Author Topic: New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think. (Read 20547 times)

JB73 · « **Reply #15 on:** August 10, 2004, 01:59:46 PM »

LMAO 13 posts in the time it took me to write that

oboe · « **Reply #16 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:03:34 PM »

I think its great that you're addressing the issue, HT. The burden of this proposed solution falls hardest on squad member Rooks who have extreme country-loyalty, flying on their squad nights. It'd be tough to fly squad missions with pilots sitting out on the sidelines for various durations. Its a non-issue for players with no country-specific loyalty.

It does kinda depend on just how much time penalty you are talking about though. I usually take a break after a death anyway so a few minutes is no big deal to me.

One thought, just the idea that this feature is coming may drive some entire squads from Rooks to Knight or Bishop, to avoid the penalties. So even the threat of implementation may help bring about more balance.

Also, it may make resets that much more difficult, since so many of the resets are powered by the suicide jabo hordes. This could effectively take that away, are ww willing to play out on stalled maps? Maybe it would change gameplay as well, encouraging pilots to fly non-suicide missions with hope for survival. Perhaps the time penalty should be the average length of time it would take to return to base, had you not died on the suicide jabo mission.....

Karnak · « **Reply #17 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:04:31 PM »

JB73,

My feeling is that most of the scenarios you described are almost always run by the country with numbers against the one without and so the delay would not be present. It also seems to me to be a "So what?" situation if the country with numbers has trouble defending a base due to the delay. That is kind of the point.

Maybe 20% over is too small a numbers advantage to warrant the delay. Then again, maybe with 20.8% over in your example they would only be experiencing a few seconds of delay. However the 200 vs 130 vs 100 we've had lately may result in minutes of delays.

Kweassa · « **Reply #18 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:05:23 PM »

Seems like a very interesting idea.

Not only does the leading super-power country limited in absolute number of planes in the air.. but effectively they are also limited in the relative time taken to up reinforcements.

Like, one of your field is being vulched. But you're a superpower. Ut-oh.. you can't up planes to save it!!!

...

As a regular idea I think it'd be interesting.

But one thing that concerns me, is that it'd kill the RJO. In this case, the Rooks have more people because the Rook squads have organized themselves and voluntarily agreed to have a 'squad night' at the same promised time.

It's one thing that many dweebs or newbies want to hang out with Rooks all the time... and if that leads to overall high numbers.

But RJO is different - the numbers boasted then, is numbers earned. Multiple Rook squads got together and worked hard, promised, agreed, adjusted schedules, and did all that stuff to gather people. It's not an 'unearned' advantage as in the case above. Nobody said the Knits or Bish couldn't do the same. It's their squads who weren't cut out, or eager enough to unite all of their squads to have a joint-squad night-operation at a certain day.

Should the RJO and its participants be punished, because the Bish and Knit squads aren't organized enough to do the same?

Eagler · « **Reply #19 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:05:55 PM »

or restrict planesets for the higher numbered countries..

take out the most flown planes in MA starting relative to the sides

this could change every month with new plane flown stats available

remove the nik and la7 and watch em jump ship

bustr · « **Reply #20 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:08:12 PM »

Removing perk on planes and vehicals for the most out numbered side, and a scaled reduction on perk for planes and vehicals of the next lowest side might be an interesting short term solution.

I'm not sure at what point this would be triggered.

Example:

R 250
B 120
K 105

Those percentages seem normal these days.

Shane · « **Reply #21 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:08:13 PM »

bleah... limiting any customer's ability to fly when they're logged on would not be too good of a concept - especially in the MA.

maybe if you could set a fuel burn (or fuel loadout) limitation on the side that has the 20% advantage? even then, bleah...

you can't really legislate effectively dweebs who won't take the initiative themselves in redressing any imbalances.

you could always open up a second smaller arena, using small maps, with say a population cap of 210-280... this may shift some numbers, altho' in what manner is unknown. it would at least give those who are gonna "log" for some gameplay reason an alternative - some simply do not like the CT or DA.

or any combination of the above.

g'luck with whatever you come up with.

Jackal1 · « **Reply #22 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:08:18 PM »

Sure would throw a loop in squad ops and mission plannings.
I still believe if new players were "funneled" to the country or countries with lowest numbers on the average at any particular time and were locked in on a settling in period before they could switch countries it would help a lot. But hey, what do I know.
I think your propasal can be sounded more with the players of Rooks now than the rest of us. Although it would affect all of us at different times, at the current state it would affect Rooks the most.

nopoop · « **Reply #23 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:08:43 PM »

I would have to reserve judgement until the numbers of what constitutes "out of whack" are on the table.

Not too fond of the idea the more I think about it. Need to remember it's the sandbox. Sorta with Shane on this one.

Karnak · « **Reply #24 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:08:55 PM »

Eagler,

I was thinking of something like that while reading HiTech's opener, but then thought how it would deprive me of those juicy La-7 and P-51D targets.

I'm torn.

shane,

The current system does the same thing. The players on the low number country are frequently denied the ability to participate at least as much as HiTech's idea would do so the the high number country.

hitech · « **Reply #25 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:09:12 PM »

JB73: If eveyone would post thoughts like that I would be one happy camper.

As to the spawn camper, the other side of that, it would make spawn camping less profitible. So think it would even out, but you are correct it could be a problem.

As to the % was think your example would be about the top of no limit imposed.

HiTech

SlapShot · « **Reply #26 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:09:17 PM »

Limiting people's "playing" time is stepping on holy ground that you must think very strongly about treading on.

What you might get is a balanced arean via loss of subscriptions. Would the loss be greater than the lost of subs due to an un-balanced arena ... only you can tell ... you have the numbers.

I would assume that this "time out" period would only relate to planes and not ground vehicles.

You might see an increase in ground vehicle usage because of the "time out", if one is allowed to take a ground vehicles during the "time out".

Either way, it probably won't affect me, so after drinking a couple of scotchs' and thinking on it real hard ... give it a whirl.

Eagler · « **Reply #27 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:17:56 PM »

that's why you limit the vehicles/planes not the time - the numbers crowd can up but just in , what some would call, inferior rides

as the numbers would change and the availability of stuff would be dynamic, I think it would just play into the game well

seabat · « **Reply #28 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:18:42 PM »

Would you use the country with the most numbers compared to the country with the least number to compute the +/- 20% or compare to the middle country?

As a set rule comparing against the country with the least numbers is it possible that you may have to switch to a country that is down to a few bases, without dar, and on the wrong side of a vulch fest being conducted by the other two countries?

Even though it most likely would not be a factor during the times I play, at face value I would not enjoy a time delay between flights and certainly would not enjoy being forced to change to a country that was close to a reset.

Im not sure how creating a situation where people may have to chose to log off instead of play will help.

Kweassa · « **Reply #29 on:** August 10, 2004, 02:30:02 PM »

Maybe slapping perks on previously unperked planes according to the seriousness of imbalance...??

Like, starting from 20% imbalance...

* (20% - 5 ENY)/5 = 3 perks on the La7.
* (30% - 5 ENY)/5 = 5 perks for the La-7
* (40% - 5 ENY)/5 = 7 perks for the La-7

...

* (20% - 20 ENY)/5 = 0 perks for the 109G-10
* (30% - 20 ENY)/5 = 2 perks for the 109G-10
* (40% - 20 ENY)/5 = 4 perks for the 109G-10...

...

In case of already perked planes, add the calculated values to the perks which the perk multiplier is applied.. and so on...?

It'd not directly limit the flying time or flying choice, but it will increase the point burden of flying planes.. and if the imbalance is really heavy most of the best MA planes will all become perked... and putting pressure on people with low perks to either;

a) fly a suckier plane
b) or fly more timidly
c) or risk the perks and fly the same

In any case of a), b), or c), it will make the outnumbered people feel a little easier to fight the horde, or at least much more profitable....