'll change again.
Hear Hear! Well done, sir :)
culero
-
See Rule #6
-
Originally posted by 2Slow
See Rule #6
LOL ... and maybe a little PNG on the side.
-
Originally posted by Gunston
I started playing aces high after seeing a commercial on the discovery wings or maybe the History channel sometime in 2001 or 2002. I thought “great a way to use the computer to in some small way get a sense of what it was like to fly in WWII”. I love aviation, my dad is a private pilot, (I got my pilots license in 2004 mostly because of my love for the game). I live near the U.S. Air force museum and had been there hundreds of times in my life. But it took on a whole new meaning after the game I truly felt that I had an understanding of the aircraft, how they stacked up against each other, their strengths and weaknesses.
When I started playing I thought it was the greatest thing in the world, really I did. I drove anyone who would listen crazy with talk about its realism. A friend of mine, who’s dad was a B-24 pilot would never believe that it wasn’t “just a video game played by a bunch of kids” I would tell him “most of these guys are my age (41 or so then) or older. They know a lot about the planes, pilots, and history of WWII. He would literally lose his patience and say things like “they are kids lying to you about their age”. I played the game constantly making me exhausted every day at work because of playing so late the night before. And I might add my wife was the classic Aces High widow.
The game made me a knight by default the first time I played it. I have never and will never play as anything else because in my Walter Mitty world of aces high that was where I was born. If I were born in Germany and came of age during WWII I would have fought against overwhelming numbers but I would not have quit or changed countries. If I were born an American or Russian I would have been part of an overwhelming horde, a simple matter of chance.
I told my cousin (SirPyro) about the game on Christmas in 2003 I told him "it’s like a drug don’t start if your not willing to devote a lot of time to playing it". The first time he got on he played for 72 straight hours. He joined the squad I was in the 113th Lucky Strikes. And he was always on. Another of our squad members was GunRunner he could always be counted on to show up for our Saturday Squad night.
I haven’t seen SirPyro on for a couple of months, since the changes started kicking in. GunRunner sent the squad an email last week that “the game had lost its luster” and he had cancelled his account. I myself signed up for the free trial of Warbirds and WWII online to check them out but didn’t really like either of them. So now I never play except on Saturday Squad night mostly out of a since of obligation to the 1 or 2 guys that still show up.
You guys and my friend are right, it is just a game now but man it used to be so much more.
Hmmm...if i had brains enough to type what you have here, i would have said it exactly the same.
It's like, like you are in my brain...hey hey...git outa my head.:noid
-
exactly JB88...
i been switching between knit and rooks.
if i say on knits i will get many in return.... if i ask for help... i might get it
if i say on rooks i get nothing. maybe 2 or 3. if i ask for help i get silence.
its not about squads, but its about everyone you get "used" to flying with.... squad mates, and country mates alike. Now forced to switch every hour just so we can fly.
i don't remember the costs going down since i can no longer fly often?
and still after SOOOO many changes to try and get us across 4 arenas you STILL have us all in LW arenas. If you weigh up what broke, and what was fixed on 9/13 I'm sure the scales will be tipping over towards broke. But that's the whole point that some people have tried to say.....
Change 1: split arenas, breaking up the game into CS servers
Result: Majority of players raise voice, but get laughed at by 20 furballers having fun in EW/MW.... even though the majority "vote" with there server choice..... 90% fly in LW1.
Change 2: HTC, dismayed that he may be wrong and that people wanna fight in a massive multiplayer game, splits the arenas yet again. and this time with a balancing system to try and keep both at equal (or close) numbers. (generally a good idea, with a few minor flaws)
Result: more raised voices, and issues due to off peak hours. A few mini tweaks to try and solve this problem..... even though it was non-existent 2 months before.... Oh and team balance issue starts to crop up....LW1 bish and knit, LW2 rook. Numbers start falling in EW/MW but rise dramatically in LW (highest numbers ever)
Change 3: due to the mini servers not allowing for large maps, the game returns to the 2002 status of AHI standard maps which have been played to death over and over and over. Also, due to the growing trend of players avoiding fights and joining arenas they can milk run in.. HTC create a blue line of advance, 1914 style.
Result: Players again show dismay against it on forum and on the servers... most try LWblue, or stop playing. Of course the select few furballers flying in EW/MW which isn't effected, think its a great idea.....:rolleyes: Initial numbers good, but only due to having a "new" map to look at. Brings back horde flying, and doesn't manage to force combat, instead A attacks B, B attacks C and C attacks A....good fights no where.... 1 against 50 odds on defencive fronts, 50 to 1 odds on attacking fronts....zzzzzzzzzzz LWB fills up most nights. side balance still a major issue....
Change 4:not listening to any ideas.... HTC chooses his own idea and forces a "you cannot fly rule" into AH.....players have to switch sides to be able to fly... which means each sortie is almost on a different team each time.
Result:I can sit in tower to wait to fly with my squad/friends or switch to another country and fly lone ranger....real result? i don't bother flying. Knits rarely have numbers anyway, and i dread to think what this change means to bish. Team work is out of the window, since you cant fly with your own team anymore (ie they get grounded once u get up) or you change to another side and cant speak the local language.
but then what does HTC care.....if i fly 5hours or 95hours it doesn't matter, hes still getting $14.99 from me....:noid
i just wish i could find another game with WWII fighter combat.... WWII bombers and a massive server.
instead of putting 100% time into getting CT out this decade, the last 4 months have been about messing around with a game that had worked for so long...whines about the "slum of old MA" was next to no existent on the forum... almost all players liked the MA and the ones that didn't was the 1 on 1 guys... they had there DA but wouldn't go there.
Now however a few 100 pages of whines (like this one i agree) get added every week or so. The community isn't "healthier" (the original change aimed for that) but is in fact MUCH MUCH worse, with both sides of the fence whining and anti whining against each other....
if only we put so much of our whining efforts into fighting instead.
So, really what did Change 1 on 9/13 really fix???
-
Originally posted by Overlag
exactly JB88...
i been switching between knit and rooks.
if i say on knits i will get many in return.... if i ask for help... i might get it
if i say on rooks i get nothing. maybe 2 or 3. if i ask for help i get silence.
its not about squads, but its about everyone you get "used" to flying with.... squad mates, and country mates alike. Now forced to switch every hour just so we can fly.
i don't remember the costs going down since i can no longer fly often?
and still after SOOOO many changes to try and get us across 4 arenas you STILL have us all in LW arenas. If you weigh up what broke, and what was fixed on 9/13 I'm sure the scales will be tipping over towards broke. But that's the whole point that some people have tried to say.....
Change 1: split arenas, breaking up the game into CS servers
Result: Majority of players raise voice, but get laughed at by 20 furballers having fun in EW/MW.... even though the majority "vote" with there server choice..... 90% fly in LW1.
Change 2: HTC, dismayed that he may be wrong and that people wanna fight in a massive multiplayer game, splits the arenas yet again. and this time with a balancing system to try and keep both at equal (or close) numbers. (generally a good idea, with a few minor flaws)
Result: more raised voices, and issues due to off peak hours. A few mini tweaks to try and solve this problem..... even though it was non-existent 2 months before.... Oh and team balance issue starts to crop up....LW1 bish and knit, LW2 rook. Numbers start falling in EW/MW but rise dramatically in LW (highest numbers ever)
Change 3: due to the mini servers not allowing for large maps, the game returns to the 2002 status of AHI standard maps which have been played to death over and over and over. Also, due to the growing trend of players avoiding fights and joining arenas they can milk run in.. HTC create a blue line of advance, 1914 style.
Result: Players again show dismay against it on forum and on the servers... most try LWblue, or stop playing. Of course the select few furballers flying in EW/MW which isn't effected, think its a great idea.....:rolleyes: Initial numbers good, but only due to having a "new" map to look at. Brings back horde flying, and doesn't manage to force combat, instead A attacks B, B attacks C and C attacks A....good fights no where.... 1 against 50 odds on defencive fronts, 50 to 1 odds on attacking fronts....zzzzzzzzzzz LWB fills up most nights. side balance still a major issue....
Change 4:not listening to any ideas.... HTC chooses his own idea and forces a "you cannot fly rule" into AH.....players have to switch sides to be able to fly... which means each sortie is almost on a different team each time.
Result:I can sit in tower to wait to fly with my squad/friends or switch to another country and fly lone ranger....real result? i don't bother flying. Knits rarely have numbers anyway, and i dread to think what this change means to bish. Team work is out of the window, since you cant fly with your own team anymore (ie they get grounded once u get up) or you change to another side and cant speak the local language.
but then what does HTC care.....if i fly 5hours or 95hours it doesn't matter, hes still getting $14.99 from me....:noid
i just wish i could find another game with WWII fighter combat.... WWII bombers and a massive server.
instead of putting 100% time into getting CT out this decade, the last 4 months have been about messing around with a game that had worked for so long...whines about the "slum of old MA" was next to no existent on the forum... almost all players liked the MA and the ones that didn't was the 1 on 1 guys... they had there DA but wouldn't go there.
Now however a few 100 pages of whines (like this one i agree) get added every week or so. The community isn't "healthier" (the original change aimed for that) but is in fact MUCH MUCH worse, with both sides of the fence whining and anti whining against each other....
if only we put so much of our whining efforts into fighting instead.
So, really what did Change 1 on 9/13 really fix???
It's Obvious that you are not blinded by the light.
The trees of the forest havent got you turned around either.:aok
-
"The subject of this thread is about change.........
Change means stuff is not the same tomorrow as it was yesterday........
HT knows the trials of change......... "
It would have been a better subject if it had been about progress. Change for the sake of change accomplishes very little. I am in favor of progress.
I was happy with the single MA. I loved it. I adapted to the multiple MA's. There is still some fun there.
The changes have lowered my fun meter. Some progress might give it some positive rise. More aircraft and GV's. The jeep was a good thing. Fun and somewhat useful. The jeep was progress.
Warfare, combat, killing, fairness, and balance. I don't see how one can expect balance in a military war game if one does not want to organize in a martial manner. I know that often the efforts of 2 or 3 squads has turned the tide against superior enemy numbers.
Done and out of here. I shall play a little longer and evaluate my satisfaction with this product.
-
See Rules #4, #5
-
Originally posted by Overlag
snip...a bunch of text
You are correct, sir.
Before 9/13 the only whines on the bbs were "How come the LA7 and Spit XVI are not perked" and "**** those dive bombing Lancs"
I wish I had enough money to purchase the correct amount of good scotch to have AHII fixed right. :p :cool:
-
if only we put so much of our whining efforts into fighting instead.
Smartest thing you said in the whole post ... the rest was 1/2 speculation on your part and the other 1/2 total bullcrap.
-
See Rules #2, #5
-
Spot On, Overlag! :aok
-
Welp I said awhile back I wasnt happy with the changes. Still not.
I will say this though. Awhile back when we all experienced the great bang that was called the arena split, alot folks sat back wondering and scratching their heads as to why we werent informed before hand and alot of folks including myself thought that was wrong.
I dont remember the exact words, but HT said something to the effect that previous experiance had taught him about forum meltdowns and crucifictions and stuff. I kinda see where he was comming from now. Not sayin I have walked in his shoes, but gettin a view of what he has seen many times before.
Side "A" says: Yay! changes and changes are good and yall take your medicine and like it.
Side "B" says: This is more or less all a big crock of poopy.
I still favor the opinion of side "B" that it is all a big crock of poopy, but through all the accusations, finger pointing, grumbles and growls, I have to gove credit where credit is due.
The guy making the calls had the respect, at least thats what I like to call it, to pony up and say more or less "Hey folks, you aint gonna like what I'm bout to do, but its gonna happen. We got us some changes in store and we gots us a big storm a commin. I knows it. I'za smelt it before. Some of you folks are gonna ride it out fine. Some of ya's are gonna get thrown around and eventualy find a safe harbor. Others are gonna just out right sink. I'll pray fer ya."
Like the first time around with the arena split he didnt tell us, this time he did. I do wish we had more laymans insight to the the models they look at in determining what they see in the numbers and what those things mean. I think at times its easier to ask a rock to give you a gallon of water in the desert than get any kind of professional explanation on why a decision to implement something was made. Sometimes an answer can be given with out divulging crutial numerical stats or speaking to someone in the "Cause I can tone of voice."
So with all that rambling being said, Thanks for letting us know and taking what time you do to read all that is being posted.
Even if the responses arent to our liking at least its nice to know there are developers who dont take their playerbase for granted and outright ignore them.
-
Fastest growin' thread ... evar. Are we there yet (China)? :D
-
I can live with more then one arena, I can live with changes to the Capture system. I even learned to live with the perk system and the biased perking of the chog and the old whacked ENY side balancing system.
However this new system is annoying. I log in and fly in late war blue POP/CAP is something like 147/170. A few members of my squad are there. I start having performance issues due to a back ground service. So I log out and restart my system. I come back and the pop limit is 162/120. I go fly in Late War orange however no one I know is there, so I give up and log off.
So it’s possible to log into AH ... Have 3/4 of the squad doing a squad night in Late War Main Blue and not be able to join my squad due to either the arena cap or the country cap. To make matters worse we could all log in together 3/4 get in the arena while the last 1/4 get the door slammed in their face. If a squad mate has to leave he may not be able to come back infact my bet is on they wount be able to get back in.
To really screw us up the population caps in the arenas fluctuates constantly. So you never really know what the best Late war arena is to get into. To add insult to injury, even if you do get in does not mean you will be able to fly with the new whacked side balancing scheme.
Why not just fix the cap for each arena? Then also Cap the country population to 1/3 the arena pop cap? Its not as effective as the current system but its also not as forceful or intrusive. To be blunt the current system wasn’t all that effective tonight, specially since 2 sides seem to have ganged up on the third. And there really is no fix for the masses of 2 countries hitting the third.
I’m not really sure why we went Early Mid and Late war. Obviously there isn’t much interest in early and mid war, there almost used about as little as the Axis vs. Allied arenas. Given enough time for the novelty to wear off and they will probably end up just like the AvA arena … rarely used. Personally wouldn’t a Theater based arena system work better. Like an E.T.O. P.T.O. maybe even East and west E.T.O.s and a North Africa Theater of Operations. This would give Historical and Theater base squads some where to move to. For example the VF-17 Jolly Rogers would probably want to move to the PTO. There are a lot of Pro USN USMC IJN IJA squadrons that would move to the a Pacific arena as there are also a lot of Luftwaffe US UK and USSR based squadrons that would move to a European arena. I know it’s a little air warriorish but it’s a good kinda air warriorishness unlike filled up arenas and waiting to get into an arena that remind me of the bad parts of air warrior.
Another problem with the current system is Squadron caps. My squadron the damned is actually 3 squads in AH2 because we have so many members. We divided the squads by how much we fly. The guys like whels who practically live in AH2 are in one squad while people like me who hardly fly are in the 3rd squad. This makes finding and communicating with squad mates specially those in a locked arena a bit hard. Removing the squad Cap would help us a lot with this new system. Having an easier and more effective means to talk so some one in an arena from the lobby would be a plus to. A really nice gift would be to have the system tell you when a squad mate logs into AH2.
Having the side populations and possibly caps if ever implemented shown on the clip board list of arena’s would really help. Something like.
Arena | Total Pop/Max | Bish | Knit | Rook | Ping |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Early War Main Arena | 10/150 | 2/50 | 1/50 | 7/50 | 47 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid War Main Arena | 15/150 | 4/50 | 4/50 | 7/50 | 47 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Late War Main Arena A | 158/300 | 51/100 | 46/100 | 61/100 | 47 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Late War Main Arena B | 107/300 | 40/100 | 33/100 | 34/100 | 47 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ETO Main Arena | 158/225 | 51/75 | 46/75 | 61/75 | 47 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTO Main Arena | 107/225 | 33/75 | 34/75 | 40/75 | 47 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Axis Vs. Allies Arena | 3/150 | 2/50 | 1/75 | 0/0 | 47 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dueling Arena | 10/75 | 2/25 | 2/25 | 6/25 | 47 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Training Arena | 10/75 | 2/25 | 1/25 | 7/25 | 47 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Events Arena | 0/600 | 0/200 | 0/200 | 0/200 | 47 |
AH2 only has a few competitors. WarBirds, Fighter Ace, Targetware, and WWIIOL.
Most of these games are hurting not because AH2 is so good but because they are just that bad.
Warbirds is dated No one ever their wants to update or push the game engine to catch up with the times and it’s mismanaged. However a few people have left AH as of late to go to Warbirds … probably Old Warbirds players.
Fighter Ace is just a Microsoft Mass multiplayer CFS that is also dated and mismanaged and has a problem with reality. Again it’s behind the times. A few old Air Warrior RR squads went there and were talking about moving here but I think they decided against this.
WWIIOL is more for the ground pounder game it also has system issues. The flight side of it is lacking. Sort of like a MMP version of BF1942
Targetware is still in beta has very limited plane sets. While it’s promising and Free there are just to many restrictions to game play and its interface is very complex.
The biggest competitor HTC ever had didn’t get blown out of the water ….. It got scuttled by EA.
Right now I do not get a lot of time to play. I prefer to fly with my squad mates. Saying the new system doesn’t brake up or hurt the squadrons means you haven’t been paying attention to the boards. Squads are having a real hard time flying together. Then you got squad mates that have left or are leaving because of the new system with even more talking about leaving. Alot of us Pay are suspscription fees even when we go 2 or 3 months at a time without playing just so when we do actually get to play we can be with our squadmated and friends. With out a good group of guys and gals to fly with there is no reason in paying to play when I can just load up Pacific fighters and play solo, least the AI wount bad mouth me on ch 200 or scream profinitys threw my speakers on an unmutable local VOX chan becuase I didn't give them a six call.
As a customer I’m frustrated with the new system specifically the fluctuating arena caps that can and often do change several times a day.
I have already lost one old squad in AH, the 33rd Strike Group. I really don’t want to loose the Damned. I would prefer to move to another game of my squads chosing, even an inferior and/or more expensive game.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev you have just proved my point. When we start AH
The flowing online flight sims all had a lot of players.
AirWarior
Fighter Ace
Warbirds
The direct competitors today are.
Fighter Ace
Warbirds
Target Ware
You saying that they are not real competitors , because you do not like them, is my point about beating the competition. But you just want to say they are not real competition, because we are better, and that is my point, the way we got to be better is doing exactly like we have always done. Continually making changes when we think the changes are for the better. Even at the expense of a period of costumer base complaints.HiTech
yea, but you forget that you won that battle with, quess what as basic weapon ?
Main Arena
-
by Stiletto
If you want objectivity, go to the long-time squad leaders and ask them what would make their squads happy. We are the ones who find out before you do when people are so frustrated and unhappy they are about to cancel their subscriptions, and we are the ones who try our best to talk them out of it.
What a cracking good point to make. Yep, Co's are usually first to know and get the real honest reasons.
-
Originally posted by Dantoo
Why do you persist in this?
People have voted with their feet. Players will always do only that which they enjoy doing, no matter what obstacles you throw in their way. What each individual seeks from the game will not change. The game changes will not change the goals of the individual and players will always look to find the shortest path to achieve their personal goals.
Your changes have not enhanced enjoyment across the board by any stretch. You are trying to force people to do things that they will not. This alienates and frustrates your customers. It is more profitable to retain a customer than to spend the money to gain a new one.
Leave it be. Stop getting these stupid ideas for "necessary changes" from the BBS. Spend time in the arenas if you want to see what people like and dislike.
If you had simply spent the time developing more and better maps and new interesting planes/gvs that you have on these ridiculous innovations you would be racing ahead.
Word.
Rather than log on and play (like it was), now I have to jump through a bunch of hoops; enter some lobby to find my squad, if found... wait in que for the same stale map, or go somewhere I dont feel like going... like a team with screen names I could give a rats sphincter about. Its my $$, that's how I like it, end of story.
Making a non stop 24/7 war campaign "fair" is lame anyway..
If a team is out numbered, suck it up and deal with it; organize, fight a smarter campaign, combat interdiction... maybe the root of the problem is a lack of in game tools that makes simple / easy organization to contradict such things? an out numbered force can easily hold their own, ask Sun Tzu or read about the battle of Gargamel.
Perhaps its time to think about scrapping the current map system if favor of something that's easier to create for and offers more / completely different challenge options. Constant tweaking with, uh, us the player, is just getting annoying, esp to those of us who like it simple; log on, game on team / squad of choice, log off.
-
I have been paying my $15.00 P/MO since the AH1 days. I have never complained about anything, but this latest change is over the top. I can't fly unless I go to an unpopulated arena, or change countries or wait in the tower. Come on. I have sucked up all the changes and experiments, but this is going too far.
People are making fun of those who are loyal to their country, or "cartoon chess peices" as someone put it.
I see nothing wrong with being loyal to your country, game or not.
The ENY change was bad enough, but this is by far the worst. Now it is impossible to fly with my squad.
What is the purpose of this latest change?
What was wrong with things before multiple arenas, restrictive ENY, and this latest and most severe change?
Are these changes just made on a whim? I ask this because I see no complaints in the forums that these changes address.
We pay our money, why can'y we fly what we want, when we want, and where we want?
-
Originally posted by Hades55
yea, but you forget that you won that battle with, quess what as basic weapon ?
Main Arena
Dead on.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
Making a non stop 24/7 war campaign "fair" is lame anyway..
This isn't really a "war" though, it's just a game. That seems to be the biggest difference among many people on here. I think HTC should just get rid of the country designations so no one will have that "loyalty" issue. The numbers will never be exactly equal but when they get as far out of whack as they have been then something needs to be done.
You make it sound as though you would still have fun even if there were no players at all to oppose your side. I know that I wouldn't enjoy that scenario at all.
-
Originally posted by Hades55
yea, but you forget that you won that battle with, quess what as basic weapon ?
Main Arena
I beg to differ, the reason AH beats them all is the combination of it's vastly superior:- flight model
- gunnery model
- damage model
- collision model (hehehe)
- graphics engine (with one exception there)
All of these things can be subjective of course, but I have played/tested/tried them all. The only one that comes close on those items is not even in the list that Dale mentioned. I know many of you guys, particularly the flood that came here when it finally broke down, are VERY emotionally tied to AW...but for anyone who does not have the rose-colored glasses of their first puppy-love on...AW BLEW BEETS! It sucked in 1993 (BADLY) as well as 1995 when I last tried it and although it may have got a little better over the next few years the only online CFS out there it beat was Fighter Ace which was for kidddies. WarBirds 1.0 was the first one that I deemed worth paying for and after a few years of fun it was destroyed by WildBill and IEN who bought it from Dale/Doug, which freed them up to bring us AH (just to show what a freaking idiot Bill was...he did not have a non-compete in the contract...lmfao).
Warbirds is dead, only reason some still play it is because they're stupid enough to try and play games on a Mac.
AW, the flaming POS finally sank, long overdue IMO, it was behind the times crap since 1990.
Fighter Ace, total easy mode planes with little relation to real life modeling or even laws of physics, nothing more than air-quake for 8 year olds, think "Crimson Skies" with WWII graphics.
TargetWare, interesting concept, think of it as the Linux of CFSes...free, weird, clumsy, overly-complicated, not much fun for the mainstream.
IL2, beautiful graphics, questionable flight modeling, no capacity for MMOL which pretty much takes it out of the DIRECT competition role. Of course there's a couple of hundred folks flying in rooms of 16/32/64 (64+ gets buggy/laggy though).
------------
Well now that I've pi$$ed off some vocal subgroups (Mac-freaks/Linux-geeks/AW-zombies) by stating the obvious, I'm putting on the asbestos undies...flame away!
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
if only we put so much of our whining efforts into fighting instead.
Smartest thing you said in the whole post ... the rest was 1/2 speculation on your part and the other 1/2 total bullcrap.
it doesnt effect me so its not true comes to mind.
-
So far the only real problem I've seem with the side balancer is when we were just about to reset Rooks and everyone started jumping from rooks to bish...
At one point there were 40 (cough) Bish on and only 20 were actually up and fighing while people that wanted to actually FLY got stuck waiting.
I think the longest I've been stuck in line for so far is maybe 5 minuits and I don't even change countries.
-
It's been a few pages ago when I tried to ask this question. I want to try this again because I really think it needs to be answered. Clearly there are two factions at odds here: the "war game" crowd and the "gamer"/"flight sim"/"furballer" bunch.. It's very much an oil and water thing to me. I just don't see how the two groups can mix in any significant way. I can read each one of these posts and flag them as "W" (war gamer) or "G" (gamer) and therefore predict their position on these issues much like I can with politics in that if you tell me you are a liberal then I pretty much know where you stand on most issues or conservative, same thing (please, I'm not trying to equate the "W"s and "G"s to politics, it's just an example of profiling).
Ok, here is the question:
Why can we not have an arena for the "G" (gamers) and an arena for the "W" (war gamers)?
The "G" arena could just be one country and no way to blow stuff up or whatever, or how ever they want it set it up so that they can furball themselves silly. The "W" arena can be structured similar to the original MA for war combat games. That way both factions can have things there own way. Someone posted that the "W"s should just ignore the insults and complaints of the "G"s when their airfields are attacked, etc. That just doesn't get it for me. I don't want to do that. Trust me, I, for one, want to be a good citizen here and get along. If the "G"s get all bent out of shape by hordes, HOs, etc. then you would think they'd be thrilled to have an arena all to themselves where they could implement structure to keep that from happening. From the posts, it is clear the numbers are there.
Duh! Am I just too simple in my thinking here?
-
Originally posted by Flayed1
So far the only real problem I've seem with the side balancer is when we were just about to reset Rooks and everyone started jumping from rooks to bish...
At one point there were 40 (cough) Bish on and only 20 were actually up and fighing while people that wanted to actually FLY got stuck waiting.
I think the longest I've been stuck in line for so far is maybe 5 minuits and I don't even change countries.
Thats another problem. people that goto work, Go shoping, Go fishing, Go to spend quality time with thier wifes/hunsbands/sheep but stay logged in and idle in AH forever. AKA squatters, while this was never an issue before I bet it becomes one now. Gunna be a pain to log in and fly when everone that is on is afraid to leave becuase the most likely will not be able to get back in let alone Fly. Guess HT is probably going to have to come up with a fix like getting kicked if your idle to long. Unfortunately people will just up in a Field gun or a GV at a far away lonely base to get around it. Ofcorse people will whine and HT will have to fix it again by modifing the anti-squatters routine to also kick people that arean't moving and/or shooting for long periods of time.
My head hurts I need an Asprin :cry
I honestly beleive the new system is way to forcefull, and it really hurts the squadrons. Their has to be a good inbetween compramise, I hope.
-
Simple fix for that. 5 minute idle-kick.
Same problem exists in World of Warcraft pvp arenas. Some people just hop in and come back and wiggle their mouse every few minutes. No actual playing, just standing there earning points. The afk-kick on it is fairly ruthless & fast though.
Our solution was to fold up business cards and jam them into our movement keys when its time for a break.
-
Originally posted by HomeBoy
Duh! Am I just too simple in my thinking here?
I don't think so. The issue Dale is trying to solve is not how to give them each what they want and separate them but rather how to combine the two as effectively as possible. There's no right and wrong here, nothing wrong with honing your ACM in the arenas, nothing wrong with flying high buffs and pummeling buildings. The trick is to make the two camps interract with each other rather than try to keep the two camps apart.
Originally posted by indy007
Simple fix for that. 5 minute idle-kick.
Make it ten to fifteen and I'm with you. Been numerous times when I've gone AFK to donate some used beer to the rleif tube intending to be back in 2 minutes and been snagged by wife-ack. But you guys are right, I suspect it gets even more rampant when a side is about to "win", guys will go to bed or go to work hoping to stay logged into the "winning team" for the reward.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
I don't think so. The issue Dale is trying to solve is not how to give them each what they want and separate them but rather how to combine the two as effectively as possible. There's no right and wrong here, nothing wrong with honing your ACM in the arenas, nothing wrong with flying high buffs and pummeling buildings. The trick is to make the two camps interract with each other rather than try to keep the two camps apart.
Make it ten to fifteen and I'm with you. Been numerous times when I've gone AFK to donate some used beer to the rleif tube intending to be back in 2 minutes and been snagged by wife-ack. But you guys are right, I suspect it gets even more rampant when a side is about to "win", guys will go to bed or go to work hoping to stay logged into the "winning team" for the reward.
An"idle kick" has been requested over and over again for some time now.
At the earliest probably around when ENY limits were first introduced.
Became more needed after the arena split, even more needed now.
-
LOL Overlag and JB88 me thinks it's time for you guys to go on a country tour and make some friends outside of your little realm. So they didn't role out the red carpet when you switched. Maybe you should start clearing some others sixes and it will rub off, honestly.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
An"idle kick" has been requested over and over again for some time now.
At the earliest probably around when ENY limits were first introduced.
IIRC people sitting in the tower are not taken into account when calculating ENY restictions.
Only those flying are.
-
Donzo ENY is based on people in country both tower and in flight. It does not include those waiting.
-
But wouldn't people sitting AFK/idle in the tower still be part of the queue?
[edit] Beat me to it HT, tks.
-
Yes & no. Just make the idle-kick look @ the "queued" flag, then you have no problem. People just sitting in the tower, that have not queued up, are the only people effected by it.
Oh, and guys sitting in field guns for 45 minutes without firing a shot. They should be kicked out of it at the very least.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Make it ten to fifteen and I'm with you. Been numerous times when I've gone AFK to donate some used beer to the rleif tube intending to be back in 2 minutes and been snagged by wife-ack. But you guys are right, I suspect it gets even more rampant when a side is about to "win", guys will go to bed or go to work hoping to stay logged into the "winning team" for the reward.
You're not the only one. :noid Was even worse before I had a DVR. I've gotten up and walked away before during a merge because a good UFC fight just started.
On a completely unrelated note.. Skuzzy you were 100% right about the DVR. I don't watch TV the same anymore.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
The issue Dale is trying to solve is not how to give them each what they want and separate them but rather how to combine the two as effectively as possible.
That's the essence of my question. Why would you want to try to house dogs and cats in the same cage? You would have to sedate them both to make that work. Why would you want to do that? It becomes a control problem and thus the need for ENY, caps, balancing schemes, idle-kick mechanisms, etc., etc., etc. At the end of the day, do you really think those dogs and cats are enjoying themselves living in that environment? Seems to me that it's spoiled for both.
Why can't we implement these "G" type controls in the LWO so that the gamers have their environment and let LWB become the old MA? It's not like the two factions would not be welcome to try the other arenas. The Gs would just have to understand that if they come in the LWB, they'd better be prepared to be in a war game. Likewise, the Ws better not go into the LWO and start blowing crap up. It's all about choices, options. Why isn't that a good thing?
-
Originally posted by indy007
Simple fix for that. 5 minute idle-kick.
Same problem exists in World of Warcraft pvp arenas. Some people just hop in and come back and wiggle their mouse every few minutes. No actual playing, just standing there earning points. The afk-kick on it is fairly ruthless & fast though.
Our solution was to fold up business cards and jam them into our movement keys when its time for a break.
Ya but there is always going to be something else. Fix the trim on my ch stick and my tank will drive off into the sunset. Next thing we know we have to have webcams pointed at out geer. There are some things you can't fix. Fixing the numbers wount stop you from getting ganged 120 to 60 when the other 2 sides find that attacking you alone is funner then attacking each other and for that there is no fix.
This whole arena ballancing eny stuff is a bit harsh and is overly agressive. There should be an easy middle ground were both sides of the argument get what they want. Mabey even give us a few more tools.
I don't fly AH for the bish knits or rooks. I fly it to be with my squad and my friends. If their gone then there is no longer a reason for me to be an AH any longer. A lot of people feel the same way so I know it's not just me.
-
Originally posted by HomeBoy
That's the essence of my question. Why would you want to try to house dogs and cats in the same cage?
I think the two camps are not as different as dogs and cats, since one wont literally devour the other...errrr wait a second there...
:D
Seriously though, I think the two camps are much closer together than your analogy would indicate. I would think that everyone here is a avaition fan to some extent, probably been reading about the exploits of WWII aviators since childhood. I am firmly in the fighter group that you call "gamers" and "furballers", but one big reason I don't fly bombers or drive GVs is becasue I suck arse in them, (I'm only a little better than that in a fighter BTW). Yet I hold no animosity to the other camp and think the arenas and the community would be worse off if there were gone, or segregated in some way.
Guess it biols down, for me, to thinking we are better off with each other than without each other. Only ones I'd like to see fewer of is the ones who wont fight at all unless they have every advantage they can get (aircraft/altitude/numbers) and wont take any risks at all, but you have not mentioned that category of player, and they are a relatively small group, so I'm okay with them hanging around too as long as they don't breed more virtual-chickens...LOL.
FWIW, I think TOD will accomplish some of what you seek, separate the groups to some extent, certainly the styles.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Donzo ENY is based on people in country both tower and in flight. It does not include those waiting.
HiTech, is this a true statement?
Players in the tower contribute to the TOTAL number of players online. Once the total number of players online exceeds 200 the ENY logic kicks in. Once kicked in, the ENY logic only looks at the number of people in flight.
-
Originally posted by Mayhem
Ya but there is always going to be something else. Fix the trim on my ch stick and my tank will drive off into the sunset. Next thing we know we have to have webcams pointed at out geer. There are some things you can't fix. Fixing the numbers wount stop you from getting ganged 120 to 60 when the other 2 sides find that attacking you alone is funner then attacking each other and for that there is no fix.
This whole arena ballancing eny stuff is a bit harsh and is overly agressive. There should be an easy middle ground were both sides of the argument get what they want. Mabey even give us a few more tools.
I don't fly AH for the bish knits or rooks. I fly it to be with my squad and my friends. If their gone then there is no longer a reason for me to be an AH any longer. A lot of people feel the same way so I know it's not just me.
That's a pretty narrow viewpoint.
It's not about fixing the numbers. Imbalances are a symptom of the greater problem, and not the problem itself. The problem itself is the players.
The only effective way to modify the behavior of players to create a fair & balanced game environment is to use draconian measures. Honestly, I believe HTC has gone way too easy on everybody the entire time. I'd personally go with an against-your-will autobalancer. Once all the crybabies quit, you'd have a fresh group of newbies coming in who simply wouldn't know better. They'd accept it as the way it is, and probably generate a crop of better pilots. Yes, I know all about side balancing in games. I've done it as a job for paintball scenario events (200 to 1000+ players @ a given event). I also created the rosters that led to some of the best, and closest scoring games ever. I've told quite a few people "Sorry, creates a skill imbalance, your team can't play with that team for this event."
The difference is, paintball players got over it immediately. No cries, no whines. Everybody recognized it was for the best. I wish that could be here, but there's alot of very vocal, and very selfish AH players.
-
Originally posted by Edbert
II think the two camps are much closer together than your analogy would indicate.
Fair enough.
And I am fully aware of these "non-risk takers" you speak of. I agree that they really don't merit a classification of their own.
Though I have recogized you as a "gamer" (my term) for some time, I've always felt you were pretty emendable. I'm not convinced that you represent a majority however. I hope I'm wrong about that. There are some very hateful Gs that are relentless in their attacks against anyone who even hints at wanting to play the "war game." I know that criticism goes both ways. Thus the "dogs and cats" analogy.
Good discussion. I really believe this sort of dialog is much more helpful than arguing over how to implement controls on the game.
S!
-
Originally posted by HomeBoy
I'm not convinced that you represent a majority however.
I don't beleive anything I say, think, or do, in-game or out, represents the view of the majority on anything whatsoever. I may be cynical but I've come to terms with being in a perpetual minority on just about everything life offers.
Originally posted by HomeBoy
Good discussion. I really believe this sort of dialog is much more helpful than arguing over how to implement controls on the game.
I could not agree more, we're supposedly rational adults here...go figure.
-
Originally posted by indy007
That's a pretty narrow viewpoint.
It's not about fixing the numbers. Imbalances are a symptom of the greater problem, and not the problem itself. The problem itself is the players.
The only effective way to modify the behavior of players to create a fair & balanced game environment is to use draconian measures. Honestly, I believe HTC has gone way too easy on everybody the entire time. I'd personally go with an against-your-will autobalancer. Once all the crybabies quit, you'd have a fresh group of newbies coming in who simply wouldn't know better. They'd accept it as the way it is, and probably generate a crop of better pilots. Yes, I know all about side balancing in games. I've done it as a job for paintball scenario events (200 to 1000+ players @ a given event). I also created the rosters that led to some of the best, and closest scoring games ever. I've told quite a few people "Sorry, creates a skill imbalance, your team can't play with that team for this event."
The difference is, paintball players got over it immediately. No cries, no whines. Everybody recognized it was for the best. I wish that could be here, but there's alot of very vocal, and very selfish AH players.
Good analogy, one problem -
It's the same with English, Scottish in fact all Worldwide football (soccer) leagues.
There is more than one division. with the top teams being in the top division, and in the case of the English league 3 more divisions that contain the next best, the next next best etc.
Thats something that hasn't been addressed in AH, said it before and I'll say it again -
Equal numbers doesn't guarentee fair/balanced gameplay.
-
indy007: I do not quite see it that way. Currently I see the current situaltion as follows.
When each country as aprox the same amount of fields, things are staying balanced.
When one country is getting down to there last fields they start getting swamped. And hence are not having much fun.
Now the players in that country start looking for fun else where. Hence they change arenas. Once the numbers get to imbalanced we are stuck in a dead lock. Players do not want to be on the lower side because they feel like they do not have a chance to fight back.
Note I in no way assign any blame to anyone, it is just human nature to respond this way.
____________________
The solution. Provide a way that even if you are loosing the "War" i.e. short on fields, your still having fun.
One thing that will help is having some fields that can not be captured, so you can still fight back.
2nd thing that will help is a change to the victory condition, so instead of the low on field country still getting hit, the winning country is forced to attack the other country.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
indy007: I do not quite see it that way. Currently I see the current situaltion as follows.
When each country as aprox the same amount of fields, things are staying balanced.
When one country is getting down to there last fields they start getting swamped. And hence are not having much fun.
Now the players in that country start looking for fun else where. Hence they change arenas. Once the numbers get to imbalanced we are stuck in a dead lock. Players do not want to be on the lower side because they feel like they do not have a chance to fight back.
Note I in no way assign any blame to anyone, it is just human nature to respond this way.
____________________
The solution. Provide a way that even if you are loosing the "War" i.e. short on fields, your still having fun.
One thing that will help is having some fields that can not be captured, so you can still fight back.
2nd thing that will help is a change to the victory condition, so instead of the low on field country still getting hit, the winning country is forced to attack the other country.
HiTech
Don't see how making them uncapturable helps at all.
The other country just goes to the field(s) that is capturable instead.
So you pork the uncapturable one so they can't use it to take anything, and smack the other one down, result is the same.
Instead of going to another arena they just log off, result, still same imbalance.
Only it now penalises the country who has done the hard work to get close to the reset.
There is nothing you can do that will make people on the losing side stay, now they might not be able to swap arenas, they'll just log off until after the reset.
This used to happen prior to the arena split, will become the popular choice again.
In all honesty the way your going you may as well do away with the reset totally.
-
Greetings,
Ok, here is the question:
Why can we not have an arena for the "G" (gamers) and an arena for the "W" (war gamers)?
The "G" arena could just be one country and no way to blow stuff up or whatever, or how ever they want it set it up so that they can furball themselves silly. The "W" arena can be structured similar to the original MA for war combat games.
I just have to ask, didn't / don't we have this? Dueling Arena, AvA and MA in the past. With DA, AvA, and multiple MAs defined by time period and numbers?
It seems that there was a structure in place to make everyone happy. Problem was there weren't enough numbers in the dueling arena / AvA for the furballers to find targets. So, they are drawn to the Wargame areana to find their 'prey' :) - and to complain on 200 when other people don't follow their 'code of conduct'.
Regards,
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Don't see how making them uncapturable helps at all.
The other country just goes to the field(s) that is capturable instead.
So you pork the uncapturable one so they can't use it to take anything, and smack the other one down, result is the same.
Instead of going to another arena they just log off, result, still same imbalance.
Only it now penalises the country who has done the hard work to get close to the reset.
So I guess teamwork gets penalised once again.
No but making one side capture 50% of the 2 opposing sides will stop the 2:1 gang bang.
I know I see it every time one side is low on bases.
Gentlemen the race to reset light is now lit. Start your engines.
The 2 countries with the most bases may now tag team the low side.
By havening to fight on 2 fronts you no longer can just steam roll the low side.
You would now have to defend what you have taken AND take territory from the side you have been sending token fights .
I think HT has said he is planning something like this .
I for one think it's brilliant.
Bronk
-
Greetings,
Side balance - two simple words that bring so much moaning and gnashing of teeth. Many ways to do this:
Some we are currently trying:
Raw Numbers - Restricting numbers on a particular side
ENY - Restricting planes available to a particular side
Reduction in cost of perk planes - Making higher performing planes available to a particular side
Lines of advance (on hold for now - but do have potential!) - Focusing the attack to enable the limited numbers of defenders to mass.
3 of the 4 are obvious to the player and a direct impact on his options.
Some to consider -
Variable Ack accuracy / density at bases - Defending country dedicates more resources to defense
Not enabling planes / vehicles / ack at recently captured bases - Reflecting difficulty of getting logistical structure in place at recently captured fields.
Further restrict side switchin to once a day/week instead of once and hour - to reduce people joining the 'winning' side
Increase the number of troops required to take a field the closer it is to the City - Reflect the difficulties associated with entering enemy home territory
Reduce availability of quality aviation fuel for over balanced side(s) - reflecting the over demand on production capability
Reduce ordance availability on the over balanced side(s) - Reflecting the demand exceeding the available resupply rate.
Establish/Increase the wait time prior to launch after a crash or landing - Reflecting shortage of maint personnel / repair parts / fuel.
Increase the size of the towns associated with a field the 'deeper' an enemy gets into the home territory - Reflecting the higher level of difficulty of taking territory in the opponents home territory.
Increase the hardening of the hangers the deeper a field is in friendly territory - Reflecting an increase if defensive structures.
Just some thoughts.
Regards,
-
Greetings,
No but making one side capture 50% of the 2 opposing sides will stop the 2:1 gang bang.
You would now have to defend what you have taken AND take territory from the side you have been sending token fights .
I think HT has said he is planning something like this .
I for one think it's brilliant.
I agree!
Regards,
-
Originally posted by Bronk
No but making one side capture 50% of the 2 opposing sides will stop the 2:1 gang bang.
I know I see it every time one side is low on bases.
Gentlemen the race to reset light is now lit. Start your engines.
The 2 countries with the most bases may now tag team the low side.
By havening to fight on 2 fronts you no longer can just steam roll the low side.
You would now have to defend what you have taken AND take territory from the side you have been sending token fights .
I think HT has said he is planning something like this .
I for one think it's brilliant.
Bronk
Like I said - may as well do away with the reset completely.
The more changes are made, the more problems it causes, and you end up chasing your tail around.
This should be obvious to anyone by now.
-
Originally posted by MWL
Greetings,
Ok, here is the question:
Why can we not have an arena for the "G" (gamers) and an arena for the "W" (war gamers)?
The "G" arena could just be one country and no way to blow stuff up or whatever, or how ever they want it set it up so that they can furball themselves silly. The "W" arena can be structured similar to the original MA for war combat games.
I just have to ask, didn't / don't we have this? Dueling Arena, AvA and MA in the past. With DA, AvA, and multiple MAs defined by time period and numbers?
It seems that there was a structure in place to make everyone happy. Problem was there weren't enough numbers in the dueling arena / AvA for the furballers to find targets. So, they are drawn to the Wargame areana to find their 'prey' :) - and to complain on 200 when other people to follow their 'code of conduct'.
Regards,
BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT Wrong
Dueling arena is just what implies. A place to fight one on one.
HT will not make a specific play type arenas. IE gv , furball, and toolsheder arenas.
It goes against what he wants. Which I believe is for us to play together.
I could be wrong but I doubt it.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Like I said - may as well do away with the reset completely.
The more changes are made, the more problems it causes, and you end up chasing your tail around.
This should be obvious to anyone by now.
Kev I threw 50% out just for a number. I'm actually thinking of a number between 30%-40%.
But I believe a lower number is doable. Remember it applies to all not just one side.
Bronk
-
he more changes are made, the more problems it causes, and you end up chasing your tail around.
This should be obvious to anyone by now.
Kev: Once again you are just completly full of it. If we took your view, AH could not exist today.
Does changing stuff create different issues? Absolutely.
But make no mistake about it ,changes have to happen if AH is to continue to grow.
But you just seem to want to completely ignore all the issues that existed before the split arenas.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev: Once again you are just completly full of it. If we took your view, AH could not exist today.
Does changing stuff create different issues? Absolutely.
But make no mistake about it ,changes have to happen if AH is to continue to grow.
But you just seem to want to completely ignore all the issues that existed before the split arenas.
but what is it going to grow into? its a mess right now... any new player is going to see this mess, and play like it. or rather not bother at all.
keeping current subscribers is easier and cheaper than gaining new.....
-
keeping current subscribers is easier and cheaper than gaining new....
That is not 100% accurate when it comes to games.
And do not view that statment as "I do not care about existing customers".
It is really just a simple truth that very few people play the same game forever.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
The solution. Provide a way that even if you are loosing the "War" i.e. short on fields, your still having fun.
One thing that will help is having some fields that can not be captured, so you can still fight back.
2nd thing that will help is a change to the victory condition, so instead of the low on field country still getting hit, the winning country is forced to attack the other country.
HiTech
Oh yeah, I think it will work. I'm just used to more dictatorial style autobalancers like on Counter-Strike. I also think that it might get you to, say, 75% of your goal for balance (by whatever metric you're using). A step further I would like to see it go is to track population by their actual area, and not just the entire arena. Cap any particular side from gaining more than say.. a 5:3 advantage. Put it on a short timer to allow squads to up together.
It would add encouragement to fight on multiple fronts instead of just grind away at one.
-
Greetings,
Dueling arena is just what implies. A place to fight one on one.
Okay, but I seem to remember a Inter-Squad 4 on 4 there.
HT will not make a specific play type arenas. IE gv , furball, and toolsheder arenas.
That may be true, however he already has - arenas limited by Time Period, Plane Set and Dueling. As far as wanting us to play together, I think he just wants us to play nice. (Jeeze, sounds like me talking to my children :lol )
Regards,
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev: Once again you are just completly full of it. If we took your view, AH could not exist today.
Does changing stuff create different issues? Absolutely.
But make no mistake about it ,changes have to happen if AH is to continue to grow.
But you just seem to want to completely ignore all the issues that existed before the split arenas.
Don't believe I have ever said the MA had no issues.
BUT it had a lot less than the current change, after change, after change, fixing the problems caused by the previous fix.
My view is (assuming you'd like to know) -
If a fix creates more problems than it addresses it's kinda counter productive. You end up spending time fixing those problems, which leads to even more.
Kinda like EXACTLY where we are at at the moment, and have been for the last 3 months.
Thats what I mean by chasing your own tail.
Change 'can' be good.
-
I normally fly for the underdogs anyway, so I've scarcely noticed the changes. Is it really so bad as to cause this much bickering?
I don't remember things being this bad when AH2 went live, and that actually did cost HTC a lot of customers in the short term. Those were people who literally couldn't play the game anymore (because of hardware, not gameplay settings), and maybe I've got my rose colored goggles on, but I don't remember this much griping even from them.
I've got to hand it to HTC, they sure take a lot of **** for trying to do the right thing.8
BTW Kev, what are all these new problems that exist only because of the changes?
-
Originally posted by hitech
indy007: I do not quite see it that way. Currently I see the current situaltion as follows.
When each country as aprox the same amount of fields, things are staying balanced.
When one country is getting down to there last fields they start getting swamped. And hence are not having much fun.
Now the players in that country start looking for fun else where. Hence they change arenas. Once the numbers get to imbalanced we are stuck in a dead lock. Players do not want to be on the lower side because they feel like they do not have a chance to fight back.
Note I in no way assign any blame to anyone, it is just human nature to respond this way.
____________________
The solution. Provide a way that even if you are loosing the "War" i.e. short on fields, your still having fun.
One thing that will help is having some fields that can not be captured, so you can still fight back.
2nd thing that will help is a change to the victory condition, so instead of the low on field country still getting hit, the winning country is forced to attack the other country.
HiTech
then if thats the case then why not just make it if people are gettin upset and they log cause their losing then deem it as that country surrenders worked in france they gave up they lost to a losing battle and award the team the win simple new map starts all over,so in order to prevent being called french stand on your feet and fight even harder,one thing i learned in the army was a 12 man special forces team can hold off the assault of a 1000 charging men whats wrong with these other countrys dont they have the back bone to do as well or should they just have the mentality of hell with it its not fair im goin to another sand box to play,seems a while back meaning a few month ago,the rooks would steamroll everybody in the arena now before the flames start im not pointin fingers at countrys,over and over and over again,then the knights would win one,and once in a very very blue moon the bish would get one,ut now i have seen changes where rooks that were rooks at one time have changed countrys to the underdog to get the perk advantage for being undernumbered and since it seems better players from rooks came bish it has seemed that now the bish are steamrolling map after map after map,just my honest opinion.
as homeboy has stated you have 2 types of people in this game the "gamer" and the war sim "kill all destroy all" player which causes friction between the 2 so heres just and honest opinion along with homeboys opinion that could solve this as he has stated.
1)keep two arenas one for furballers no captures no hanger destroying etc.
2)the other for the kill everything including bacteria type player.
it would solve alot of arguments over you bombed our vhs at tt what dweeb would do that wtg on ruining our fun or
wtg ho newb learn to fly learn some acm or you hoed me on the merge that aint fair your not supposed to do that waaa waaa waaa waaa and the crys continue,so no matter what you do to the game the whiners will still cry if ya keep them together with everyone so just seperate the 2 and let them play their own game this is what ya do with children so why not with adults that act like children furball one side,,,,,and destroy everything in the other.........Corpse:lol
also on that note for those people on one country wanting to change side to a winning team make it so you cant change side for 30 days instead of 1 hr 3 hrs or 12 hrs
-
Originally posted by hitech
That is not 100% accurate when it comes to games.
And do not view that statment as "I do not care about existing customers".
It is really just a simple truth that very few people play the same game forever.
HiTech
i aint saying that people stay forever, a balance has to be created. keeping new players coming in, while keeping old players happy at the same time.
but new restrictions isnt the way to win new, or existing customers over....
new planes/gvs, new maps, and new features are a much better way to increase playerbase, while keeping oldies happy.
new players will only come here with advertisement....current players need new things to fly/do
one thing.... did you have these changes layed out in a long term plan from 9/13 to the latest change? or was they "on the fly" changes to "fix" what happend after 9/13?
-
Originally posted by Overlag
i aint saying that people stay forever, a balance has to be created. keeping new players coming in, while keeping old players happy at the same time.
but new restrictions isnt the way to win new, or existing customers over....
The problem with this statement, with all due respect, is that new players will accept the rules and conditions of the game as a matter of course, as seen overall, the same way you accepted the current ruleset when you started playing.
-
Originally posted by MWL
Greetings,
Dueling arena is just what implies. A place to fight one on one.
Okay, but I seem to remember a Inter-Squad 4 on 4 there.
What were they doing ... Ohh 1 squad dueling the other to see who was the winner.
HT will not make a specific play type arenas. IE gv , furball, and toolsheder arenas.
That may be true, however he already has - arenas limited by Time Period, Plane Set and Dueling. As far as wanting us to play together, I think he just wants us to play nice. (Jeeze, sounds like me talking to my children :lol )
1. Time period still includes all play types . IE gv, furball,and toolshedder.
2.Plane set AKA AvA is controlled by a event team not just htc .
Plus once again you can do all play types in there.
3.Dueling :confused: I already covered that.
Regards,
I will refrain from commenting on the personal attack.
As I feel it is not warranted .................
Yet:t
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Don't believe I have ever said the MA had no issues.
BUT it had a lot less than the current change, after change, after change, fixing the problems caused by the previous fix.
My view is (assuming you'd like to know) -
If a fix creates more problems than it addresses it's kinda counter productive. You end up spending time fixing those problems, which leads to even more.
Kinda like EXACTLY where we are at at the moment, and have been for the last 3 months.
Thats what I mean by chasing your own tail.
Change 'can' be good.
exactly.
you have to wiegh up what each of the changes fixed.... and if that fix was a long time issue, or something caused by the last change.
change 1 was to fix a long term issue HTC "saw" which was 700players was unhealthy (debatable.... but not here). Anyway did change 1 really fix this?
from change 1, HTC created the following issues yet fixed nothing (IMO):
- 4 unbalanced arenas (2 empty, 2 at an "ok" level)
- sides unbalanced within these arenas
- players decided not to fight, but instead fly in empty arenas milk running score vs sheds
then we had changes to try and fix these issues... and these create more issues......
-
Originally posted by scottydawg
The problem with this statement, with all due respect, is that new players will accept the rules and conditions of the game as a matter of course, as seen overall, the same way you accepted the current ruleset when you started playing.
maybe.... but one way i learnt to fly this game was to make friends within the country i started in. and i flew with them to learn what to do. i then got picked up by VMF323, and then VMF switched to knits since the knits had been the low number side for a few tours.
now thats imposible.
every time you log on, you have 2 servers to choose, and might not be able to fly with people you know and get used to.
so a new player is going to have a hard time learning the game when he is forever trying to find people to help him on server1/2 or side A/B/C.
-
What are these new issues?
-
Overlag: Knock it off, you are in no way discussing the issues involved all you are doing is trying to point fingers at HTC. I have totally had enough of these those type post from you.
No where at all in your last post did you have anything to say about any game issue. All you are trying to do is sling mud at HTC.
I will no longer tolerate that type of continued behavior from you , you are fee to say you do not like a change, you are not free to make those type of posts on this bbs.
Do so once more and you will not be a member of this bbs.
And a big word of advise, stop digging that hole immediately.
And just for general information, splitting the arenas was planed since the day we started coding AH.
HiTech
-
Deleted
-
Originally posted by hitech
Overlag: Knock it off, you are in no way discussing the issues involved lall you are doing is trying to point fingers at HTC. I have totally had enough of these those type post from you.
No where at all in your last post did you have anything to say. All you are trying to do is sling mud at HTC.
I will no longer tolerate that type of contiued behavior from you , you are fee to say you do not like a change, you are not free to make those type of posts on this bbs.
do so once more and you will not be a member of this bbs.
And a big word of advise, stop digging that hole immediately.
HiTech
.
i simply following the same line of discussion that kev is making.
Originally posted by hitech
And just for general information, splitting the arenas was planed since the day we started coding AH.
HiTech
.
what about the ones after it?
-
Originally posted by Overlag
maybe.... but one way i learnt to fly this game was to make friends within the country i started in. and i flew with them to learn what to do.
now thats imposible.
every time you log on, you have 2 servers to choose, and might not be able to fly with people you know.
so a new player is going to have a hard time learning the game when he is forever trying to find people to help him on server1/2 or side A/B/C.
BS
It's ohh so hard to periodically check to see if there is room for you in another team and arena. PFFFT
zOmG 1111!!!!!111!!! I have to back out arena and check if there room in another.
If you can't take 2 min to do this, how the hell you going to learn a game with this huge curve.
Your logic is astounding.:rolleyes:
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
BS
It's ohh so hard to periodically check to see if there is room for you in another team and arena. PFFFT
zOmG 1111!!!!!111!!! I have to back out arena and check if there room in another.
If you can't take 2 min to do this, how the hell you going to learn a game with this huge curve.
Your logic is astounding.
Bronk
so you find the guys you've been tagging along with and learning with but you cant fly due to numbers? thats what i mean, thats what will effect the new players too..... the lack of stability.
-
Originally posted by Overlag
so you find the guys you've been tagging along with but you cant fly due to numbers? thats what i mean.
Numbers are not stagnant they go up and down almost by the second.
It's real hard to hit that refresh button and check to see if i can jump were I want.
Unless There is a JSO going on a particular side you should have no problem getting where you want to go with in 1/2 hour I'd bet.
Done it my self squad was in orange i was in blue . Back out after a flight and check. Guess what took me ONE try and i was in with my squad. *GASP*
Your making a mountain out of a mole hill.
Bronk
-
(David Eisenhower enters room)
"Here's some milk and cookies, and there's PLENTY for EVERYBODY!"
(tm David Frye, c. 1973)
So, this is probably a good time to suggest that tempers are running just a bit high here and there are other threads to check out!
- oldman
-
Hooray for cookies!!
And that's good advice re: the chillout... I think some people would do well to stand back and do some deep breathing exercises.
If I start to dislike the game, I'll just stop playing it and either find something else or just stop neglecting my family.:D :D :D
-
Someone said earlier, one of the causes of an arena imbalance is one side looses too many bases and get swamped, people start logging off because may they just get tired of defending and losing, or maybe the numbers are just too overwhelming. I know that I have logged off when the HQ has been taken down and you cant find where the attacks are at until the base starts to flash and then its too late.
I just wonder what would happen if the strats (city, refineries, etc) were capturable and the bases were related to the strats but in reverse of the current zone system. Capture all the strats and the related bases fall. Use the new capture system that was tested and HQ is the last stand...
this is a quickie map I made to try and illustrate it. This has been suggested in the past but I dont know if its a doable idea. I would think the majority of the fights would take place in and around the strat areas. Less fighting directly over the bases.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/874_1164223049_baseidea2.jpg)
-
Guess I'll leave it at this -
Only time will tell if these changes will be for the good or the bad.
But I personally know of one long time (since AH1) squad (not us) who will be leaving en masse this month, and going 'back down the hall'.
Maybe thats what it will take, a clear out of us 'oldies' to make way for the next generation.
-
I haven't checked this tread in a while but so far I haven't had any problems whatsoever getting into an arena with eough players in it or flying with my country of choice although I do always play during "prime time". I've even been able, for the most part to jump back and forth from map to map staying with my country. My only comment is that in the initial post it sounded as though we'd still be using at least one big map with some modifications from the "blue line", zone modifications and some uncapturable fields and I haven't seen that.
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
Snipped for brevity
Now here is some thinking out of the box.
Makes fields secondary and makes strat guy more involved.
Simple yet effective .
:aok
Bronk
-
Bronk,
That may be true, however he already has - arenas limited by Time Period, Plane Set and Dueling. As far as wanting us to play together, I think he just wants us to play nice. (Jeeze, sounds like me talking to my children )
The comment about my children was a whimsical reference to the 'play nice' comment and not directed at you personnally.
Take a deep breath - it's okay. I just don't buy your argument. That's okay, we are both adults. Plus, neither of us get to decide any way! :)
I just appreciate the opportunity to comment as the owner is obviously interested and monitoring this thread.
Regards,
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
I haven't checked this tread in a while but so far I haven't had any problems whatsoever getting into an arena with eough players in it or flying with my country of choice although I do always play during "prime time". I've even been able, for the most part to jump back and forth from map to map staying with my country. My only comment is that in the initial post it sounded as though we'd still be using at least one big map with some modifications from the "blue line", zone modifications and some uncapturable fields and I haven't seen that.
I believe HT is still tinkering with the blue line setup, and we will get it back once he's satisfied with it. At least that's the impression that I got. Until then, I think it's just business as usual in both LWAs.
Ditto on moving around at will. Still see enough disparity in the numbers that entire squads could move around at will, or find their side as an underdog in another arena. Numbers are, overall, closer than they have been during the hours I play, so it seems like a nice compromise to me.
-
Originally posted by hitech
That is not 100% accurate when it comes to games.
And do not view that statment as "I do not care about existing customers".
It is really just a simple truth that very few people play the same game forever.
HiTech
so far, this is the only MMOG that i have ever played.
it had been the only one that i had planned to play for any meaningful period of time. i am not a gamer by any stretch, but i like the community and i enjoy the game when it isn't causing me headaches like it did the other day. i'd rather be elsewhere than have to deal with that.
for me it's really just a matter of courtesy. if you are going to change a product that i or others have already paid for then it seems reasonable to expect prior notification and/or explanation when these changes come.
i hope that you can see the wisdom of going out of your way and requesting beta testers for changes in the main arenas rather than forcing the whole group to be test subjects. with a modicum of consideration i doubt that you would find many who would be opposed to the notion. i keep saying this, but i feel that it still isnt sticking. we pay you for this service. it just isnt much to ask. do you like service like this from others?
you might consider a notification list or maybe even a newsletter in the future. i think it will clear up alot of the complaints that are happening now.
the way it stands its looks like you on one side and us on the other.
i don't care how you cut it, in my view that isnt progress, it's bad customer service, even if you ARE here talking with us after the fact to express that it is the way it is and you wont budge. that isnt change. thats the "slum" that is becoming the standard and the status quo in these here parts.
best,
88
-
Just took me exactly 3 hours to read all these pages :D
But ummm... yea I like that Idea that HT said earlier....
If he could combine that Idea With 1 Late War Main Arena it would hopfully put an end to all this imbalancing whining BS...
But then Again whoever Listens to the Bananaboy :rolleyes: :(
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Now here is some thinking out of the box.
Makes fields secondary and makes strat guy more involved.
Simple yet effective .
:aok
Bronk
thanks Bronk. I think my idea is place more focus on the strat side. Bombers and tanks need to take down buildings. Bombers will probably need escorts to survive. If my play style leans to the "capture territory/win the war" I can contribute whether I like bombers, GVs, or fighters. If my play style leans more to just fighter combat, ACM, stress relief, then that can happen also.
-
Mole
Play type and arena type are 2 different things.
The MAs are just that allows all types of play have 3 sides and have scoring.
The AvA 2 sides diff plane sets depending on scenario and all play types . Once again depending on scenario. Ohh and no score.
Dueling has no scoring and and capture is irrelevant .
What you would propose is to further spit a community already entrenched in its style of play.
This is wrong, as i said HT want us to fight each other not go further apart in our own little arenas .
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Your logic is astounding.:rolleyes:
There seems to be no logic to many of these guys. They make a choice and then say HTC is denying them a choice due to their choice of choices...."rolleyes" indeed!
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Ditto on moving around at will. Still see enough disparity in the numbers that entire squads could move around at will, or find their side as an underdog in another arena. Numbers are, overall, closer than they have been during the hours I play, so it seems like a nice compromise to me.
EXACTLY!
Every night (prime-time US) I have looked and seen where it was possible for an entire squad of 32 to switch en masse to one side in any arean they choose and fly immediately. Although I will acknowledge that my observations are , although true, purely anecdotal and this may not be true for prime-time EU.
-
JB88: If you even gave 1 min of thought to the changes we are making you would realize they can not be done in a beta fashion, because to find out the result to any of it we need all the people playing.
So you are just trying to find a reason to mud sling at HTC.
HiTech
-
hehe "mud sling".......
kinda Trendy and classic :lol
-
Originally posted by hitech
When each country as aprox the same amount of fields, things are staying balanced.
When one country is getting down to there last fields they start getting swamped. And hence are not having much fun.
Now the players in that country start looking for fun else where. Hence they change arenas. Once the numbers get to imbalanced we are stuck in a dead lock. Players do not want to be on the lower side because they feel like they do not have a chance to fight back.
Note I in no way assign any blame to anyone, it is just human nature to respond this way.
____________________
The solution. Provide a way that even if you are loosing the "War" i.e. short on fields, your still having fun.
One thing that will help is having some fields that can not be captured, so you can still fight back.
2nd thing that will help is a change to the victory condition, so instead of the low on field country still getting hit, the winning country is forced to attack the other country.
HiTech
Not that I disagree with you but I usually had fun being the low number/low field country. The fun was in the challenge to find ways to have fun and still have successs and usually I was able to. With only one arena and county loyalties maybe some would switch sides or log off but the die-hard country loyalists, at least those with some fortitude, would put up an awsome fight. I suppose i'm in the minority in this regard.
That said how do I get you to answer my qustions posted on page 3. Do I have to threaten or demean you?
Of course I'm kidding, but I would like the answers to those questions.
-
Greetings,
Actually, I am not avocating (sp - no dictoionaryy availble right now) a further split, just the use of arenas currently available.
I can't even begin to list the varying comments I have 'heard" (well, read) while flying - so much so, that I almost always turn off 200. I turn off that channel as I dislike listening to some 'knowitall' bang on the keyboard about score ho, tool shedding, hoer, cherry picker, run dweeb, cryer, furballer, alt monkey, Lgay, Dweebfire, etc . . .
If a person wants to play by a set of rules, a joust if you will, then there is an in arena in whick a person can do that.
If a person only wants to bomb, there is an arena he can do that as well - the training arena.
If a person want's to participate in a grand scale wargame, there is an arena that will accomidate that person.
If you are a Historical Fanatic, there is an arena to meet your desires. Plus the SE arena.
Goes back to Homeboy's comments about Gamers and Wargamers. The tools are out there for everyone to be happy - the tools are just not used. I am, to this day, amazed at the number of ppl who join the current version of the MA and complain about other ppl not acting how they want. If you don't enjoy the current arena, use the others.
I guess the problem is - as the dueling and AvA arena aren't used very much, the only targets are in LW Blue or Orange. Maybe the scoring thing drives it, yet, it seems most of the purists deride the whole scoring concept.
Seems to me, that if you enter an arena where the overarching goal that drives the tactical engagements is to 'conquer' an electronic realm, people are gonna try and do that. If that's not what you want, use the other arenas.
Regards,
-
BaldEagl:
Didn't answer them, because I have not decided yet.
HiTech
-
No the problem is (and it's not really a problem just an incentive) is score and perkies.
You don't get score or perkies in the DA or the TA.
And while the AvA does have its own score and perkies. (which i believe get reset) HT does not post top scores on the main page.
Thus those who worry about rank will not go there.
I suggest you look up the criteria for a ma style of map also.
Those are the only ones that make it as a MA and thus score and perkies.
Ohh I agree with the 200 comment. I sometimes wonder why I have it tuned.
Bronk
-
After thinking about these changes I have become a big believer in HiTech's idea to change the reset conditions to be X percentage of the other two countries. This will make the 3 country system function as it theoretically should, it will force a reset minded country to fight a two front war.
This is diametrically opposed to what happens most of the time now whereby two countries dogpile the low guy and/or the one in the reset corner of a particular map. How it is now only the low fielded/dogpiled team is fighting the two front war, the two larger teams are ignoring each other and only fighting on one front vs. the smaller/geographically disadvantaged team.
The net effect of changing the reset conditions will be, as HiTech stated, a guarentee of at least a fighting chance and therefore some fun for the low field/playered team. It will also force the reset minded folks to fight each other for fields against much stiffer opposition.
Zazen
-
Originally posted by hitech
3. Will also make some core fields uncapturable in each country.
HiTech [/B]
Personally I'm not a big fan of "rules" that don't have some basis in reality. I was surprised when I started playing again to find the indestructible buildings.
The Orange Arena setup didn't change much of my minute by minute play, but it seems to make things less of a war simulation and more of a board game. At least that was my perception. It didn't really bother me that much, but going back to the Blue Arena felt good, it was nice to not have the targets dictated, or some areas artificially protected.
Just my perception.
BTW, I felt bad that I did not respond to you in the previous post in a timely manner, but I started spending more time in the game to try and figure out how much of my opinion was based personal versus what I was actually doing. Switching planes to the F6F has kicked up the enjoyment quite a bit
:aok
I wish I understood better what you are trying to accomplish with the changes.
-
hitech this is gone from ridiculous to sublime.
not letting people fly just gives them time to window out and ***** here. cant really blame them because squad play is shafted. it's what older players come for.
18 years in sims says rolling country numbers have always been. it happens randomly and can last a year, but it has always been. hordes are fun, but many guys actually enjoy being underdogs. good strat modeling attenuates what a horde can do and adds new dimensions to gameplay. good strategy should offset fighter tactics in an interesting war sim.
in contrast, queing a player 20 minutes to join up with his squad to balance numbers is kludge. you gotta know that's true.
please just consider getting rid of *all* bwana patches to engineer gameplay and tell staff to work on modeling enhancements of all sorts. this done, you can ignore the bb, go sip some scotch and play with a real joystick.
considered advice from knowing you at least 15 years now,
mullah
-
smash: with the new capture setup, if you do not have some fields not captureable. It would be possible to completely wipe out a country and still not have the war won.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
smash: with the new capture setup, if you do not have some fields not captureable. It would be possible to completely wipe out a country and still not have the war won.
HiTech
Think i have a tear welling up .:aok
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
After thinking about these changes I have become a big believer in HiTech's idea to change the reset conditions to be X percentage of the other two countries. This will make the 3 country system function as it theoretically should, it will force a reset minded country to fight a two front war.
This is diametrically opposed to what happens most of the time now whereby two countries dogpile the low guy and/or the one in the reset corner of a particular map. How it is now only the low fielded/dogpiled team is fighting the two front war, the two larger teams are ignoring each other and only fighting on one front vs. the smaller/geographically disadvantaged team.
The net effect of changing the reset conditions will be, as HiTech stated, a guarentee of at least a fighting chance and therefore some fun for the low field/playered team. It will also force the reset minded folks to fight each other for fields against much stiffer opposition.
Zazen
I have exactly the same opinion about this part of the changes. :aok
-
I remember having unlimited non-stop fun way back in 1993 on SVGA Air Warrior with three countries that had no capturable fields and a little atoll in the middle that did have a few capturable fields. The CV's were anchored, too. No resets, just a constant battle to take the atoll.
It was simple. It was a blast.
Seems the more complex we make this, the less fun we're having.
Fight.
It's fun.
Try it, you'll like it.
-
Originally posted by Zazen13
After thinking about these changes I have become a big believer in HiTech's idea to change the reset conditions to be X percentage of the other two countries. This will make the 3 country system function as it theoretically should, it will force a reset minded country to fight a two front war. Zazen
So this reset condition would be for example, 1 country would have to have taken at least (random #) 50% of the other two countries fields before there was a reset?
-
Airscrew Your a knight. To win you would have to have 90% of knight bases, 30% of bishop bases, 30% of rook bases.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
JB88: If you even gave 1 min of thought to the changes we are making you would realize they can not be done in a beta fashion, because to find out the result to any of it we need all the people playing.
So you are just trying to find a reason to mud sling at HTC.
HiTech
ok then how can this be done when alot are stuck in cue waiting to fly driving up the eny without switching countries or the coined term "chess peices"
-
Originally posted by corpse
ok then how can this be done when alot are stuck in cue waiting to fly driving up the eny without switching countries or the coined term "chess peices"
Back out and pick the other late war arena .
Simple really.:D
Bronk
-
I remember having unlimited non-stop fun way back in 1993 on SVGA Air Warrior with three countries that had no capturable fields and a little atoll in the middle that did have a few capturable fields. The CV's were anchored, too. No resets, just a constant battle to take the atoll.
It was simple. It was a blast.
Yep. That model worked really, really well for the range of player styles. Though air combat was still the primary focus, and base taking a means to the end. The suggested AH changes (capture path and 2 country percentages to win reset) should go a long way towards recreating this environment.
Charon
-
Originally posted by hitech
Airscrew Your a knight. To win you would have to have 90% of knight bases, 30% of bishop bases, 30% of rook bases.
HiTech
well thats sounds pretty good. No need for any single country to lose all their bases, and any bases you capture you need to keep. No one country gets rolled up
(i still like my idea :cool: )
-
Charon, I'm not too sure that will happen.
In those golden years there was nothing really to "win" except the atoll and if a country took the atoll..........nothing happened. The fight went on. There was no "reset" to put things back on an "even" footing. There were no "perks" awarded for "distinguished service".
All that happened was that the other countries tried to take the atoll back. It was really the only option. The "reward" for "winning" the atoll fight was... more fighting. That's why it worked.
Even with the new system, the basic underlying problem remains. The reset will be rewarded. As long as the reset is the raison d'etre, the problems will be the same. It may take a while for the rats to adjust to the new maze but the end result will be the same.
Just my .02.
-
Originally posted by hitech
JB88: If you even gave 1 min of thought to the changes we are making you would realize they can not be done in a beta fashion, because to find out the result to any of it we need all the people playing.
So you are just trying to find a reason to mud sling at HTC.
HiTech
not true.
but first let me apologize for my tone. i was angry and frustrated. i feel that way, but i don't think that it has done any good to express it without my filter on. you are a person who deserves the same respect as i do. i hope that you will accept this as sincere.
as i have said, i don't play any other game. i like it, the people who play it, and i like the people who make it. ive said before. alot. my new goal in life is to learn how to fly a plane. had i never seen that awful commercial my life would be different.
but i disagree that it could not have been tested via beta. the new base capture system was almost that, but there just wasnt a large enough runoff in the second arena to account for those who might not be ready to participate.
if i am not mistaken, you are also doing outside testing on TOD (old name?) and i have seen pages and pages of people volunteering to help.
i like some of the changes that are happening. i am not opposed to them at all, but it seems clear at this point that its been a bit more of a shock to folks than they would have liked.
as a subscriber to your service, i am opposed to the method. that's all. again, i love the game, but i feel that the heads up factor is lacking enough to cause me an inconvenience...and that the method being used is creating a few impressions globally
:
1. that concern for customer satisfaction is secondary to the master plan. this may or may not be true, but it is the impression that i have gotten at times.
2. that hitech creations is unwilling to expand it's PR and damage control approaches in it's actions to encompass the growth of a larger sized community and market which was less intimate the larger it grows and requires an entirely different set of tactical decisions in terms of public relations.
3. that once a decision has been made there is no turning back. probably not true...you did add ack back to the towns...but that's not what people will see. people will see that you have made a change and then ignored their pleas for a softer approach. i would hate to go to the Hitech creations dental offices...no novacain. : )
4. that squads, which have been encouraged to grow from the beginning and have taken deep root in the game are no longer at the top of the list of priorities for HTC. this may or may not be true, but its a reasonable perception.
when i first arrived in this world, i got to play AH1 for a few weeks before the change. i remember how i felt when it came and i didnt even know it was coming. i also remember coming into the bulliten boards then and reading the complaints. i dont recall them lasting as long or being as vehement but they may have been. i dont think so.
in my view, and you may not share it, but in my view, these changes that you are making are for the next generation, the next possibility in a war based flight sim game. an alternate rather than the only possibility.
what i mean is...why not leave the arenas alone and make money and build the next generation and then sell it to them? if it is as good as you forsee it, they will come and the old ways will disappear and make way for the new...
i wish that i could articulate this better and i hope that you can appreciate that noone gets incensed about things that they do not care deeply about.
i know i do. and i feel that i have been here long enough to earn your appreciation for my support thus far.
oh, and it's your damned fault for airing that commercial that sucked me into your god forsaked cartoon video game world, so there.
88
-
Greetings,
Percentages sound okay. Big Map has what? 210 bases on average? Let's just take that number, each starts with 70.
To win, must hold 63 original Knight bases, 21 Bishop and 21 Rook.
Let's say, just to be onery, that I being the all powerful leader of the Knights decide to run the Rooks to no remaining capturable bases - inconjuction with Bishops' all powerful overlord. Say the remaining Rook bases are the four around the HQ / City and one of which is a zone base.
Then I take out the Rook Hangers and Strats. Will take a long time to rebuild Rook ack/fuel/ord/troops.
Next, I turn on the evile Bishops to retake lost ground and complete the reset. Rook pilots do what? Probly, switch to Bishop or Knight or depart the arena instead of sitting around waiting for the tools to retake the homeland. Based on current conduct, go to another arena is most likely for the vast majority.
Now, you have a 1 front war between Knights and Bishops with the occasional guerrilla raid by the Rooks until reset.
With the availabilty of other arenas - i.e. everyone can fly. Is that really that bad? This could cause an overbalance of Rooks in the other LW arena.
Comments?
Regards,
-
JB88, it's posts like those (the one above) that made me take you off of ignore, a couple of years ago (the hot headed ones). Excellent post, and please try to be more rational towards HTC in the future, we ALL should.
<> you mook! :cool:
-
Originally posted by MWL
Greetings,
Percentages sound okay. Big Map has what? 210 bases on average? Let's just take that number, each starts with 70.
To win, must hold 63 original Knight bases, 21 Bishop and 21 Rook.
Let's say, just to be onery, that I being the all powerful leader the the Knights decide to run the Rooks to no remaining capturable bases, inconjuction with Bishops' all powerful overlord. Say the remaining bases are the four around the HQ / City and one of which is a zone base.
Then I take out the Hangers and Strats. Long time to rebuild ack/fuel/ord/troops.
Next I turn on the evile Bishops to retake lost ground and complete the reset. Rook pilots do what? Probly, switch to Bishop or Knight or depart the arena instead of sitting around waiting for the tools to retake the homeland. Based on current conduct, go to another arena is most likely for the vast majority.
Now, you have a 1 front war between Knights and Bishops with the occasional guerrilla raid by the Rooks until reset.
With the availabilty of other arenas - i.e. everyone can fly. Is that really that bad? This could cause an overbalance of Rooks in the other LW arena.
Comments?
Regards,
You ever try and heard cats ? It don't work. This would mean a continual and deliberate cooperation to keep rook fields down. This wont last long once the fights start at the other end of the map. That and I shoot red tag planes with whatever base they are over.
Ohh whats this a heavy bish Jug otw to pork a rook base? Weeeellll now lets see if i can get him to drop ord or die.
I think the majority would do the same.
All this gives the rooks in this scenario you described breathing room to fight back.
As apposed to the current MA environment . Of tag-team the lowbies.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Mayhem For example the VF-17 Jolly Rogers would probably want to move to the PTO.
Amen, brudah. But I would also respect the needs of others. :)
-
1. that concern for customer satisfaction is secondary to the master plan. this may or may not be true, but it is the impression that i have gotten at times.
2. that hitech creations is unwilling to expand it's PR and damage control approaches in it's actions to encompass the growth of a larger sized community and market which was less intimate the larger it grows and requires an entirely different set of tactical decisions in terms of public relations.
3. that once a decision has been made there is no turning back. probably not true...you did add ack back to the towns...but that's not what people will see. people will see that you have made a change and then ignored their pleas for a softer approach. i would hate to go to the Hitech creations dental offices...no novacain. : )
4. that squads, which have been encouraged to grow from the beginning and have taken deep root in the game are no longer at the top of the list of priorities for HTC. this may or may not be true, but its a reasonable perception.
While I understand your concerns in these ideas, and agree with the philosophy behind them. I totally disagree with your assessment of where each stand. Each assertion you have made is completely false (not the perception but the reality).
And quite frankly what causes that perception is people like you or overlag (btw I view you as totally different but the outcome is the same) instantly posting that the sky is falling and jumping to all sorts of conclusions.
I'm not going to go point by point to show all the real issues involved in each of your points. But I have not ever seen any other way thats works better than our methods in the type of business we are in.
And if you want to see how other communities are, take a look at the post on other BBS gaming sights.
And can some on post a link again to the article "if all you saw of a game was its bbs?"
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Baine
7. You assume that squads no matter how large increase player retention.
8. You assume that squads are the only item that increase retention and attract players.
9. You assume that if nothing had changed people do not leave for other reasons.
10. You assume that to have fun with your squad, every member must be able to fly together.
My point is, that I very well understand the attractions and need for social aspect of a "Squad". But also understand there are other needs that have to be balanced with the needs of squads.
HiTech
The change does in no way threaten the squad base.
HT I'm sorry, but you're just plain wrong there.
These guys aren't making comments with the jerk of a knee. The comments are coming after flying for the last couple of months and trying to enjoy squad nights under the old set of new changes. They've given stuff the good college try without *****in or moaning. Now they - and many of the other people in this 12 pages of comments - see changes that they fear are going to finally do away with the aspect of the game they treasure most.
I don't know if you fly in a squad or not. But if you did regularly you would understand where they are coming from.
You're also assuming that these guys are saying they want to fly together all the time, they don't. But this system does make it difficult, if not impossible on squad nights when they do want to fly together.
I'm not assuming that you do not know about the interaction of squads. But I also know that these guys _ and lots of others in this thread _ are basing their comments on their real experiences over the past several months, not on some perverse desire to give you a hard time. They are speaking from experience. They know what they are talking about.
You say we assume you don't have other ideas in the works.
I think, given the last couple of weeks, most of us are sure that you do. But, since you won't share them and tend to announce them rather abruptly, then you can't blame us for commenting on them as they come along.
You say "I have a roadmap, trust me" but then when people post their concerns in a civil way you go into "I am the great and powerful Oz" mode. An understandable reaction, but one not likely to generate a lot of trust.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think a lot of us, if you do have a plan, would prefer you wait until it was fully formed instead of implementing it in drips and drabs. That's not an assumption, but based on the numerous "I don't want to pay to beta test" posts.
I don't think anyone will argue with you on point 8 and 9. I don't see anyone here doing so.
But you are dead wrong on point 7. I speak from experience. Take a look at my stats (SKBaine). I'm flying maybe 6-10 hours a month these days. Most of that is on squad nights. Without my squad I probably would have cancelled my subscription a while back. I might have come back when you got done with CT and started putting a little more effort into AH again, I might not have. But the opportunity to spend two or three hours a Sunday with guys who are both my virtual and real life friends keeps me playing. (Well, that and the fact that I'm a real procrastinator). So, here you have at least one person who stayed because of his squad. I know of at least two others and I assume that we are not alone.
And finally, we do understand that you have to balance many needs to make the game a success. Remember, many of us have been here since the start, and have played other MM games before. We know the drill.
That's why these guys don't post very often. They are content to let you do what you need to do.
As I said in the beginning of my post - they kept their mouths shut for many weeks and tried to make a go of it. You should consider that when you consider their comments and give them the respect they deserve. [/B][/QUOTE]
Lets look at the numbers shall we?
As of this morning, there were a total of 1,155 squads listed on the HT website containing 6,813 people for an average of 5.89 ppl per squad.
Now looking at above average squadrons containing 7 or more people there were 271 with 4,291 people for an average of 15.83 ppl per squad.
That's 63% of the toal squadron member ship is contained within 23.5% of all the squadrons.
Now considering that those who choose not to fly within a squadron or new members on free trials or yet to be signed into a squadron makeup only on average 10% of the total arena memberships at anyone time, that would make the larger squads responcible for atleast 50% of the general revenue for hightech.
I have to side with the squadron C.O.'s on this matter, the cap limits are a big pile.
Rather than trying to keep tabs here on the BB you could just set up a poll for folks to vote on to get a concensus or even just poll the top squadron C.O's & see what they have to say......if you care to get a realistic responce worthy of notation.
As for the new capture victory conditions, with cap limits in place forcing parity for all 3 sides, noone will have the #'s needed to attain them fighting a 2-front war and no reset will come & no perks will be awarded & the same map will be played till weeks end reset with everyone complaining about the "same ol map"
-
Originally posted by hitech
Airscrew Your a knight. To win you would have to have 90% of knight bases, 30% of bishop bases, 30% of rook bases.
HiTech
I like this. I like this alot.
-
Greetings,
Yep, I agree - actually, it would be easier to herd cats, me thinks! Just looking at a worst case scenario. I got the impression the initial RJOs were an unexpected event.
If it did happen (which I agree is a real long shot), you are now down to one side or the other taking, at worst case, 21 Non-Rook bases. How long would that take on a one front fight?
These bases are probly not near the four Rook remaining ones. Maybe it will give the Rooks time to get back in the fight. However, to prevent either Knight or Bishop reset, the remaining Rooks will need to take 50 - OOOPS, not. . . let's see, grabs calculator, oh there it is right next to dectionary.....70-4=66. . . . . umm, say 33 for Knights and Bishops. . . . . . got to get to less than 21 . . . . .33-20=13 per side . . . . humm, that wold be, viola! 26 bases to prevent reset.
Regards,
-
Originally posted by hitech
Airscrew Your a knight. To win you would have to have 90% of knight bases, 30% of bishop bases, 30% of rook bases.
HiTech
Ok, makes sense. I've logged myself when things got royally bad.
I haven't switched sides in years, but when I did it before it was during the time when either the rooks or knits (cant remember) were chronically getting pounded. Like as in every day. I switched over just to see what was going on. One thing about it, you got a lot of 6 calls :D
-
Originally posted by hitech
And can some on post a link again to the article "if all you saw of a game was its bbs?"
I think this is the one you mean...
http://www.wired.com/news/columns/1,72119-0.html
...and for the lazy...
Complainers of the World Unite
If you play an online game that you enjoy, there's one surefire way to spoil the experience: read the forums on the official site. There you will find a vast underworld of lost souls keening their misery onto your screen. A game you thought was entertaining, well-balanced and attractive will be torn apart before your very eyes and pronounced lacking in every conceivable way.
It doesn't matter that the complainers spend as much time on the game as you do, and probably more. While they may disagree on the nature of the flaws, they are united in agreement that whatever those flaws may be, they are unforgivable.
Herewith then, a guide to the deranged, degraded inhabitants of the forums. You cannot defeat them, they provide precious little experience, but if they get their claws on you, they may turn you into one of their own.
The Power Craver
Wants only one thing -- more power with less effort. Any downgrade in power is infuriating. Any upgrade is insufficient.
Sample Quote: "I can't believe they nerfed the pillar of lava spell! How am I supposed to kill twelve ogres at once now?"
Punishment: Forced to admit that no matter how powerful in the game, still works as a cashier at Kroger in real life.
The Magical Realist
Doesn't understand what a "game" is. Constantly makes arguments based on what would be "realistic," even if the game is set in a fantasy world run by wizards and pixies.
Sample Quote: "You can't tell me a Mondlagarian Tiger Warrior is stronger than a Swamp Troll. That just doesn't make sense!"
Punishment: Sent back to kindergarten for remedial make-believe classes.
The Majority Stockholder
Seems to believe that $15 a month buys you a seat on the board of directors. Doesn't realize that a hundred thousand other people are ponying up the same amount.
Sample Quote: "I've e-mailed the developers several times telling them that Fire Paladins should have the axe-throwing skill. They haven't changed it, but they're still taking my money!."
Punishment: Forced to work customer service for an online game company.
The Emancipator
Sees the game as a titanic struggle between the evil expressive developers and the poor, downtrodden gamers. The evidence? Every rule and limitation in the game.
Sample Quote: "I don't see why I have to complete quests to get epic weapons! If I want my second-level Bumblefur Bard to wield the Deathsword of Arat'rak'k'k'k, that's my right! Quit telling me how to play!"
Punishment: Sent to Sudan to experience first-hand what oppression actually feels like.
The Eternal Quitter
Just comes on the forum to let everyone know he's quitting for good and to spend a dozen paragraphs explaining why. Then does it again three months later.
Sample Quote: "For real, this time."
Punishment: Forced to actually quit.
One-Issue Poster
Only has one complaint, but posts about it 15 times a day. This is because nobody else cares.
Sample Quote: "THE LAVENDER STARBELT IS ACTUALLY PERIWINKLE!!!! WHY DON'T THEY FIX THIS??!!!?!"
Punishment: Lavender Starbelt changed to lilac.
The Lifestyler
Wants a bunch of cosmetic changes to a single type of character. Exhibits an eerie level of identification with said character.
Sample Quote: "The Pastry Elves' laugh should be less bubbly and more tinkly. Our giggle should remind you of gazing at the stars as a child, and our smile should make you think of the taste of honey on a cool spring morning."
Punishment: Character icon replaced with accurate photograph of self.
The Deathmonger
Main complaint about the game is that you can't kill everything. Secondary complaint is that the things you can kill don't suffer enough.
Sample Quote: "Why can't I make the baker watch me kill his wife and child, then force-feed their flesh to him until his stomach bursts? What is this, Barbie's Horse Adventure?"
Punishment: To be determined, pending DNA analysis of freezer contents.
(Edited for formatting of quoted material...wish we could paste HTML)
-
lol. love that one.
wonder why they don't have the evil overlord gamer bent on hellfire soul slavery misery and destruction listed there...
wink wink. ;)
88
-
i think this one fits the last few weeks
The Emancipator
Sees the game as a titanic struggle between the evil expressive developers and the poor, downtrodden gamers. The evidence? Every rule and limitation in the game.
Sample Quote: "I don't see why I have to complete quests to get epic weapons! If I want my second-level Bumblefur Bard to wield the Deathsword of Arat'rak'k'k'k, that's my right! Quit telling me how to play!"
Punishment: Sent to Sudan to experience first-hand what oppression actually feels like.
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
i think this one fits the last few weeks
The Emancipator
Sees the game as a titanic struggle between the evil expressive developers and the poor, downtrodden gamers. The evidence? Every rule and limitation in the game.
Sample Quote: "I don't see why I have to complete quests to get epic weapons! If I want my second-level Bumblefur Bard to wield the Deathsword of Arat'rak'k'k'k, that's my right! Quit telling me how to play!"
Punishment: Sent to Sudan to experience first-hand what oppression actually feels like.
sudan ain't got nothin on my woman.
:p
-
all of these fires should have been out weeks ago. best case they would never flare up...how? advanced notice...bombardment of the masses with positive concepts related to change and an expectation of something new coming around the bend.
While this sounds all great in theory it does just the opposite of what you expect.
Take one specific pre announcement we did concerning the perk ordinance system. All it does is create "Sky is falling post" and really makes matters even worse with rumors and speculation. End result is you are just putting out flames longer.
Take another example of when we launched the ENY plane disabling. It was talked about long in advanced. The flames on it started before the launch and continued on until this last side balancing change.
Believe me when I say been there done that got the tee shirt on pre anouncing contriverial changes. JB88, remember I have been CEO of an online flight sim company since 1995 (- 2 years of wild bill hell).
Have built 2 of them starting from scratch. And while I'm always looking for better ways of doing things.
I have learned a hell of a lot what does and does not work. And also I am constantly reavaluating that knowledge.
One of the things I have learned is that , a pure marketing type person interacting with the community is an absolute night mare . W
They typically do far more damage than you could ever imagine. There problem is that a marketing / sales type personality is very much driven by telling people what they want to hear. While this works for a short time, in the end it really breaks down the trust of gamer vs game maker. And from then on anything the marketing person saises is just viewed as pure hype, and ignored. Go look at WB as a classic example of how to destroy player relations.
When you have a product that all of your customers communicate with each other on a daily basses, it creates an entirely different beast than other type industries.
HiTech
-
ya. i thought of that...i deleted the post on reread due to that very line. thanks for bringing it back lol.
when it comes down to it, all i am asking is that nothing comes in the way of just being able to hop on and kill people with my friends.
maybe if changes happened every first saturday or something, or at the start of each tour...at least then i could have an expectation and have no reason complain that i didnt see it coming.
i really dont know squat about being the ceo of an online gaming company, true...but i do know how i feel when said ceo throws clouds in my coffee.
please just consider some predictability with changes and maybe even consider rolling a few back from time to time when they arent working...please.
and thank you.
-
please just consider some predictability with changes
This is a fair idea ill keep in mind.
HiTech
-
joy.
-
JB88: Have a real world question for you. I have completed the new capture war win system.
Now the choices I face.
Assumtion.
I'm fairly sure it will help with the current country balances between arena.
If it helps, the current balancing system should hardly ever take effect. I.E. no waiting.
So now the choices.
1. Can put it into the mid war.
2. Can put it into 1 late war arena.
3. Can put it into all arenas.
I can release it today or some other day. Under your "predictablity" I should wait until Monday to implement it.
If it works as expected, it would be much better to have it up for the weekend.
So now lets not debate the actual system, but just the launch.
What would your choices be.
HiTech
-
HT I have a question about your new 30, 30, from each country to win the war" idea:
Wont that just "encourage" a country to be More populated than the others in order to succesfully be able to fight the war on two fronts??
Wont this add to the imbalancing?
-
Originally posted by hitech
JB88: Have a real world question for you. I have completed the new capture war win system.
Now the choices I face.
Assumtion.
I'm fairly sure it will help with the current country balances between arena.
If it helps, the current balancing system should hardly ever take effect. I.E. no waiting.
So now the choices.
1. Can put it into the mid war.
Can be totally avoided.
2. Can put it into 1 late war arena.
Some will try to avoid . Then complain about it being forced on them in that arena.
3. Can put it into all arenas.
Will get the best overall picture of how well it works . None can hide from it.
But none can cry fowl about being forced to fly with it in one arena.
I can release it today or some other day. Under your "predictablity" I should wait until Monday to implement it.
If it works as expected, it would be much better to have it up for the weekend.
So now lets not debate the actual system, but just the launch.
What would your choices be.
HiTech
IMHO a weekend test would bring a bigger sampling of whats going on with a test.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Platano
HT I have a question about your new 30, 30, from each country to win the war" idea:
Wont that just "encourage" a country to be More populated than the others in order to succesfully be able to fight the war on two fronts??
Wont this add to the imbalancing?
How can you jump on a high numbers side when numbers balancing is in effect?
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
IMHO a weekend test would bring a bigger sampling of whats going on with a test.
Bronk
Then again there's the flip side.
Any problems or unpredictable results are with you until at the earliest Monday.
At least if a Monday there's a complete working week to get on them, it would still be there for the following Saturday.
Thats one of the reasons our company never sends a patch out just prior to a weekend, nothing worse than tee'd off customers.
Nothing worse than having to come in on a weekend either.
-
Originally posted by hitech
JB88: Have a real world question for you. I have completed the new capture war win system.
Now the choices I face.
Assumtion.
I'm fairly sure it will help with the current country balances between arena.
If it helps, the current balancing system should hardly ever take effect. I.E. no waiting.
So now the choices.
1. Can put it into the mid war.
2. Can put it into 1 late war arena.
3. Can put it into all arenas.
I can release it today or some other day. Under your "predictablity" I should wait until Monday to implement it.
If it works as expected, it would be much better to have it up for the weekend.
So now lets not debate the actual system, but just the launch.
What would your choices be.
HiTech
I would say just for a quick test.
2. Can put it into 1 late war arena.
I would say put it up now if not then for sure on the weekend. Thats when our numbers are highest.
-
The Magical Realist
Doesn't understand what a "game" is. Constantly makes arguments based on what would be "realistic," even if the game is set in a fantasy world run by wizards and pixies.
Sample Quote: "You can't tell me a Mondlagarian Tiger Warrior is stronger than a Swamp Troll. That just doesn't make sense!"
Punishment: Sent back to kindergarten for remedial make-believe classes.
OUCH!
:lol
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Then again there's the flip side.
Any problems or unpredictable results are with you until at the earliest Monday.
At least if a Monday there's a complete working week to get on them, it would still be there for the following Saturday.
Thats one of the reasons our company never sends a patch out just prior to a weekend, nothing worse than tee'd off customers.
Nothing worse than having to come in on a weekend either.
Hehe cmon Kev HT is dedicated he wont mind coming in on the weekend.
*snicker*
But yes point well taken.
Bronk
-
Any problems or unpredictable results are with you until at the earliest Monday.
Kev I work almost every weekend so that statement is incorrect.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev I work almost every weekend so that statement is incorrect.
HiTech
Hitech has a pa system linked to this game. Its hooked up into his house in every room. Only people with special access can use the vox in the game to contact him. It also works on his cell phone and in his airplane. So you see its all gonna be ok. Well unless the secret channel is leaked.:t :t :t
-
You might as well set it up in all the arenas, HT.
Just like AH1.99betasomethingorother, just like the capture setup, people will run from it. They will complain, and they will be very upset, even if they don't try it. If they have to try it, they will still complain, and they will still be very upset, but if it works, most will calm down, and order will be restored.
-
I agree with that. Might as well just get it over with and hit the button. That way it will be done and thats the way it is.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Kev I work almost every weekend so that statement is incorrect.
HiTech
Point taken.
Still say it's asking for trouble though.
From experience many moons ago - We released a 'fix' on a Fri afternoon for one of our products, had an unforseen side affect.
Since then nothing goes out later than Thursday morning.
We aren't talking penny anny companies here either, some of our 'customers' -
Kroger
US Steel
Airtran
General Electric
U.S government
to name but a few.
Your choice as always.
-
Kev most players are online during the weekend.
-
Weekend releases are only a problem if your coadmonkeys don't work weekends.
-
Hub - Banshee
Both very true, just speaking from [edit] BITTER [end edit] experience.
Don't forget it would still be there for the following weekend.
-
Kev, why are you so against launching this now? First Hitech said he has fixed it and 2nd the HTC staff can be reached if something goes wrong. It was proven the other night 3rd Hitech said he is always working on the weekends. There really is no point in debateing. Its not like the everybody goes home and says see ya hope nothing goes wrong be back Monday.
-
Originally posted by smash
The Magical Realist
Doesn't understand what a "game" is. Constantly makes arguments based on what would be "realistic," even if the game is set in a fantasy world run by wizards and pixies.
Sample Quote: "You can't tell me a Mondlagarian Tiger Warrior is stronger than a Swamp Troll. That just doesn't make sense!"
Punishment: Sent back to kindergarten for remedial make-believe classes.
There is such a thing as a "realistic fantasy," paradox or not. You and your ilk would do well to keep that in mind. Or do you really want purple skies in the next patch?
-
Like I said it's my personal opinion having suffered at the hands of a just pre-weekend release.
I'd have much rather have been at home, or in the bar sinking a few pitchers.
I'm sure the customer (the important one in the equation) could have done without the hassle over a weekend also.
Personal opinion only, others varies, doesn't make either 100% right or wrong.
-
Originally posted by Benny Moore
There is such a thing as a "realistic fantasy," paradox or not. You and your ilk would do well to keep that in mind. Or do you really want purple skies in the next patch?
It's not purple ?
Damn now i got to go adjust my monitor colors .:furious
:rofl
Bronk
-
ok lets say its done your way and something goes wrong that day. Tell me what the diffrence is?
Edit: Tell me what the diffrence is any other day
-
hitech,
Hats off to you and the HTC folks for weeding through all this with patience and professionalism when it would be much easier to just go on vacation for a couple years, leaving a single arena up with no bug fixes or additions and outsourcing support to Bangalore. ;) No one can say that you aren't dedicated to your product and customers.
You're right. Continuously even number will always yield a stalemate in the war - no side can win. On the other hand, momentum swings with the country numbers. I think we've all logged out, or considered doing it when overwhelmed by 2 other countries. Maybe there is no way to create a single, multi-faceted arena that will always be fun for all sides in all conditions?
If I were free to make my own arena, I might make something like this:
I liked the rolling plane set idea you made in Brand X. I think it would be interesting to combine it with ENY to create an Air War arena that offered a different challenge each time the player logs in.
An Air War having no troop captures. Bombers and Attack aircraft can capture sectors by destroying 99% of multiple large targets within a time limit and resupply/rebuild would set the time limit. Offensive and defensive fights are all air-oriented. Resupply is by air only and only M16s and Ostwinds are available for their intended air-defense role at a base or strat target.
It would feature a rolling plane set based on ENY that the player can influence. Bombers can up any ENY value bomber at any time.
When players log into the arena, they are restricted to fighter/attack aircraft with ENY >28. After landing at least two victories, they can up ENY >20.
Land at least two more victories, and they can up ENY >12. Two more victories and they can up any non-perk plane. After landing two more victories, they can up a perk ride, but cannot up another perk ride for one hour if they fail to land it successfully.
It may not be practical to do, but I think that would be a fun arena providing a new incentive for the player each time they logged in. Each side has air targets and bombers/attackers have a purpose.
-
Originally posted by hitech
JB88: Have a real world question for you. I have completed the new capture war win system.
Now the choices I face.
Assumtion.
I'm fairly sure it will help with the current country balances between arena.
If it helps, the current balancing system should hardly ever take effect. I.E. no waiting.
So now the choices.
1. Can put it into the mid war.
2. Can put it into 1 late war arena.
3. Can put it into all arenas.
I can release it today or some other day. Under your "predictablity" I should wait until Monday to implement it.
If it works as expected, it would be much better to have it up for the weekend.
So now lets not debate the actual system, but just the launch.
What would your choices be.
HiTech
you have already done what i would suggest. you have posed a question to the player base in such a way that have the opportunity to take co-ownership in its implimentation and will subsequently strive to see it succeed.
having said that you have completed it, people are curious...heck, i am salivating, but that's just because i am eating spicy salted peanuts.
i would place it in one of the late war arenas, tell the community about it and ask for their help in testing it. i would also announce that i was jacking the numbers up in the other lw arena so that they wouldnt have to participate if they did not want to. chances are they will. why? a. they are not forced to change their habits they are invited to. b. it's thursday. less drunks than friday.
you might also consider rolling it out in one of the earlier arenas to get people interested in them again. not sure if that is the best option though.
my guess is that if it works as well as you say it might, all will hail the great hitech and it will go off with only a few bugs needing to be worked out. the key is to make it possible to avoid having to try it while enticing them to do so.
since you let the cat out of the bag and since nothing is set in stone yet, i would probably just go ahead and impliment it immediately with a MOD that expresses appreciation to all of the subscribers for being patient while changes are being implimented and how much you appreciate their continued support of the game and that in the future all new mods will occur at the first of each month at exactly 10 am cst for continuity which will give them something to look forward to and only one month of whines before the cutoff and the new ones start.
thats what i would suggest.
i think it would make all the difference in the world.
but i'm an idiot according to hubs so there is that.
;)
88
-
Originally posted by hitech
... a pure marketing type person interacting with the community is an absolute night mare . They typically do far more damage than you could ever imagine. There problem is that a marketing / sales type personality is very much driven by telling people what they want to hear. While this works for a short time, in the end it really breaks down the trust of gamer vs game maker. And from then on anything the marketing person saises is just viewed as pure hype, and ignored.
Couldn't help laughing when I read this. Anyone remember Robert Wolf, aka "Airwolf" in AW? It was he (if memory serves) that first uttered "2 weeks" in response to question about time frames for a change in the game. :)
-
well, in all fairness, i was trying to stress PR more than i was trying to stress marketing...they can be interchangable, but good PR is good for stamping out fires as well as starting them at the right time.
i can see what he means by the nightmare though. it certainly could be.
-
Originally posted by hitech
So now the choices.
1. Can put it into the mid war.
2. Can put it into 1 late war arena.
3. Can put it into all arenas.
What would your choices be.
HiTech
OK I'm not JB88
I kinda wish this element was introduced before the forced side switching..............
Seems that if we are eventaully targetting inter LW arena hopping then it has to be in both LW arenas.
I think its very important that the war status is easy for a player to see.
Very important that however its presented it does not cause confusion and hence dissapointment.
I would go to the extent of giving countries objectives............. on their clipboards
eg
To win Bishop must stil capture
2 fields in Bishop land
3 fields in Rook land
1 fields in Knight land
Then of course you have to define those "lands". Once upon a time some terrain clipboard maps had starting boundries.............I think they should return.........else some sort of table easier to read than the present war status clip page.
I would be wary of making the uncapturables any more than 30% (of original territory)and they to should be very clearly defined and known. Plus vehicle spawns out of and into the uncapturables should be considered again in the light of the fields fortress roles.
A situation where one side is down to its uncapturables and they are all porked is equally undesirable. Quite frankly I would add AAA (fluffy ack) in copius quantities to at least two key (medium/large) uncapturables
Sorry the above is kinda giving granny egg sucking lessons. Its highly likely that its all been considered and decided upon. But I would rather look an arse here than end up with a system that but for a few tweeks could have been free of "nasty details".
-
Originally posted by hitech
One of the things I have learned is that , a pure marketing type person interacting with the community is an absolute night mare . W
They typically do far more damage than you could ever imagine. There problem is that a marketing / sales type personality is very much driven by telling people what they want to hear.
HiTech
Sorry
You've drifted off topic into a theory which is bull****.
The above is not the act of a pure marketing/sales type personality......
The above is the act of a poor marketing/sales type personality......
It may be the act of the typical bull**** "I've gotta make every one happy" amateur marketing idiot......or sales fool who gives the farm away to get the order or indeed the conundrum facing most "politicians".....................
Good marketeers and sales persons are "successful communicators"..................
You may be CEO but if you are a successfull communicator then you will find that you are also a good marketeer / sales person.
I know its off topic and probably broke some rule or other......but its the sort of generalisation that irks me some what.
:furious
-
Originally posted by BansheCH
ok lets say its done your way and something goes wrong that day. Tell me what the diffrence is?
Edit: Tell me what the diffrence is any other day
Main difference -
It happens when there isn't the most customers on.
Bit like -
Would I do a network or server upgrade with everybody at work, even though I'm there to fix any problems?
Or wait until it was quiet, or late afternoon when most have left.
Whole idea is that any problems affects as few people as possible, not as many as possible.
By the time the 'main' group comes into work eveything is running smoothly.
-
I'm still kinda partial to something like this...
The ENY is no longer running - .fly what ever plane you wish...
Join what ever side you wish.....even if the numbers are skeewed some...
Side A starts getting over populated:
Message:
"Our country's fuel and ordnance supply is under strict rationing now..all planes can only take 75% fuel, and only 500lb bombs or less."
Side A keeps growing:
Message:
"Our country's fuel and ordnance supply is reaching a critical level. All planes can only take 50% fuel and 100lb bombs."
Side A is over the top:
Message:
"Our country's fuel and ordinance supply is exhausted. Planes may only take 25% fuel and are unable to take ordinance at this time"
That'd take you back to the "porking fuel and ord" down to 25% whines....
Were those better than these whines? :)
-
OK..LW Blue...Nits 122...Rooks....88...Nits ENY..1.1? Bish in middle somewhere
That doesnt even stop LA7:eek:
-
Originally posted by hitech
Airscrew Your a knight. To win you would have to have 90% of knight bases, 30% of bishop bases, 30% of rook bases.
HiTech
Originally posted by hitech
I have completed the new capture war win system.
Now the choices I face.
Assumtion.
I'm fairly sure it will help with the current country balances between arena.
If it helps, the current balancing system should hardly ever take effect. I.E. no waiting.
I could be wrong, but this reset system would seem to guarantee a complete end to resets.
Any rational player that sees one country is close to half the map will fight against that country. Because of the balancing system, even if the large country has numerical superiority, the size of that superiority will be insufficient to fend off two countries.
Thus the other two sides will quickly regain ground as either there will be close to a 2-1 superiority on both fronts, or deadlock on one front while the other country rolls against only token opposition.
In other words, does this reset system make the balancing system unnecessary (as the large side is virtually guaranteed to be ganged)?
No, no, wait, I said "rational player". That may be the flaw in my logic . . . :D
Still, seems the systems in conjunction will make resets impossible. That isn't necessarily a bad thing so long as there is an ebb and flow across the territories rather than a stagnant one. "Movement" and/or "momentum" are what helps keep it interesting for the "landgrabbers". And for a minority of those, taking resets away is going to bum them out.
-
Originally posted by E25280
I could be wrong, but this reset system would seem to guarantee a complete end to resets.
No, no, wait, I said "rational player". That may be the flaw in my logic . . . :D
I recall several times in the past were scenario was something like
Rooks 27 bases, Knights 31 bases, and Bish 5 bases. A bunch of Rooks are trying to capture Bish bases along with Knights, in fact there would be clashes between Rooks and Knights at the same Bish base. The rooks were so intent on capturing a base they didnt realize they were helping the Knights win the reset, because while Rooks were fighting Knights over a Bish base, Knights were capturing other Bish and even Rook bases.
-
Originally posted by ZZ3
I dont like it.
I have'nt liked the recent changes for various reasons. Now we are going to have to sit in the tower and wait, or switch countries, for the sake of balancing.
Oh horror! You might actually have to switch countries once in a while! Never mind that some people (me) switch every time they notice an imbalance.
-
Originally posted by E25280
In other words, does this reset system make the balancing system unnecessary (as the large side is virtually guaranteed to be ganged)?
My view was that it could................... provided as you infer, that players get feed back regarding the "status" of the war such that they are sufficiently informed to respond and "gang" a massively dominant side.
Its the self balancing 3 sided war in its purest form.
-
You want to populate all the other servers on a regular basis? I'll tell ya how to do it;
Right now your front page on the website only lists 5 winners per campaign, fighter, attack, vehicle & bomber with an over all score winner.
Break that down into difinitive winners of each arena(i.e. 5 winners for each of the 4 arenas[EW,MW & 2 LW's] and throw in an overall winner based on stats from all 4 arenas & vola, you have created the incentive for folks to remain loyal to all areas. So that you'd be listing a total of 21 winners at the end of each campaign(not counting runner ups) Everyone from score hoes- furballers could have a shot at something somewhere & it would also confound the shade account abusers from ganging the final results
You know there is one other aspect concerning the "hording" that everyone seems so intent to claiming is to blame but fails to point out & that is the time zone element. It's not a matter of rooks have more ppl overall or kights have too few people, alot of times its based on folks who are always on at certain times (in or out of squad) based on time zones & population distribution across the world. When brits are logging off for the evening, Aussies are logging on in their morning. Americans are also situated the same east coast verse west coast, some variables are not negotiable.
I'll tell you honestly why i left under my original CPID of, because changes were instituted in mid-campaign while i was making a run for that 1st place bomber spot, talk about changing the rules of the game on a guy & making my task almost insumountable...well you almost did, i finished 2nd even considering the changes.....I hung in there like a trooper for my squads sake even tho i didn't like it, but when it was all over & said & done i said that's it. I'd love nothing more than to return as a full fledged paying member & rejoin my original squadron(which by the way moved here from AW & has been around 10+ years) and play to win & make front page news on the HT website, help train new members & help recruit longterm players who would by the way also be long term subscribers of your game...........
Trust me when i say that alot of old AW folks live here & alot of WB fans too and to put it bluntly, we've all been down that road of disaster before and i would have to say that most of those folks posting here are posting more of the "please don't make the same sort of mistake" sorta of stuff verse "how dare you eat off of my plate"
If you look at it like this, "we do not want you to fail bacause we have no one else to turn to in recourse" i think you might better understand the gunshyness alot of folks are feeling.
You have a very loyal following, not to many games can claim that throphy, and people are willing to experiment & "enhance" to a certain extent "within" reason. Maybe babysteps are in order verse giant leaps forward......i don't know. I do know it's best to "belong" to a gaming community verse just playing the game.
You are the developer and have a different persepctive on things outside of "our" realm as the gamer, but to us gamers, the game is our "everything", like a drug addict, we need our fix, diluted we don't get "it" and look for alternatives.
I used to be an AW, from version 1 all the way thru MV and left 1 month before EA shut it down, WB's never made the grade with me so i gave up flying online for 5+ years, by chance i met up with old squadmates from the AW days & came to your company, loved it from the start, was like "advanced" Air Warrior, 4-5x's the plane sets. GV enhanced, more complex strategy, naval ops.....etc....etc..great stuff...kudo's
The perk point system was a nice touch as well as the ENY thingy(ya learn to live with it and accept) Now i'm not that big of a number cruncher so someone else can back me up as i have read that there DOES need to be some tweaking in these areas....fine we can deal with it.
The main bone of contention i am submitting to you as the developer from the gaming aspect is that forced player limitations are not acceptable. Players have neither the time nor patience to wait to get their "fix" and you alienate your customers by doing so. If i have even 10 mins to fly 1-mission & hope to get a kill, i don't want to wait even 1-minute in any sort of que for a spot to play, i won't pay to wait. I won't wait in line at the grocery store to be checked out just to get my groceries bagged for me, i'll go to the self-check line & do it myself.
Now i will admitt that i was against the original concept of splitting the MA, and it did hurt squad ops as at that time there was no way of knowing where everyone was at so it made command & control an issue. This was resolved by adding the dot command to our menu but was then difused by putting cap limits into place which limits squad ops as a whole in many different ways(yes there are ways around these but there are also obstructions) nothing is perfect, just limiting the downward aspect is.
So here's a couple of possibilities for you to ponder, don't stop at 4 arenas, go to 8, group the early & mid war planes together as one and keep the latewar set. Make 4 map sets similar to AW in that you have big europe/little europe & big pacific & little pacific with early/late variations.
Big maps & little maps/ lots of water & lotsa land/ early plane sets & late war sets, setup a scoreing system for 8 winners in each category + 1 overall winner from PAC & Euro with another overall winner for the combined 8 arenas(long term goal) add in a seperate "dueling/fighter town arena" for the 'quick fix" genre and score that seperatly from the main arena's.
Put in place your perk ord system, upgraded ENY, capture system and any other changes you'd like, but for gods sake remove the arena cap limits & let us fly. In fact put into place a more "strategic" aspect, not just for us bomber types, but for the sake of clarity & realism. You have squads here based solely as ground pounders like the LTARS, they are great at what they do, it's not for everyone, but it works for them, so more power to them. Some guys are so good in fighters it ain't funny, they could fly ME-262's for the rest of their lives with the perks they have accumulated, so be it if that makes them go, some guys can hit you with an ack gun 1st shot at 3k and most can't hit a barn at 200 yrds, so be it, that's the way people are, some are better at certain things than others & to group us all into 1-lump sum to create parity isn't going to work. I've flown an ME-262 twice in a year since i started playing, 1st one i augered on takeoff(lesson learned) 2nd one i augered in a dive going to fast(2nd lesson learned), doesn't mean anyone owes me a 3rd chance, just means i need to stick to what i do best which is bombing, different strokes for different folks and i can deal with it.....i don't need parity. I accept my own limitations & play within those bounds, i don't need artificial restraints, maybe some do, but doesn't the ENY & perk system cover that already?[minus tweaks proposed by others?]
BB's can be a great source of "new" ideas as well as great consternation. I'll admitt i've been more of the later than the former, but suffice it to say that frustration can be a detrimental thing. Maybe you are addicted to the BB's like alot of others here(partial addict) You have done a wonderful job of being an onhands developer by staying glued here to these pages and taking into consideration alot of ideas presented and taking alot of heat from folks[raises hand], but let me add this, their are also alot of other great ideas lurking in the wings from long term squad members as well as C.O./X.O. types which due the convolution of flame or be flamed mentality here on the BB goes unspoken.
When i see a C.O. of a squadron make his 200th post after being on here for 2 years you know it holds water as thats only about 1 post a week verse someone who has 5,000+ post in the same ammount of time which leads me to believe he doesn't even play the darned game as he's posting 3 times a day and has a view on everyone elses view.
I know you don't need to lurk here & explaine yourself, kudos again for being a spot on developer & defending your positions, but may i suggest that you give full due to the long term squadrons here on Aces High who have helped foster your vision and have patronized your company for X ammount of years and possible ask for input from them.....maybe in a private way so as not to inflame the BB?
Might i also suggest that you institute a "voting" tabulation for newcomers at the end of their 2-week trial period as either why they did or did not sign up to be members & get positive feedback. I know you have one on the front end as to how you "heard" about AH and started out........
I know that many squads here relocated from AW and some from WB's & some were started from the getgo in AH1, they do deserve your respect for their loyalty & player retention that goes on everyday we play here. Outside of my views & others like me, i can respect where they have been in the past & where & what they would like to see instituted in the future.
I know that any directional path chosen is yours and your alone to make, but with say 10 different alternative directions to choose from, i would think that these long term members could help cut that down to say 3 outta 10 all of which would be acceptable & make the majority of folks happy in the long run, keeping retention high, bringing old members back & fostering a working relationship with newer membership that would garner respect for your company as "player friendly" upfront.
To sum it up, if you fail, we all fail as players & no one wants that to happen, we love the game & want you win on your end, just our victory conditions differ.
-
[hijack]
Originally posted by smash
Ok, makes sense. I've logged myself when things got royally bad.
I haven't switched sides in years, but when I did it before it was during the time when either the rooks or knits (cant remember) were chronically getting pounded. Like as in every day. I switched over just to see what was going on. One thing about it, you got a lot of 6 calls :D
I switched from bish to rook about six months ago because I got really frustrated at the teamwork I was seeing at the time (from the bish). It seemed to me that noone really cared to fight together to get anything accomplished.
But the biggest thing to slap me in the face when I started as a rook was the communication. It was a torrent of information, with "check 6" calls, con updates, enemy cv postings and just general banter between "room" players. These weren't something I was accustomed unless it was from my old squad. Now, everyone was talking, and it felt like something was happening.
[/hijack]
-
Originally posted by Dantoo
Why do you persist in this?
People have voted with their feet. Players will always do only that which they enjoy doing, no matter what obstacles you throw in their way. What each individual seeks from the game will not change. The game changes will not change the goals of the individual and players will always look to find the shortest path to achieve their personal goals.
Your changes have not enhanced enjoyment across the board by any stretch. You are trying to force people to do things that they will not. This alienates and frustrates your customers. It is more profitable to retain a customer than to spend the money to gain a new one.
Leave it be. Stop getting these stupid ideas for "necessary changes" from the BBS. Spend time in the arenas if you want to see what people like and dislike.
If you had simply spent the time developing more and better maps and new interesting planes/gvs that you have on these ridiculous innovations you would be racing ahead.
I couldn't agree more Dantoo.
Face it fellas, you are all like fruit on the supermarket shelf. You have a "shelf life" and like it or not, your "shelf life is coming to an end.
This game isn't being tailored to YOUR needs, its being done for the needs of the new batch of fruit that will be coming to sit on the shelf.
I was going to try make a comeback and see if I could enoy the game again, don't think I will bother just yet while all these changes are going on. :confused:
-
Originally posted by ZagaZig
So here's a couple of possibilities for you to ponder, don't stop at 4 arenas, go to 8, group the early & mid war planes together as one and keep the latewar set. Make 4 map sets similar to AW in that you have big europe/little europe & big pacific & little pacific with early/late variations.
I personally see some merit to this idea. Historically, the AAF in Europe had their mission, with the Allied forces and Commanders focused on Fortress Europe, and the PAC had a totally different set of conditions with the Japanese Imperial Navy holding multiple fronts on all those individual islands and also their carriers that could potentially pop up anywhere. Also, there was the different tactics necessary to overcome the imbalance of forces in each campaign.
In fact put into place a more "strategic" aspect, not just for us bomber types, but for the sake of clarity & realism.[/QUOTE]
This also has merit, as I'm sure you have already addressed with the Axis vs Allies arena. However, there are some players that really don't see the game in a purely "historical recreation" mindset. To hold to that idea of total historical recreation, you would have never seen a P-51 furballin with a P-38 and a Spit. Some feel that aspect would be too limiting in the game environment and thats a valid point.
I know you don't need to lurk here & explaine yourself, kudos again for being a spot on developer & defending your positions, but may i suggest that you give full due to the long term squadrons here on Aces High who have helped foster your vision and have patronized your company for X ammount of years and possible ask for input from them.....maybe in a private way so as not to inflame the BB?[/QUOTE]
Also, a valid point. Perhaps entire squadrons would be open to moving to a LWA that was purely PAC based, for example, with the associated conditions that would be inherent there acceptable.(i.e. CV tactics, F6F, F4U, Zekes, Kates, ect.)
I know that many squads here relocated from AW and some from WB's & some were started from the getgo in AH1, they do deserve your respect for their loyalty & player retention that goes on everyday we play here. Outside of my views & others like me, i can respect where they have been in the past & where & what they would like to see instituted in the future.
I know that any directional path chosen is yours and your alone to make, but with say 10 different alternative directions to choose from, i would think that these long term members could help cut that down to say 3 outta 10 all of which would be acceptable & make the majority of folks happy in the long run, keeping retention high, bringing old members back & fostering a working relationship with newer membership that would garner respect for your company as "player friendly" upfront.
To sum it up, if you fail, we all fail as players & no one wants that to happen, we love the game & want you win on your end, just our victory conditions differ. [/QUOTE]
ZagaZig's points are all valid IMHO. I only highlited the ones I have been pondering myself. Now I'll sit back in my "flame retardent" underware and watch the Bar-B-Que :rofl
-
Originally posted by Ball
no, you have to be quiet with your criticism until you have given it a chance, or at least read the changes properly.
What sense does that make? You can't have an opinion. If this is the case there should be no positive feedback either. Just post the changes and lock the forum.
Second this is a forum. All PAYING members should have the right to post their opinion.
-
Originally posted by Bruv119
interesting point zz3.
I'm sure the Brit/american pilots in 1944 said "oh chit" we better swap sides this is just darned unfair for poor old jerry.
I like seeing 80 bish 50 knits 50 rooks it means some Bish are gonna get killed :)
striving for an AH utopia where alls fair in love and war is impossible???
You are thinking of the Italians in 1943. :rofl
-
Originally posted by TheBug
There's another saying.
What's the best way to piss your customer off??...............
Give him exactly what he wants. :)
Got to have a little faith they know what they are doing and in the end the results will be beneficial for all parties involved. Voicing concerns, offering opinions as adults and using the proper channels to express them are all good things. No one is saying we all have to agree. But from some of the stuff I've seen people pull, never rule out the fact that sometimes "firing" a customer is a good thing.
If for one have a belief that HTC is pointing this game down a new and better path and am willing to ride out and speed bumps as they work towards the destination.
I am not convinced HT gave the customer exactly what he wanted. I think they gave the few whiners what they wanted. The squeky wheel get the grease saying. There are customers HT who have been here for years. They seem to like the game because they keep paying.
As far as the balancing rules, the first problem is there are 3 sides. What war is this? If there are 3 balanced sides and each side is fighting the other 2, how do you win the war? Wars are won by gaining momentum (moral, resources) and crushing the enemy.
If you want balance and realism, participate in the AH events they are great.
-
Originally posted by darxe
You are thinking of the Italians in 1943. :rofl
Close, but no. They switched to the side WITH numbers not without.
Originally posted by darxe
They gave the few whiners what they wanted. The squeky wheel get the grease saying.
Based on that comment I can only beleive that you do not know much about how HTC makes decisions.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
OK..LW Blue...Nits 122...Rooks....88...Nits ENY..1.1? Bish in middle somewhere
That doesnt even stop LA7:eek:
so what?
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
You might as well set it up in all the arenas, HT.
Just like AH1.99betasomethingorother, just like the capture setup, people will run from it. They will complain, and they will be very upset, even if they don't try it. If they have to try it, they will still complain, and they will still be very upset, but if it works, most will calm down, and order will be restored.
There is merit in this view.
- oldman
-
Deleted
-
Fixed for AH2:
The Power Craver
Wants only one thing -- more power with less effort. Any downgrade in power is infuriating. Any upgrade is insufficient.
Sample Quote: "I can't believe they perked the 262 and the F4U-1C! How am I supposed to land 12 kills now?"
Punishment: Forced to admit that no matter how powerful in the game, still has a mullet and works as a cashier at Kroger in real life. ;)
The Sim Realist
Doesn't understand what a "game" is. Constantly makes arguments based on what would be "realistic," even if the game is set in a virtual world run by wizards and pixies.
Sample Quote: "You can't tell me the roll rate at 235 mph IAS at 7,350 feet on the Spit XVI is faster than the VIII. It says exactly the opposite on 3 different Internet sites I looked at today!"
Punishment: Sent back to kindergarten for remedial make-believe classes.
The Majority Stockholder
Seems to believe that $15 a month buys you a seat on the board of directors. Doesn't realize that a hundred thousand other people are ponying up the same amount.
Sample Quote: "I've e-mailed the developers several times telling them that the new arena system is utter crap. They haven't changed it, but they're still taking my money!"
Punishment: Forced to work customer service for an online game company.
The Emancipator
Sees the game as a titanic struggle between the evil expressive developers and the poor, downtrodden gamers. The evidence? Every rule and limitation in the game.
Sample Quote: "I don't see why I have to fly early war planes in the early war arena! If I want to fly a 262 in EWA, that's my right! Quit telling me how to play!"
Punishment: Sent to Sudan to experience first-hand what oppression actually feels like.
The Eternal Quitter
Just comes on the forum to let everyone know he's quitting for good and to spend a dozen paragraphs explaining why. Then does it again three DAYS later.
Sample Quote: "For real, this time."
Punishment: Forced to actually quit.
One-Issue Poster
Only has one complaint, but posts about it 15 times a day. This is because nobody else cares.
Sample Quote: "THE SPEEDO ON THE F4U-1 IS TOTALLY 3 INCHES TO THE LEFT FROM WHERE IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE!! THAT IS SO NOT HISTORICALLY ACCURATE!!"
Punishment: Speedometer on the F4U-1 moved an additional 3 inches in the wrong direction.
The Deathmonger
Main complaint about the game is that you can't kill everything. Secondary complaint is that the things you can kill don't suffer enough.
Sample Quote: "Why can't I see body parts fly out of the hangars when I bomb them? We should be able to kill gunners on bombers and get a separate kill for that too! Kills for troops also. I want to see blood spraying out of the cockpit when I hit a pilot!"
Punishment: To be determined, pending DNA analysis of freezer contents.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Main difference -
It happens when there isn't the most customers on.
Bit like -
Would I do a network or server upgrade with everybody at work, even though I'm there to fix any problems?
Or wait until it was quiet, or late afternoon when most have left.
Whole idea is that any problems affects as few people as possible, not as many as possible.
By the time the 'main' group comes into work eveything is running smoothly.
Ok Kev, I You strike a valid point with not many customers on during that time. I will give you that. My whole point is and this is comeing from sombody that has worked on designing multi player online games. Sometimes it is better to release a fix,patch,update whatever during peak time to get the best results. Here is another point. If Hitech does relese it hes not just going to walk away from it. This is something I know from experience. If I am changeing something in my game that I know is gonna make a huge impact. Then chances are the coffee is on and its going to be a long day and night. I am right there if something goes wrong. Thats because I own it and I can come to work whenever I want. I don't have to be at the office to fix it. I don't even have to get out of bed. I Just turn on my laptop and fix whatever is wrong.
See I don't know what your work is but this ita not like letting a product go out the door. Then find out there's something wrong. Then you are not there to service it. Take the product back and replace it whatever I don't know what you do. This is a online product. Aslong as there is power and battery backups also willing all types of phones are working and you are still alive. Then its pretty easy to get to. Infact there isnt a single place I can goto that my laptop won't work. Catch my drift?
-
^^^^^^Scottydawg^^^^^^
:rofl :lol :rofl :lol :rofl :lol
-
:aok Scotty :lol
-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by hubsonfire
You might as well set it up in all the arenas, HT.
Just like AH1.99betasomethingorother, just like the capture setup, people will run from it. They will complain, and they will be very upset, even if they don't try it. If they have to try it, they will still complain, and they will still be very upset, but if it works, most will calm down, and order will be restored.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would say set it up in either EWA or MWA and 1 of the LWA with a higher cap. If you set it up in all arenas then some may not play at all or give it a chance. If they try it and dont like it then there is an alternate arena to play in.
Setting it up in the EWA or MWA might give you some idea how the new capture system would work during EU hours
-
All arenas for the weekend.
Rationale:
(1) all players would experience the change so sentiment could be accuratelty gauged across all arenas.
(2) weekend introduction would insure the largest number of players who actually experienmce the change firsthand.
Originally posted by hitech
JB88: Have a real world question for you. I have completed the new capture war win system.
Now the choices I face.
Assumtion.
I'm fairly sure it will help with the current country balances between arena.
If it helps, the current balancing system should hardly ever take effect. I.E. no waiting.
So now the choices.
1. Can put it into the mid war.
2. Can put it into 1 late war arena.
3. Can put it into all arenas.
I can release it today or some other day. Under your "predictablity" I should wait until Monday to implement it.
If it works as expected, it would be much better to have it up for the weekend.
So now lets not debate the actual system, but just the launch.
What would your choices be.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
[BI would say set it up in either EWA or MWA and 1 of the LWA with a higher cap. If you set it up in all arenas then some may not play at all or give it a chance. If they try it and dont like it then there is an alternate arena to play in.
Setting it up in the EWA or MWA might give you some idea how the new capture system would work during EU hours [/B]
Delta's sentiments pretty much match my own. If you give some folks the option, they'll avoid it completely. I think it's better that A) they get a chance to try it and offer some feedback based on experience, and not the kneejerk panic response that's associated with any change, and B) it's not like change has ever really been optional around here. There will be more changes, might as well jump in with both feet.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Deleted
dang I thought it was funny, albeit nothing to do with subject at hand
-
I agree with that, I dont have a problem with him setting it up in all 4 arenas, I'm guessing he may not do that though, and if he's not going to do all 4 then at least do the EW or MW. And probably should start today before 3pm
-
Going with all arenas, releasing today, and switching back to the old ENY system. I.E. turing off the wait time for the new war win system
HiTech
-
Sorry Hub -
If people WANT to spend $14.95 to beta test a new capture system they'll do it voluntarily.
No beta test should be forced on people.
It should be setup in one of LW arenas, with standard[b/] caps.
Why?
That way you get feedback on two areas -
1) Does it work
2) Do poeple want it. Easily seen by monitoring the numbers.
[edit] Well guess the decision is made. Another loss to choices, and a gain for YOU WILL HAVE IT.
-
i'm cenile or....
LWBlue was always full during that trial,
even with cap system
:huh
doesnt that say something about the majority's prefrences, a.k.a. them bulk of customer base?
-
Originally posted by hitech
Going with all arenas, releasing today, and switching back to the old ENY system. I.E. turing off the wait time for the new war win system
HiTech
Good deal, new ENY all but non-existent, although the basic problem is most people go for easiest, weakest target--which is the equivalent of Allies and Germany ignoring each other and pounding the crap outta Italy to the exclusion of all else, I don't know how and coding can address that
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
[edit] Well guess the decision is made. Another loss to choices, and a gain for YOU WILL HAVE IT.
Still beats being assigned a side and being told what arena I have to fly in cus i cant switch sides . :rolleyes:
Bronk
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Good deal, new ENY all but non-existent, although the basic problem is most people go for easiest, weakest target--which is the equivalent of Allies and Germany ignoring each other and pounding the crap outta Italy to the exclusion of all else, I don't know how and coding can address that
Cuz if the war winners want to rest the map... They HAVE to fight the second high numbered side .
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Cuz if the war winners want to rest the map... They HAVE to fight the second high numbered side .
Bronk
wont this lead to a rotating 2 v1 gangbang never ending,
think about it,
lets say at day1
rook 35 fields
bish 23
knight16
bish+ nit will take on rook,
Day 2
rook 20
bish35
night19
rook+night on bish
DAY 3
rook 25
bish 16
night 38
rook bish on 38
it in many circumstances will lead to a hamster will of stagnantcy (sp.)
not all, but some.
-
I bet they will still reset the map after a couple of weeks if it hasn't been won by one side or the other or the other.
-
Thats why its a TEST sheesh.
Is the glass always half empty with you?
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Laurie
wont this lead to a rotating 2 v1 gangbang never ending,
think about it,
lets say at day1
rook 35 fields
bish 23
knight16
bish+ nit will take on rook,
Day 2
rook 20
bish35
night19
rook+night on bish
DAY 3
rook 25
bish 16
night 38
rook bish on 38
it in many circumstances will lead to a hamster will of stagnantcy (sp.)
not all, but some.
I think it's a decent idea, and most countries havent that much organization anyhow...many folks ldo no more than look for the biggest blob of green and head there---they might still do that, but that wont get them the precious reset
-
Originally posted by Laurie
wont this lead to a rotating 2 v1 gangbang never ending,
think about it,
lets say at day1
rook 35 fields
bish 23
knight16
bish+ nit will take on rook,
Day 2
rook 20
bish35
night19
rook+night on bish
DAY 3
rook 25
bish 16
night 38
rook bish on 38
it in many circumstances will lead to a hamster will of stagnantcy (sp.)
not all, but some.
Prove that it's not about "Win T3H War" but being little horde monkies.
Proves that HT would have to keep side balance in place .
Bronk
-
Looking forward to trying it out tonight.
Thanks for the heads-up Dale. :)
Originally posted by hitech
Going with all arenas, releasing today, and switching back to the old ENY system. I.E. turing off the wait time for the new war win system
HiTech
-
Yeah, I am another one who just hasn't switched countries in a long time. I fly the country I do because I like the group of people that are in that country, and I'm used to flying with them.
I still remember in the old AH days, that sunday was Rook squad night, and if you weren't a rook, prepare to get rolled.
That being said, I like being on the lowside, and trying to defend against the horde.
That being said, I too wish I had some ideas to allow balance to be kept, without forcing those who like to stick to one country to switch.
good luck HT and company, I don't envy your position.
-
Originally posted by Coach
If you feel the money you are spending on this product is not worth the value.... spend your money elsewhere on another entertainment product.
I couldn't agree more.
The first time I log in and I can't choose what country I fly for or be able to fly with my squad, then I intend to do just that.
-
Why not simply send the two weekers to the lowest side when they log in?
Fixes the Balance Problem, doesn't piss off your paying customers, offers some incentive to actually subscribe, and it doesn't make us beta test all the many methods of forcing balance.
-
New players are already put into the country with lowest numbers. All this does for the imbalance is make sure all of the seal pups are grouped together on the outnumbered side.
-
Originally posted by twitchy
Why not simply send the two weekers to the lowest side when they log in?
Fixes the Balance Problem, doesn't piss off your paying customers, offers some incentive to actually subscribe, and it doesn't make us beta test all the many methods of forcing balance.
More benefit to the overwhelmed countries to send the larger squads over along with the High kills per death and Kills per time crowd.
-
OKAY WAIT A MINUTE hItECH.......
Been away from forum for a while so not sure if anyone asked...
To win you must own 90% of your own fields and 33% of each other countrys fields.
WTF happens when 2 countrys donot fight eachother and take all of 1 countrys fields?
Just currious Because I'm watching it happen RIGHT NOW
They own more than 33% of our fields and none of eachothers......so what will happen? We just get wiped out?
-
Originally posted by Pieper
OKAY WAIT A MINUTE hItECH.......
Been away from forum for a while so not sure if anyone asked...
To win you must own 90% of your own fields and 33% of each other countrys fields.
That´s exactly the reason why HT has made some fields in each country uncapturable: To prevent one copuntry being wiped out from the map without a reset.
-
sigh.
-
if it's not 90%-33%-33% or better there will be no reset.
i think:confused:
-
I like the idea of keeping each side balanced. It's a BIG + when the ENY is high and you can't fly the plane you want.
What happens if it is a squad night and not all of your squad can be together?
-
Originally posted by RATTFINK
I like the idea of keeping each side balanced. It's a BIG + when the ENY is high and you can't fly the plane you want.
On the other hand, I really like it when my side is outnumbered by a considerable margin. Cheap perk planes, lots of targets and a nice perk point modifier! :)
-
HT I agree informing about changes is just pointless if it is in the form "Hey guys this is what we are gonna do". It will as you say just prolong the whining.
Better thing to do is to manipulate the community into thinking they decided what gets done. Make them think they came up with the ideas that get implemented. They feel informed, listened to and part of the games progress. It is a nice illusion that strenghtens the ties between the supplier and the customer.
Tex
-
^ :lol I think we have a winning idea.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
^ :lol I think we have a winning idea.
Yeah he's good at digging up stuff like that.
-
IMO I dont like the large icons for capturable bases, its too hard on the eyes. I would rather see the small icons back for all bases and all bases capturable. Only being able to capture one base in a select number isnt that fun. Some of the fun our squad had was to sneak bases, but with these changes into effect it makes it difficult to enjoy the game
-
Originally posted by Meatwad
IMO I dont like the large icons for capturable bases, its too hard on the eyes. I would rather see the small icons back for all bases and all bases capturable. Only being able to capture one base in a select number isnt that fun. Some of the fun our squad had was to sneak bases, but with these changes into effect it makes it difficult to enjoy the game
Hmm did you actually play with the new settings? Almost all bases are capturable now anytime. I have seen lots of sneak attacks. If the current 3 uncapturable bases were capturable, one country could get wiped out days before a reset.
edited some grammar
-
Originally posted by Lusche
Hmm did you actually play with the new settings?
I was going to say that, I think it is obvious from a number of the protests that are complaining about things that are no longer there or never were.
But then as I thought about it more I was struck by the idea that the game is more enjoyable when you attack things that are not defended by human opponents. Or to quote more accurately...not enjoyable without being able to capture undefended bases.
I am having serious trouble understanding how that fits into MMOL gaming at all, at least from the standpoint of not being able to have fun if the enemy fights back. Not that it's not fun from time to time to do such, that is NOT what I am saying, but as a basis for finding the game fun or not...
:huh
-
Good grief. "Uncapturable" bases. Even the word sounds silly.
No place for sneak attacks or flanking manuevers. As if this were a WAR game :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Lusche
Hmm did you actually play with the new settings? Almost all bases are capturable now anytime. I have seen lots of sneak attacks. If the current 3 uncapturable bases were capturable, one country could get wiped out days before a reset.
edited some grammar
I was in there this afternoon, it still is a step backward. Should of just left it as 4 arenas before all of the new capturing/changing how the war is won nonsense started
-
Since this is page 16, and my eyes fogged over at about page 7 of this thread, I doubt that anyone will read this BUT:
I really enjoy this game and have since AW shut down. I will therefore stay with it and see what the eventual outcome is.
I must say though, that a number of my squadies (friends) have left, and I really miss them.
I really don't care if I'm in a horde, or being horded, as long as my wingers are with me, in fact there is more satisfaction in fighting off a horde than the other way. I kind of like being one of "the few", as long as I have "the few" with me.
I started AW as a lone wolf but didn't really get into the game until I was asked to join the Nightmares, and I doubt if I could ever go back to the lonewolf style of play
Matelot
-
Originally posted by viper215
(http://www.jawbonepodcast.com/blogpics/kate.jpg)
She gives me a red rocket :D
-
good for you hijack. can we get back on topic now?
:huh
-
Originally posted by JB88
good for you hijack. can we get back on topic now?
:huh
yes please, we haven't covered this subject enough.
besides that, I find that once I take off, the game is the same as it has always been. I fly around get shot at and shoot at people then I bomb stuff. I talk to people on the radio and have an overall good time usually. I am not in charge of what changes are made so I'll just roll with it and if I can't stand what's going at some point(which hasn't happened yet) I'll quit. Oh and RATT, stop posting pictures of my girlfriends cute friend.
-
oh. you are new here.
-
Originally posted by JB88
oh. you are new here.
sarcasm taken as intended...yeah actually about 6 months, I flew the old MA for about two of those and I would be lying if I said I like it better now, but like I said....I'm not in charge so I'll deal with it. I like the fact that people care enough to voice there opinions about the changes, it's our right and is important to have a voice in it all(alot of games don't have that). I pay my subscription because I have fun....changes or not, once I'm in the air it's the same to me.
-
I think what we need is another smiley that jumps up and down, changes colour from pink to orange to blue and finally to red, rolls around...stomps it feet and hands and then stops, starts all over. We will call it whiney smiley :D
-
on it.
:cool:
-
seems to be tweaked nice.. us knights had LWO within 1 base of reset back about 4-5pst.. not so much now.
I dunno, I have no real opinion, I'm noob, and want to get my first base capture with a C47..
-
I like the new reset criteria..................I have played on both sides (with the greater numbered side and with the lesser numbered side) and was able to find fights and take part in constrructive defensive and offensive actions.
Pity the clipboard advice is confused but I am sure that will shortly be fixed. (infact it is also confusing as to whether ,or which type of, side balancing system is in use)
IMO with this system side inbalance is just not that important...............sure the side with fewer numbers is going to lose ground, but local game play is not so adversely effected. Conflict is balanced to stop two sides rolling up the third in a race to reset.
I think who ever thought of this deserves a prize.
I would go so far as to suggest that as side inbalance may be less critical now then forced (restricted access) balancing could be dispenced with.
However I still like the idea of "Mercenary Pawns" volunteering to be switched countires auotmatically (for reward). It sort of adds a dimension of fun and contributes to solving the problem.
-
Originally posted by E25280
I could be wrong, but this reset system would seem to guarantee a complete end to resets.
Any rational player that sees one country is close to half the map will fight against that country. Because of the balancing system, even if the large country has numerical superiority, the size of that superiority will be insufficient to fend off two countries.
Thus the other two sides will quickly regain ground as either there will be close to a 2-1 superiority on both fronts, or deadlock on one front while the other country rolls against only token opposition.
In other words, does this reset system make the balancing system unnecessary (as the large side is virtually guaranteed to be ganged)?
No, no, wait, I said "rational player". That may be the flaw in my logic . . . :D
Still, seems the systems in conjunction will make resets impossible. That isn't necessarily a bad thing so long as there is an ebb and flow across the territories rather than a stagnant one. "Movement" and/or "momentum" are what helps keep it interesting for the "landgrabbers". And for a minority of those, taking resets away is going to bum them out.
OK, guess I was wrong . . . we just got a reset, and the numbers in the arena were fairly even right before: 58 Bish, 52 Rook, 47 Knight.
Big to everyone involved at the time, regardless of country.:aok
-
So there are multiple arenas now? What are the player numbers like and how many different arenas are there now? :huh
-
Originally posted by E25280
OK, guess I was wrong . . . we just got a reset.
Cool, came within what, about two days? Reminds me of all the prophets of doom-and-despair who've claimed an end to the reset a hundred times before when a change to the system was introduced. You think by now they'd stop.
-
First reset I saw was Friday night. I was still trying to sort out the base percentages, and figure out which countries fields we needed to take, but we got the right one despite my best efforts.
-
Originally posted by herrhav0k
So there are multiple arenas now? What are the player numbers like and how many different arenas are there now? :huh
4 arenas, average number US late evenings, 500-600 total on a weeknight, upwards of 700 on weekends. The early and mid arenas seem to average around 50-80 each, with 200-300+ in the 2 late wars. AvA numbers tend to be a bit lower.
-
Is side-balancing in place right now, or just the new reset criteria?
-
I like the new capture system. Now can we try it on a big map with no other changes (no blue lines)?
I found it interesteing last night that in the arena I was in (wasn't really paying attention to which LW arena it was) Bish had numbers (approximately 100 to 80 to 80 at one point) and did all night but every time I checked the numbers in the air were almost even across the board.
-
Change away hitech........
I Think its great you take the time to read alot of this stuff and try to do what is best for the game (in your opinion)...
Though I or others may not like, nor agree, with the changes in the long run this is not my living, and does not feed myself or my family as it does you..
The fact that you even entertain these post at all shows a level of commitment to the player base that IMO you will never be able to fully satisfy...
In any event the game is the same to me in as much as I still crash in firey balls of fire as often and violently as before any of the changes and have a great time doing it....
-
Originally posted by Edbert
Cool, came within what, about two days? Reminds me of all the prophets of doom-and-despair who've claimed an end to the reset a hundred times before when a change to the system was introduced. You think by now they'd stop.
You’d think by now, someone of your intelligence would stop comparing apples to oranges.
"a change to the system" is rather general, dontcha think?
-
Originally posted by Tilt
I like the new reset criteria..................I have played on both sides (with the greater numbered side and with the lesser numbered side) and was able to find fights and take part in constrructive defensive and offensive actions.
Pity the clipboard advice is confused but I am sure that will shortly be fixed. (infact it is also confusing as to whether ,or which type of, side balancing system is in use)
IMO with this system side inbalance is just not that important...............sure the side with fewer numbers is going to lose ground, but local game play is not so adversely effected. Conflict is balanced to stop two sides rolling up the third in a race to reset.
I think who ever thought of this deserves a prize.
I would go so far as to suggest that as side inbalance may be less critical now then forced (restricted access) balancing could be dispenced with.
However I still like the idea of "Mercenary Pawns" volunteering to be switched countires auotmatically (for reward). It sort of adds a dimension of fun and contributes to solving the problem.
How very observitory of you sir. :aok
Oh...and once again...a very good observation from a very reasonable person.
-
Originally posted by Mugzeee
"a change to the system" is rather general, dontcha think?
Sure it is, there have been many over the years, some major, some minor, most disparate. The fact that the term is general but the reactions are not is the point though.
Almost any time there's a change SOMEONE (not always the same folks, not saying that) comes out and says it is the end of "xyz" and says they're quitting. Turns out later, sometimes a day sometimes a couple of months, that it was not the end of "xyz" and those who threatened to quit are still around (obviously not 100% of them).
Just the point I'm making...the professors of doom-and-gloom are wrong, and most of those who threaten to quit either don't; or they come back soon.
-
All this talk about competitors got me pondering the differences between Aces High and WWIIOL (where I came from after 5 years) and it struck me that they were both like women.
Aces High is like a 36-24-36 babe who is all curves in all the right places with all the hot moves on the dance floor and in the bedroom! Ton-O-Fun... until you try to have a conversation, then you realize although the package is gorgeous, she's not the brightest lightbulb in the box.
WWIIOL is a great conversationalist and very interesting to be around, but she has about as many curves as a desert highway and her idea of dancing is the polka. Sex to her is synonymous with the missionary position and you'd probably have more fun with your blowup doll.
But everyone is waiting for Combat Tour to arrive at the party. Supposedly, she's got the curves and moves of her Aces High sister, but she's no dumb blond. Want the wild ride plus the engaging conversation the morning after? She's your ticket. A WWII pilot's dream. If she lives up to her potential I see a lot of pilots being drawn in from WWIIOL, Warbirds, FighterAce and IL2. Personally I can't wait.
-
Originally posted by Trukk
But everyone is waiting for Combat Tour to arrive at the party. Supposedly, she's got the curves and moves of her Aces High sister, but she's no dumb blond. Want the wild ride plus the engaging conversation the morning after? She's your ticket. A WWII pilot's dream. If she lives up to her potential I see a lot of pilots being drawn in from WWIIOL, Warbirds, FighterAce and IL2. Personally I can't wait.
Not trying to be impolite but just how do you come to the assumption that CT is going to be anything better or worse as nobody has seen it and we really have no idea just how it's curves and moves will be or how smart it is? It's still a "in two weeks" product and the rumor mill has been working overtime for over a year about what it will do or will have or what you can or cannot do. No offense to HT, it's vaporware at this point and I for one am glad that he is taking his time on the project as we don't want to go through years of beta testing ourselves on a project as grand as he has proposed. Some of the best things in life are the best when they mature and I hope that this will be the case when CT does release.
All the Best...
Jay
awDoc1
-
Combat Tour features a very different style of game play from "Arena" play. Arena play is a very loose free-form style of game play that focuses on the mechanics of air combat. In CT, this is changed so that the gaming experience goes beyond the dogfight and puts you in the role of a WWII combatant trying to survive and perform the mission at hand. Working together as a team, you’ll find success in the mission and gain promotions, medals, and even improved abilities and aircraft.
CT will begin as a campaign that focuses on the long range bombing campaign of the U.S. 8th Air Force vs. the Luftwaffe. As CT development advances, more campaigns will be added covering a wide variety of theaters and time frames.
This is what I find so much more interesting that the arena style of gameplay. If CT can deliver this, she will be very sexy indeed.
-
Originally posted by hitech
Monday we will be implementing a new balancing system. It works with the existing ENY number. It will no longer limit what planes you can fly. But rather when it reaches a preset value, people entering the arena will not be able to fly in that arena for their current country.
HiTech
Not sure what this means. Having flown under the new rules now I don't see where the eny has changed. It still limits the airplanes you can fly.
I still see the message.... Planes with an ENY less than (#) are not allowed.
Not sure of the quote, but the old ENY is still with us.
-
Originally posted by badhorse
Not sure what this means. Having flown under the new rules now I don't see where the eny has changed. It still limits the airplanes you can fly.
I still see the message.... Planes with an ENY less than (#) are not allowed.
Not sure of the quote, but the old ENY is still with us.
It´s with us again. The change you referred to was implemented for a few days some time ago. When HT changed the reset criteria to the setting we currently have (capture a certain amount of bases of both enemy countries), the Wait Time limitation was dropped again.
-
I read of "lots of changes in AcesHigh" , thats nothing new . HTC crew has always
been on top of their game . Lot of players cry doom with changes ....
(get pissed off, quit, want to have BBS polling, raise hell , ect , but the game continues to evolve and interest grows . With out testing the changes online, in the game, their is no-way in hell to see if changes will work or not.....
Me worried about AcesHigh ? heck no, I'll start worrying when I don't see any changes or trials ..
Biggest problem I see right now is that Nate has moved on to a new job ...
I just hope HT can find someone to hire that has the dedacation that Nate had...
psssst, ( I hear that Matt Davis lives in Texas ) :t .....
Bob/CHECKERS