Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: zack1234 on April 22, 2014, 01:45:35 AM
-
Why is everyone complaining about the game?
-
Why is everyone complaining about the game?
If you're not improving/growing you're dying.
-
I'm not. With the exception that I'd still like to see the J2M someday soon.
Actually just found some new enjoyment by leaving the squad I was in for over a year.
Think I'll see what Rooks are up to one of these days soon, several peeps I really liked over there before I joined said squad and was not allowed to switch...
Great product HTC, thanks.
:salute
-
Dunno, let me try it out and see... :confused:
I'd like to complain that it takes too long to climb out and fly all over the place looking for a fight. A "spawn into a fight" button would be nice. :aok
Only the best players get to enjoy multiple fights per climb out, most others fly for five or ten minutes, get shot down, then have to start over again. :frown:
Why do i complain? Hmm... :headscratch:
:headscratch:
Because I care. :old:
:)
-
It amazes me how this has become a thing...
It makes me wonder if people are even capable of generating their own fun for themselves or others...
You have this big game that asks you for nothing more than a small subscription and then they give you everything and anything within reason to have a good time...
Magic words to all you idiots that have nothing but complaints, GO HAVE FUN
It's not hard, there's always something to do...
-
Can't have fun.. The fun is over on the other front and I have to wait 12 hours to see some action. :cry
-
Then find something to pass the time!
Operation Kill The Crab is fun :airplane:
-
Then find something to pass the time!
Operation Kill The Crab and his henchman is fun :airplane:
fixed :D
-
Dunno, let me try it out and see... :confused:
I'd like to complain that it takes too long to climb out and fly all over the place looking for a fight. A "spawn into a fight" button would be nice. :aok
Only the best players get to enjoy multiple fights per climb out, most others fly for five or ten minutes, get shot down, then have to start over again. :frown:
Why do i complain? Hmm... :headscratch:
(http://s29.postimg.org/wh0d9rrer/complaint.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/wh0d9rrer/)
-
See Rule #4
-
Why is everyone complaining about the game?
Looking at the scores and stats page I can see that my rank in some areas is beyond 1000. If I look at the names who seem to be the loudest complainers then these are often familiar, like "mr 12 hours" here for example. I could be wrong, but the majority seem to be silent and not complaining at all.
-
the side change whine is getting ooooooold.......
-
While I agree that the side change rule should be around 2-3 hours max, I also agree that there has been a substantial amount of complaining on the BBs. This game is ran a lot like the USA, because there are so many people who want one thing or a other, it makes it difficult to make major changes without disrupting another group of players view points. Change one thing and one group complains, change it again and another group complains. It's almost impossible to make a huge group of people who play the game differently all happy at once.
This game is not for everyone. And at a 15$ per month fee, that scares a lot of people away from the get go. But say there were 20,000 people who played this game. There would be a tremendous amount of complaints about hoarding and blah blah.
I think what people have a hard time grasping is that there are so many different ways and styles to to play this game that it tends to make others unhappy. For me it is when bombers kill FHrs at a furball and there is no attempt to take the base. However, this is a war simulator and bombing is part of the game. Taking bases is part of the game. Shutting down the enemy HQ is part of the game and strategy.
Personally I think the way this game is made is great. I've been playing for over 8-9 years and even though I think I'm pretty good, I always have a challenge when I jump into a furball. Sometimes you get ganged, sometimes you get 8 kills. Its always a challenge.
Personally, and I'm sorry if this offends some of you, but I don't think you are good enough to complain. I think most of you still need a couple of years before you can really grasp how to play right in this game and get kills every sortie. If you are complaining about HOing or running or F3 mode or the way people fly then you still have much to learn.Having said that, I still get mad when I put 60 bullets in a plane and they don't die.
When I first started they had H2H and it was free. That's what really attracted me to learn this game and meet some new players. I'd give anything for HTC to bring H2H back.
My biggest issue has been that 2 free weeks just isn't long enough for people to figure out this huge and complicated game. That is why only maybe 3 in 10 Will stick to the game after the trial is over.
I think there has been an over whelming amount of complaints. But when people cannot learn how to do something they complain. Instead of trying to be better they complain. You try one thing and another group complains.
Here's some advice. Ask players who are better than you to fly In their planes. Go to the DA and get your prettythang kicked 1v1. Ask good players to help you with ACM tricks. Or better yet, just wallow in the fact that you probably won't live every sortie and like I always do, go for as many kills as you can every single time. I had a 4 k\d last tour ranked 6th fighter and died 75% -80% of my sorties. Now I hate dying, but damn if I didn't have 4 or 5 kills to go down with.
-
Every game I play that has a message board are full of nothing but complaints and people squeaking and moaning. Most aren't even worth visiting any more.
-
It's that way here now. And it's less than a dozen voices. Bad apples and barrels.
-
It's that way here now. And it's less than a dozen voices. Bad apples and barrels.
We represent the half of the game's population that has already left.
-
It's that way here now. And it's less than a dozen voices. Bad apples and barrels.
you nailed it Hap , maybe some of those pie-holes could get stuffed with some bad apples , this sim is awesome IMO
-
There are people in the world who have the following misconceptions.
1. A company owes me an explanation whenever I ask for one.
2. If I have a suggestion, the company should implement it.
3. A company should let me be an annoying jerk if I want to be.
4. My $x means 1-3 are my rights.
5. If I quit, that will show them.
6. The 1st Amendment means that I have the right of freedom of speech in a private forum.
7. If a company doesn't give me reasons for something, it means that they haven't thoroughly evaluated it.
-
There are people in the world who have the following misconceptions.
1. A company owes me an explanation whenever I ask for one. If the issue is serious and a group of customers have the same issue yea they do.
2. If I have a suggestion, the company should implement it.If I have a suggestion the company should at least hear it.
3. A company should let me be an annoying jerk if I want to be.To an extent maybe.
4. My $x means 1-3 are my rights.
5. If I quit, that will show them.If 1-3 are not your "rights" than you have no other option than to vote with your wallet.
6. The 1st Amendment means that I have the right of freedom of speech in a private forum.I haven't heard that one lately.
7. If a company doesn't give me reasons for something, it means that they haven't thoroughly evaluated it.Maybe, how can we know any different if they don't at least try and inform their paying customers.
-
1. A company owes me an explanation whenever I ask for one. If the issue is serious and a group of customers have the same issue yea they do.
2. If I have a suggestion, the company should implement it.If I have a suggestion the company should at least hear it.
3. A company should let me be an annoying jerk if I want to be.To an extent maybe.
4. My $x means 1-3 are my rights.
5. If I quit, that will show them.If 1-3 are not your "rights" than you have no other option than to vote with your wallet.
6. The 1st Amendment means that I have the right of freedom of speech in a private forum.I haven't heard that one lately.
7. If a company doesn't give me reasons for something, it means that they haven't thoroughly evaluated it.Maybe, how can we know any different if they don't at least try and inform their paying customers.
1. No. A company can choose to do so or not, but they don't owe it to you or to a group of 15 out of out thousands of customers.
2. You are conflating "hearing it", "implementing it," and "upper management discussing it with me". They are all vastly different things. The first usually happens. The other two usually do not (unless the idea is a very good one that they agree with).
3. No. Annoying jerks are often a detriment to business.
5. Yes. That is in fact mostly how the world works and is (but only in aggregate) effective.
7. A company almost always has reasons for things. To assume otherwise is to be usually wrong.
What a lot of people here would benefit from is a reading of "How to Win Friends and Influence People," by Carnegie. It is a great book. A lot of people here employ techniques that are best suited to minimizing their ability to influence people and to get things done.
-
1. No. A company can choose to do so or not, but they don't owe it to you or to a group of 15 out of out thousands of customers.
2. You are conflating "hearing it", "implementing it," and "upper management discussing it with me". They are all vastly different things. The first usually happens. The other two usually do not (unless the idea is a very good one that they agree with).
3. No. Annoying jerks are often a detriment to business.
5. Yes. That is in fact mostly how the world works and is (but only in aggregate) effective.
7. A company almost always has reasons for things. To assume otherwise is to be usually wrong.
What a lot of people here would benefit from is a reading of "How to Win Friends and Influence People," by Carnegie. It is a great book. A lot of people here employ techniques that are best suited to minimizing their ability to influence people and to get things done.
2. No I am not. I meant what I said exactly how I said it.
3. Most people are not normally annoying jerks. You may want to find out why they are angry.
5. It is not always about having an effect on the business as a whole. If a company did a person wrong(perceived or not) why would they continue to knowingly support that company with their cash?
7. If they do why not share?
-
2. No I am not. I meant what I said exactly how I said it.
3. Most people are not normally annoying jerks. You may want to find out why they are angry.
5. It is not always about having an effect on the business as a whole. If a company did a person wrong(perceived or not) why would they continue to knowingly support that company with their cash?
7. If they do why not share?
2. OK, then you will usually be satisfied for that one at least. If you send a suggestion to a company via customer-support channels, someone in the company will see it usually.
3. There are some people here who usually are annoying jerks -- and they often have a set of picky reasons individual to them on why they are unhappy.
5. They don't have to. If they like what they get from the company more than they like their $x in cash, they will stay, and if not, they will leave.
7. Because it takes work to share, and then you have malicious people who will do their best to distort the response, pick it apart, and argue with it. Those are the main reasons companies don't respond (except for companies where there is liability, too -- that is another main one).
-
There are people in the world who have the following misconceptions.
1. A company owes me an explanation whenever I ask for one.
2. If I have a suggestion, the company should implement it.
3. A company should let me be an annoying jerk if I want to be.
4. My $x means 1-3 are my rights.
5. If I quit, that will show them.
6. The 1st Amendment means that I have the right of freedom of speech in a private forum.
7. If a company doesn't give me reasons for something, it means that they haven't thoroughly evaluated it.
Opinions are different than sarcasm. Sarcasm gets met with sarcasm.
-
2. OK, then you will usually be satisfied for that one at least. If you send a suggestion to a company via customer-support channels, someone in the company will see it usually.
3. There are some people here who usually are annoying jerks -- and they often have a set of picky reasons individual to them on why they are unhappy.
5. They don't have to. If they like what they get from the company more than they like their $x in cash, they will stay, and if not, they will leave.
7. Because it takes work to share, and then you have malicious people who will do their best to distort the response, pick it apart, and argue with it. Those are the main reasons companies don't respond (except for companies where there is liability, too -- that is another main one).
2. Normally, yes.
3. Of course individuals will have individual reasons to be upset. You are looking for reoccurring themes among those with their "set of picky reasons."
5. As you know not all people behave that rationally Brooke.
7. It does take work to share. That is why you pay a fee.
-
Is it a good business strategy to be banning players?
-
If their absence makes things thrive, of course.
-
If their absence makes things thrive, of course.
Guess we'll see!
-
If their absence makes things thrive, of course.
I took Grizz's point to mean in a time of business turmoil. My opinion is the turmoil that some players feel about dwindling numbers. If that is true, banning players is akin to banning revenue. Things cannot thrive on less revenue. MBA 101...businesses cannot save their way to prosperity.
Ofourse doubling the monthly cost or even tripling it would help revenue but that's a whole different problem for the 100 players thriving in the MA at peak time.
-
Is it a good business strategy to be banning players?
If those players are detrimental to business or game play, then the answer is a definite Yes.
ack-ack
-
If those players are detrimental to business or game play, then the answer is a definite Yes.
ack-ack
I agree.
-
When it comes to forum moderation, HTC is rather liberal compared to almost all game company official forums. Heck, AH forums make our game forums and other MMO companies look like an utopian paradise.
ack-ack
-
I'm not concerned that HTC bans people, I'm stunned someone can be clueless enough to get banned in the first place. I mean, really, how caustic do you have to be to get kicked out of a game? Some have fun trying to figure that out. What an abysmal waste of time and energy.
Changeup If that is true, banning players is akin to banning revenue.
I closed an office in January when I took over the operations, that office served 90 customers. It lost 80k per year specifically because a few, and I mean exactly 8 members, abused the staff and resources to the point that it was a loosing venture. Board understood that by closing that facility I risked loosing 90 members. I lost 4 of the 8 caustic ones, the other 4 know for a fact that I don't care if they stay or go and they shouldn't waste my, or my staffs time, the majority of those in the area that office served never even went into the facility. 86 members stayed, renewed their membership, don't even notice the office is no longer there. 6 New members joined in March from that service area that didn't know or care that we used to have an office there. I moved the employee down to my main office, productivity is up more than ever, revenue is fine, expenses are slashed, 3 employees got a raise. Sometimes the caustic few that seem to represent the majority are just so much hot air and need to go.
-
When it comes to forum moderation, HTC is rather liberal compared to almost all game company official forums. Heck, AH forums make our game forums and other MMO companies look like an utopian paradise.
ack-ack
Thats not the sentiment of your flamewarriors ilk.
-
.
-
Thats not the sentiment of your flamewarriors ilk.
And those with that sentiment over there were the ones that found themselves on the wrong side of the rules most of the time. While I've found the moderation from time to time being inconsistent in the AH forums, it still has been more lax then the majority of other official game forums. Hell, in our game you can't even mention another player's name in a post without the risk of getting the thread locked and a brief suspension or outright ban.
ack-ack
-
Rule 4
-
Wha? That wasn't an attack? It was opinion.
-
Opinions are different than sarcasm. Sarcasm gets met with sarcasm.
What I wrote wasn't sarcasm. It was a truthful observation of what I see as common misconceptions.
-
What I wrote wasn't sarcasm. It was a truthful observation of what I see as common misconceptions.
That you phrased in the form of questions fielded from the public in a sarcastic undertone. The fact they were truthful observations doesn't discount their flamebaitability.
-
3. Of course individuals will have individual reasons to be upset. You are looking for reoccurring themes among those with their "set of picky reasons."
Whether a company does that or not is its own business, though -- it's not obligated to do so. Also, it's unlikely they would do it unless it really was widely enough occurring. Just because someone says "X sucks!" and 10 other people chime in with "Yeah!" doesn't mean it's widely occurring when the player base numbers in the many thousands.
5. As you know not all people behave that rationally Brooke.
What I said is true whether or not someone is rational. When a person feels that the game isn't worth his $x (whether that feeling is based on rational thought, irrational thought, sagacity, misperception, great insight, or profound ignorance), he will stop paying his $x.
7. It does take work to share. That is why you pay a fee.
That isn't why you pay a fee. You pay a fee because that's what the company charges for it's product and because you are willing to pay that for the product. The product isn't design discussions.
-
That you phrased in the form of questions fielded from the public in a sarcastic undertone. The fact they were truthful observations doesn't discount their flamebaitability.
My tone wasn't sarcastic, and they aren't portrayed as questions from the public. Those are common misperceptions, plainly and succinctly stated, that lots of people have -- both here and in the wider world.
-
My tone wasn't sarcastic, and they aren't portrayed FROM questions from the public. Those are common misperceptions, plainly and succinctly stated, that lots of people have -- both here and in the wider world.
mmkay :rofl
BTW, fixed
-
What I said is true whether or not someone is rational. When a person feels that the game isn't worth his $x (whether that feeling is based on rational thought, irrational thought, sagacity, misperception, great insight, or profound ignorance), he will stop paying his $x.
Not true. A person could like the product and not want to deal with the person(s) creating the product.
You pay the fee for the package. Customer service included.
-
Not true. A person could like the product and not want to deal with the person(s) creating the product.
You pay the fee for the package. Customer service included.
True -- but that just means that it's not worth $x to the person. My statement really was just semantics: folks buy it or not at their own decision based on whether they want to or not. That is their right. That's all I was saying on that point.
-
Consider the irony of this thread.
-
Is it possible to get a character limit for non paying commenters? That way those interested in having polite dialog can come say hi and the non paying trolls can't spam the rest of us with their rubbish.
-
That way those interested in having polite dialog can come say hi and the non paying trolls can't spam the rest of us with their rubbish.
:aok :aok
-
Good riddance to bad rubbish :rock
for all you egotistical prima donna cry babies:
Just because you can't find enough moles to whack to stroke your huge egos doesn't mean you have a right to wag the dog of this player base.
CYA in the MA.
-
As has been metioned before there is ALWAYS a fight to be found. Up a fighter, throttle down fly to a base your dot dar flving slowly across the dar ring will usually elicit a buff hunter to up thinking you are a buff. Isnt a 1v1 good enough to give this a try? If nobody does up take a bomb or 2 along with you next time and start smashing things til somebody ups. Don't just pick them as they are low and slow give em a chance to get some alt and some E. If you are truely the hotshot you think you are what does a few thousand feet of air and some airspeed matter?
-
I still don't think anyone ever reads what I write :furious (sigh)
-
I still don't think anyone ever reads what I write :furious (sigh)
I read it, you left a period off the end of your sentence. :P
-
I read it too. After I was done, I was unsure as to whether I'll do so again.
kidding...
It's like I say, though. Isn't anyone the least bit tickled that we've got here a thread chock full o' complaints about complainers and their complaints?
-
As has been metioned before there is ALWAYS a fight to be found.
As has been mentioned before that is often incorrect after about 2-3 am Eastern time.
-
Is it possible to get a character limit for non paying commenters? That way those interested in having polite dialog can come say hi and the non paying trolls can't spam the rest of us with their rubbish.
The number zero comes to mind....
-
While I agree that the side change rule should be around 2-3 hours max, I also agree that there has been a substantial amount of complaining on the BBs. This game is ran a lot like the USA, because there are so many people who want one thing or a other, it makes it difficult to make major changes without disrupting another group of players view points. Change one thing and one group complains, change it again and another group complains. It's almost impossible to make a huge group of people who play the game differently all happy at once.
This game is not for everyone. And at a 15$ per month fee, that scares a lot of people away from the get go. But say there were 20,000 people who played this game. There would be a tremendous amount of complaints about hoarding and blah blah.
I think what people have a hard time grasping is that there are so many different ways and styles to to play this game that it tends to make others unhappy. For me it is when bombers kill FHrs at a furball and there is no attempt to take the base. However, this is a war simulator and bombing is part of the game. Taking bases is part of the game. Shutting down the enemy HQ is part of the game and strategy.
Personally I think the way this game is made is great. I've been playing for over 8-9 years and even though I think I'm pretty good, I always have a challenge when I jump into a furball. Sometimes you get ganged, sometimes you get 8 kills. Its always a challenge.
Personally, and I'm sorry if this offends some of you, but I don't think you are good enough to complain. I think most of you still need a couple of years before you can really grasp how to play right in this game and get kills every sortie. If you are complaining about HOing or running or F3 mode or the way people fly then you still have much to learn.Having said that, I still get mad when I put 60 bullets in a plane and they don't die.
When I first started they had H2H and it was free. That's what really attracted me to learn this game and meet some new players. I'd give anything for HTC to bring H2H back.
My biggest issue has been that 2 free weeks just isn't long enough for people to figure out this huge and complicated game. That is why only maybe 3 in 10 Will stick to the game after the trial is over.
I think there has been an over whelming amount of complaints. But when people cannot learn how to do something they complain. Instead of trying to be better they complain. You try one thing and another group complains.
Here's some advice. Ask players who are better than you to fly In their planes. Go to the DA and get your prettythang kicked 1v1. Ask good players to help you with ACM tricks. Or better yet, just wallow in the fact that you probably won't live every sortie and like I always do, go for as many kills as you can every single time. I had a 4 k\d last tour ranked 6th fighter and died 75% -80% of my sorties. Now I hate dying, but damn if I didn't have 4 or 5 kills to go down with.
I do. :rofl
Well spoken!
Yet as long as hurt buttocks after a sortie need ventilation in written or spoken language all the good points above become meaningless.
-
As has been mentioned before that is often incorrect after about 2-3 am Eastern time.
In my personal experiences it is correct, then again I don't mind having to fly more than 5 minutes to get into a fight.
-
In my personal experiences it is correct
So you fly at 3 am Eastern time enough time to gather some statistics and always find a fight?
-
So you fly at 3 am Eastern time enough time to gather some statistics and always find a fight?
honestly not in a while, yet a few short months ago I could find a fight, yes sometimes I had to make that fight, but with a little effort it can be done. Look all I am saying is that yes people are entitled to ask questions, but spamming the boards and being obnoxious about it at this point in time is probably not the best way to handle it.
-
honestly not in a while, yet a few short months ago I could find a fight, yes sometimes I had to make that fight, but with a little effort it can be done. Look all I am saying is that yes people are entitled to ask questions, but spamming the boards and being obnoxious about it at this point in time is probably not the best way to handle it.
I don't think that being obnoxious about it is valuable either. I wasn't arguing any issue at all of obnoxiousness -- that wasn't part of the post I was replying to or part of my reply.
What I'm discussing is that there are people dismissing discussion of far-off-peak characteristics, saying "you can always find a fight" when that statement is wrong if you include times after 2-3 am Eastern. Maybe you can sometimes, but not always. Maybe you did in the small number of times it happened to you, but you don't fly those times frequently enough to gather good statistics on it. Or you flew from 2 am to 2:30 am but not at 3 am, or 4, or 5, when it would happen to you, too. Far-off-peak flying just is very, very sparse compared to, say, 6 pm to 1 am Eastern. There might be some ways to liven it up, though, if we don't dismiss it wrongly as being a nonexistent issue.
-
I don't think that being obnoxious about it is valuable either. I wasn't arguing any issue at all of obnoxiousness -- that wasn't part of the post I was replying to or part of my reply.
What I'm discussing is that there are people dismissing discussion of far-off-peak characteristics, saying "you can always find a fight" when that statement is wrong if you include times after 2-3 am Eastern. Maybe you can sometimes, but not always. Maybe you did in the small number of times it happened to you, but you don't fly those times frequently enough to gather good statistics on it. Or you flew from 2 am to 2:30 am but not at 3 am, or 4, or 5, when it would happen to you, too. Far-off-peak flying just is very, very sparse compared to, say, 6 pm to 1 am Eastern. There might be some ways to liven it up, though, if we don't dismiss it wrongly as being a nonexistent issue.
I said not in a while I have spent many a nights on past 4 am est, even been on when the early morning crew came on and things picked back up aain. Maybe I was lucky tho.
-
I said not in a while I have spent many a nights on past 4 am est, even been on when the early morning crew came on and things picked back up aain. Maybe I was lucky tho.
OK. But 4 am is still enormously less active than peak hours, wouldn't you agree?
My main theme here is that there might be ways to make far-off-peak much more active, and that -- I strongly believe -- would be a large benefit.