only two countrys arenas

[drfritz]

This has been talked about in the past and shot down faster than goon taking of from a capped base.
But, thats the way the game is being play anyways 99.9% of the time. just take alook at any of the war arenas any given day or night and you see one side getting nailed like a cheap lady of the night from the other two sides with no fights on there fronts or if there is is only small 2 or 3 man fight.
Maybe I'm wrong in what i see going on but sure seems to be alot of talk on channel about it. so maybe the eny needs to be reworked that will stop this or we nned to have something else done. just my two cents on the subject please go easy on me..

[oTRALFZo]

This has been talked about in the past and shot down faster than goon taking of from a capped base.
But, thats the way the game is being play anyways 99.9% of the time. just take alook at any of the war arenas any given day or night and you see one side getting nailed like a cheap lady of the night from the other two sides with no fights on there fronts or if there is is only small 2 or 3 man fight.
Maybe I'm wrong in what i see going on but sure seems to be alot of talk on channel about it. so maybe the eny needs to be reworked that will stop this or we nned to have something else done. just my two cents on the subject please go easy on me..

Will never happen. But understand why.

Adding that 3rd country suddenly adds new dynamics of the game. Yes this can mean that some days you get beat up by 2 countries, but in this case you can choose to switch sides or join the other arena. Its a great system now, why change it? A 1 front war is too boring and prediticable.

[flatiron1]

nm

[SEseph]

[T]hats the way the game is being play anyways 99.9% of the time. just take alook at any of the war arenas any given day or night and you see one side getting nailed like a cheap lady of the night from the other two sides with no fights on there fronts or if there is is only small 2 or 3 man fight.
[T]he eny needs to be reworked that will stop this or we nned to have something else done...

Actually, if you combine the ideas, it's not a bad one. If (I'm bish, so that's how I'm giving this example) lets say the rooks and nits aren't fighting one another, but only fighting the Bish for sake of argument. Maybe those Fields of the attacking forces should have an ENY limitation unless they move to the Rook/Nit front. I suspect it wouldn't be easy to program, but I'd suspect IF it were done, the system could go off two types of measurements. One being the current level of DarBar activity, and the other being a Field check based on the amount of aircraft that have left a certain base and are still in flight. This could be limited to maybe 2 or 3 Fields deep at the front so as to still allow usage of any plane, but you will have to work to bring it to the battlefield.

[Yeager]

two countries would work as long as you forced people onto sides......all in the name of BALANCE

[Blooz]

With two countries one side will always outnumber the other. This is static. It will never be otherwise.

With three countries each country is always outnumbered by the other two. The battle flows and changes all the time because any time one country lets up, the other two can start attacking it.

It's the natural herd mentality at work. Most people will flow to where there are more people for obvious reasons. Having three countries limits the choice because at any time, two countries can work together to keep the third in check. I admit this doesn't happen often but the opportunity is there.

With the two country system there is no opportunity for this to happen. Once one side starts "losing" it will lose because of the flow of people in the game. The people on the outnumbered team log off or switch to the other side and the game dies.

[Bizman]

Good argumentation, Blooz. Seems you've been studying your share in human behavior.

In a two country situation I would like to add one more aspect: Racism. People on the opposite side would be considered as "them", which soon would become a synonym to "axis of evil" or any other national arch enemy. Sooner or later we would have a virtual WW3 running on this board, recruiting people to the "right" side and flaming those on the "wrong" or even "evil" side. With three countries having similar planesets this is just a game instead of a political battlefield.

[SEseph]

With two countries one side will always outnumber the other. This is static. It will never be otherwise.

With three countries each country is always outnumbered by the other two. The battle flows and changes all the time because any time one country lets up, the other two can start attacking it.

It's the natural herd mentality at work. Most people will flow to where there are more people for obvious reasons. Having three countries limits the choice because at any time, two countries can work together to keep the third in check. I admit this doesn't happen often but the opportunity is there.

With the two country system there is no opportunity for this to happen. Once one side starts "losing" it will lose because of the flow of people in the game. The people on the outnumbered team log off or switch to the other side and the game dies.

Didn't think of it this way when I was putting my idea out there. Well put 

[Stalwart]

Remember four sides: Gold, Red, Green, Purple?   

I like three sides fine.  But, I love variety more than anything else.   Any change to the arenas is tolerable for a TOD, as long as it keeps changing next TOD.  So, in that spirit, Vote +1.

[Traveler]

This has been talked about in the past and shot down faster than goon taking of from a capped base.
But, thats the way the game is being play anyways 99.9% of the time. just take alook at any of the war arenas any given day or night and you see one side getting nailed like a cheap lady of the night from the other two sides with no fights on there fronts or if there is is only small 2 or 3 man fight.
Maybe I'm wrong in what i see going on but sure seems to be alot of talk on channel about it. so maybe the eny needs to be reworked that will stop this or we nned to have something else done. just my two cents on the subject please go easy on me..

I think AH offers that now with the AvA arena.  I don't think I have ever seen more then 30 players in AvA at any one time. 

[bustr]

Three sides generates freindly competitive "Nationalism".

Human nature is to belong to a herd. Three sides allows a core of players to become "Chess Peice Loyalists" while tollerating the flux of non-affiliated individuals and squads to roam at will. Being able to roam at will as an idividual or with your group of freinds or choosing to stay put emotionaly keeps the game from stagnating. Freedom of association without repercussions keeps people from leaving the game because we are hardwired to interact that way. AH is like three soccer & rugby leauges that play perpetual pickup matches daily against each other and prefers for the happiness of it's players they regulary go play for the other two franchises. Wife swapping without the leagal problems...............

Oh did I mention that they still haven't worked out keeping the team numbers balanced and sometimes the rugby teams get on the wrong feild and really rough up the soccer teams......and then those hooligan stampeeds taking over all the refreshment stands when no one is looking or those irritating american sqweeker teams that run everywhere on the feild asking questions and getting excited because they want the ball. I hate to think what kind of an earfull the owners get after the rugby team accidentaly gets on the same feild with the american sqweekers team....eewwww....

And then there was that incident when the sqweeker team got the American Samoan Sumo team and their families stampeeding into the middel of a hooligan refreshment stand sneek and the sqweeker team following them got the idea kicking everyone in the shins was the real Hard On way to win a match..... Yeah AH is just like three freindly game franchises.

[BillyD]

N0 1 3nj0y b3ing a SP13 (ZOMG) 4 4ll 3 0f T3h C0untr13z