Author Topic: New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.  (Read 22318 times)

Offline DrDea

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3341
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #270 on: August 11, 2004, 03:15:53 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by nopoop



If a countries numbers are low and reaches a certain point, make Dar for that country undestructable ??

Then you might be getting the snot beat out of you but you still can pick your spots ??

That doesn't penalize the country with numbers and gives the outnumbered a reason to stay around and fight'um.



   I like this.:aok
The Flying Circus.Were just like you.Only prettier.

FSO 334 Flying Eagles. Fencers Heros.

Offline kevykev56

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1391
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #271 on: August 11, 2004, 03:31:12 PM »
This Delay will make matters worse.  You are going to effectively create more mission oriented flights by the team with the numbers! While waiting they will just join the mission instead of waiting for the next time slot.

I doubt it will make people change countries. Its hard to break friendships and bonds that have been going on for years. Not saying nobody will jump ship, because some will. But the organization that will be happening will get alot less of the hordes killed.  

BTW im Bish and oppose this. Limiting gameplay for anyone is wrong. It seems your goal will be more to get players to change countries than it is to make the delay happen. If that works great, problem solved. If not then you have angry players who just log off...Been to Vegas lately?

This change shouldnt effect my squad, Bish will not have to worry about delays.:D


RHIN0
RHIN0 Retired C.O. Sick Puppies Squadron

Offline Halo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3222
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #272 on: August 11, 2004, 03:33:18 PM »
Aces High's greatest strength and greatest weakness is its mostly unstructured game play that allows players the greatest freedom in choosing how they want to play whenever they sign on.

Most constraints in any business, e.g. perk ride limitations, are customer negatives because they are perceived as losses of rights rather than incentives or benefits.    

Restricting choice of side or adding a limitation on when or how long you can play with this or that is risky -- customers would get less value for their money for the elusive goal of promoting more balanced fights when, ironically, not everybody fights the same battle anyway or even cares which side "wins."

IF additional steps are necessary to better balance sides, why not simply rotate country assignments as players log on?  If some players or squads insist on a particular country, they could be assigned a number like waiting for a fast food order.

And like fast food it wouldn't take long before they would get the country they ordered.  

For example:  Thanks for signing on.  To balance sides, you can immediately play as a Knight.  If you prefer to wait for the next Rook vacancy, select R.  If you prefer to wait for the next Bishop vacancy, select B.  Waiting time is about 2 minutes for R and 5 minutes for B.  

Voila!  McAces High!
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity. (Seneca, 1st century AD, et al)
Practice random acts of kindness and senseless beauty. (Anne Herbert, 1982, Sausalito, CA)
Paramedic to Perkaholics Anonymous

Offline Mugzeee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1650
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #273 on: August 11, 2004, 03:40:33 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Murdr
Just wanted to disagree on the one point.  If JoeRook and I want to fly together, and I cant switch to his country, he can always switch to mine.  Hence we arent really limited.  If just wanted to fly the high# country, and I couldnt, yes it is a limit on where I can fly, but I can still fly as often and quickly regardless of what country Im in.

 

Thank You Murdr!!! :aok

Offline tactic

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 381
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #274 on: August 11, 2004, 03:41:53 PM »
would it be possible to adjust the damage the bullets and bombs do?   the country or countries that have numbers  the damage factor for them to be adjusted  depending on how uneven it is?  so it might take 4000lbs to kill fighter hanger instead of 3000 to kill the FH of the country that has 20% or what ever the % is less players, then 3500lbs to kill FH instead of 3000 for the country thats 2nd in numbers and the standard 3000 lbs to kill FH for country that has the numbers, it might take 25 or 50 more hits on a plane to down it.  something like that.  I may be suggesting something that may not be able to be done or may take way too much  work.  seems that if something like this could be done having the country send two p51's (two players) to kill some thing that usually take's 1 p51 and if they have to use 25 to 50 more rounds to kill a plane , would even out the numbers with having to rtb etc...  (((((((((  should only be done if numbers are way outa line))))))).. .  have a spot on clipboard that says if there is a adjustment in effect or not....   only problem i see with all of this ,  there seems to be lots of people that jump to the countries that are ahead in search of perks, even though it says you have to be in that country 12 hours before you can get'm, then they are there for the min 12 hours .   sometimes if numbers are even as soon as one country get ahead (for sure when on a roll) here they come,  even if perks are not the issue being on the winning side means alot to some people. so not sure if any of this stuff will get the results people want...  LMAO it may cause more problems no matter what is tried, people wanting avoid any of all these sugestions,  switching to the country that THEY Think has the  advantage.......

Offline simshell

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 786
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #275 on: August 11, 2004, 03:48:44 PM »
any person that cant wait 3 mins for up to 10 mins to 40 mins of flight time needs help


i would never leave this game over a 4 min wait when my country is huge in numbers


what you all fear is that the rooks wont leave there huge country and you wont ether so you may have to wait 4 mins to fly for 35 mins

but if you cant stand the wait why not move to the nights or bishops easy as that

if its about the its my 15$ thing well should i whine about not flying my tempest all the time because its my 15$

this is the best online flight sim iv ever played and im not leaving for such a dumb thing nor should anybody

and why cant you meet new people on other countrys?
known as Arctic in the main

Offline Xargos

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4281
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #276 on: August 11, 2004, 04:06:59 PM »
As I stated in a earlier thread, soldiers get paid for their service.  Why not pay people in perk points when they are flying.  If a person is flying for a country with low numbers they get paid more.  If they are in a La7 they would get paid less then someone in the same country who is flying a P-40.
Jeffery R."Xargos" Ward

"At least I have chicken." 
Member DFC

Offline simshell

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 786
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #277 on: August 11, 2004, 04:09:39 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Xargos
As I stated in a earlier thread, soldiers get paid for their service.  Why not pay people in perk points when they are flying.  If a person is flying for a country with low numbers they get paid more.  If they are in a La7 they would get paid less then someone in the same country who is flying a P-40.


because they dont care about money(perks)  because they get everthing free
known as Arctic in the main

Offline DipStick

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2157
      • http://www.theblueknights.com
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #278 on: August 11, 2004, 04:12:33 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Xargos
As I stated in a earlier thread, soldiers get paid for their service.  Why not pay people in perk points when they are flying.  If a person is flying for a country with low numbers they get paid more.  If they are in a La7 they would get paid less then someone in the same country who is flying a P-40.

That is the present setup. Apparently, it's not enough to balance the arena.

Offline flakbait

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 867
      • http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #279 on: August 11, 2004, 04:15:57 PM »
I still think this is the worst idea in the long, sad history of bad ideas. There's no logic to it, other than being a quick fix to a serious problem. Quick fixes to serious problems never work. Here's what you're promoting HT:

1) No comaraderie at all. You want people to side-switch to balance the numbers for you. And to do that, you're putting a traffic cop on the runway with a stopwatch. It's no different than using a cattle prod. You'll implement a "feature" people detest so they move where you want 'em to. Which results in...

2) Breaking up squads. A 20-man squad switches sides and suddenly that country now has a time limit imposed. What do you think will happen once folks find out who switched to cause it? Flame warz galore. As a result squads will end up not being huge, functional squadrons. They'll end up being no more than five people. Squaddies wing up together because they're friends. Small problem: it's either put up with the stopwatch or swap sides. Either way squaddies won't be able to gather in one country. Some will get pissed and vamoos to another country. Thus busting up the squad.

3) You want to slow down the Mongolian Horde land-grab, but you're picking the most backwards way to do it. Instead of implementing changes to the strat system no one has seen before, you're using an "annoy the people" technique. Simply because that technique is faster to implement than changing an antequated system. Yes, antequated. Read my earlier post to see more on that subject.

4) You want the attitude on this BBS and in the game to improve, yet you're saying the exact opposite by sticking a dumb time limit in. People's attitudes won't change for the better, they'll get worse. You'll break up squads, piss people off, make 'em wait after getting shot down and for what? To slow down the Horde? How many other ideas have been posted that might, or could, work infinitely better than your's?

5) Using a time limit will take the trickle and turn it into several waves. Instead of the little guy facing down two or three enemy aircraft, he's now looking at five or ten. Putting the right respawn wave at the right target will negate this time limit completely and result in the same Horde-based land-grab. Only with double the numbers hitting a given target thanks to the 30 second wait.

Large changes are required to fix this problem, not quick fixes dreamed up over night. Does it have merrit? Most definitely! Will it work? If your intention is to make even more people angry, then yes. Otherwise it'll be a dismal failure.


For Pyro:
Doug, this isn't an online FPS game where insta-spawn can give you mega kills or that WunderShield or the BFG 9000. It's an aerial combat game. To get the bonuses here you don't have to run around the corner, grab the key, shoot the demon and get the gun. You have to fly several minutes in a given direction, think your way in, and then attack. It takes much longer to get a single kill here than it does in UT2k4. How many minutes did you have to fly for in order to bag your last kill? 5? 6? In 5 or 6 minutes in any FPS you can bag two dozen kills or more. My personal record in UT2k4 stands at 33 bots dead in ten minutes. That's why they have a respawn time of 5 seconds or so. To prevent mass scores from being run up. It's part of a system. You randomize the spawn location, give the player 5-15 seconds before respawn, and then it's back to work. Using tricks from FPS games in AH won't work because those tricks are built for FPS games, not flight games.

I'll say it again: If you want to slow down the Mongolian Horde you can not simply slap a respawn time limit in and call it magically fixed. Actual work has to be done to improve the strat system that hasn't changed in basic function since 1995. Slowing down the Horde requires actual supply limits. No more unlimited everything unless your field's bunkers have been plastered. Limited bombs, limited rockets, and limited troops based on actual lag time to ship those items from the factory to the front. The supply system is already in place to allow for this. What has to be done for it to work is implementation of hard limits on supplies. If you don't have trucks delivering your bombs and rockets, you will run out of them. If there's no supply ships moving freight into the port you took, you can't advance the front lines because things are in such short supply. Realistic adjustment factors that really happen will stop the Horde, not a "System: you can't fly for 40 seconds" message.



-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School
Put the P-61B in Aces High

Offline Mugzeee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1650
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #280 on: August 11, 2004, 04:20:05 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
HT and Pyro, I'm sure you've considered this but I'm putting it out there for some in the thread that might not have thought about it.

Generally, resets come from the numbers advantage.

If you sufficiently inhibit the "numbers" side, they won't be able to achieve the reset. It leads to stalemate. The "low numbers" side doesn't have the troops to gang their way to glory. The "numbers" side is artificially restricted from ganging their way to glory.

If you insufficiently inhibits the "numbers" side, you merely drag out the inevitable, extending the agony of the "low numbers" side.

My main thought on this is you are treating a symptom rather than the disease.

But, hey, I'll find a place to play on any map most nights.
At present. This is true.
But are you saying that even numbers will stop the ability to win a war?
If so..then this will be very telling of our ability to plan stratagey.
I remember clearly a period of about 4 months when the sides were basically even. The fighting was ferice the war was tough but there were resets plenty.
It makes for very healthy game play. And above all...I causes the countries to work together. We have witnessed it right here in this game somewhere from about late summer to late fall of 2003.


On another note.
I think we need to remember that the solution needs to be one that can be done without a total overhaul of the Code.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2004, 04:23:23 PM by Mugzeee »

Offline ghostdancer

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7562
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #281 on: August 11, 2004, 04:25:34 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by DipStick
Should have done this months ago. I just find it sad HT has to waste his time on this BS because folks like you can't even things up in the first place. That's the nice version of what I'd like to say anyway.


Nice polite shot their DipStick. But still a shot. Take a look at HT's player percentage break down.

Bish = 31.1%
Knights = 32.2%
Rooks = 36.7 %


Its not a massive spread between the countries.  What happens is that some squads work very hard and have worked very hard to turn out players and make things fun their buddies on a consistent basis.

Rooks were in the hole and spent 2+ years working to address it by 1) recruiting more people into their squads, 2) working to turn out more of their pilots on a consistent basis (establising a monthly event to look forward too .. RJOs only happen once every 3 - 4 weeks .. and during the beta period went on hiatus for a while), 3) squads emailing each other and working with each other .. not just on a squad level but posting missions with the mission editor so that a couple 3 or 4 person element on a squad can group together and have fun and feeling of being something larger.

Yes, some squads came over from countries too .. but it was not a massive influx. There was a lot of hard work by a lot of people to try to find a community base solution. You and others may dismiss that or not believe it but it was done after over 3 year straight of being on the low man on the totem pole.

And yes, Rooks have done things to try to balance things. They have not held regular RJOs (which used to happen once a month .. get used to working together on a multi-squad level and even without formalize things it still tend to happen to a lesser degree). When they have they tried to evenly split the squads on both fronts (of those participating). Several squads have made it policy of attacking the stronger country not the weaker in numbers. Not all do this but some .. at times it like trying to steer a bull elephant .. you can only nudge.

Things have been tried and an effort has been made and several posts have been posted about discussing what was done to help work out of the hole. Ripsnort gave us advice way back when of what the Knights did to get more organized with MAG-33. I now have posted and email others on the same subject saying will to discuss and see what I can do.

All countries don't like switching to other countries. Even HiTech pointed that out as a consistent.

The timer issue is worth an attempt but I don't think it will address the cause of problem but only the symptons.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2004, 04:31:19 PM by ghostdancer »
X.O. 29th TFT, "We Move Mountains"
CM Terrain Team

Offline Mugzeee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1650
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #282 on: August 11, 2004, 04:30:49 PM »
Looking at Flkbaits post i do agree that there are many troubling issues with the proposal.
I did notice several replies that mentioned the system that i disclosed on page 3 of this thread.
Please dont grill me for quoting myself. But i still think this old system would be VERY effective in acheiving the required result. And i will do so in such a way that it Will not make Subscribers feel like they are being charged for sitting in a tower.

QUOTE]Originally posted by Mugzeee

B]What if… Each zone had an allotted number of flight slots. If the slots were currently full…then you would have to launch from another base say 50 to 75 miles away or wait till some one else moved to a different zone.
This could work well to disperse the Hoards. Because you would have to wait…or chose another base of operations…The new base of operations being far enough from the original base that your fuel would be rather low by the time you made it to the zone you were originally trying to Hoard…err fly in. :D
 Could work to deter hoarding or gangbanging.
Aces High with its zone structure could maybe benefit from this setup.

BTW…this isn’t new. Nor is it my own idea. ;)

But I loved it. :) [/B][/QUOTE]

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #283 on: August 11, 2004, 04:31:07 PM »
Hitech could change the icon colors for the 3 countries, then on Sundays when the Rooks have their joint operations, the Bishops and Knights can have a 24 hour truce and gang up on the Rooks.:D
bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline NUTTZ

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1818
New idea what do you ladies and gentlemen think.
« Reply #284 on: August 11, 2004, 04:45:02 PM »
I have to agree, Make the strat system workable, or downtimes flexable. I pointed this out in a previous post. I posted where the problem could be attacked. I left out the "perk" points and ENY values because I personally didn't think this would change anything. this point could be cemented by just looking at how many perk points some people have stored up.

I believe the strat or "hardness" could be changed according to team number strenght. But HOW would the players KNOW what the new hardness would be. Also the time down or resupply could be changed this would probably be the easiest way to impliment. For example if it takes X amount of bombs to take down a fighter hanger and with the "muliplier it now takes X plus 1 bomb to take it down How would the player KNOW or it could even change while inflight. Therefor the the dilema.

NUTTZ

Quote
Originally posted by flakbait
I still think this is the worst idea in the long, sad history of bad ideas. There's no logic to it, other than being a quick fix to a serious problem. Quick fixes to serious problems never work. Here's what you're promoting HT:

1) No comaraderie at all. You want people to side-switch to balance the numbers for you. And to do that, you're putting a traffic cop on the runway with a stopwatch. It's no different than using a cattle prod. You'll implement a "feature" people detest so they move where you want 'em to. Which results in...

2) Breaking up squads. A 20-man squad switches sides and suddenly that country now has a time limit imposed. What do you think will happen once folks find out who switched to cause it? Flame warz galore. As a result squads will end up not being huge, functional squadrons. They'll end up being no more than five people. Squaddies wing up together because they're friends. Small problem: it's either put up with the stopwatch or swap sides. Either way squaddies won't be able to gather in one country. Some will get pissed and vamoos to another country. Thus busting up the squad.

3) You want to slow down the Mongolian Horde land-grab, but you're picking the most backwards way to do it. Instead of implementing changes to the strat system no one has seen before, you're using an "annoy the people" technique. Simply because that technique is faster to implement than changing an antequated system. Yes, antequated. Read my earlier post to see more on that subject.

4) You want the attitude on this BBS and in the game to improve, yet you're saying the exact opposite by sticking a dumb time limit in. People's attitudes won't change for the better, they'll get worse. You'll break up squads, piss people off, make 'em wait after getting shot down and for what? To slow down the Horde? How many other ideas have been posted that might, or could, work infinitely better than your's?

5) Using a time limit will take the trickle and turn it into several waves. Instead of the little guy facing down two or three enemy aircraft, he's now looking at five or ten. Putting the right respawn wave at the right target will negate this time limit completely and result in the same Horde-based land-grab. Only with double the numbers hitting a given target thanks to the 30 second wait.

Large changes are required to fix this problem, not quick fixes dreamed up over night. Does it have merrit? Most definitely! Will it work? If your intention is to make even more people angry, then yes. Otherwise it'll be a dismal failure.


For Pyro:
Doug, this isn't an online FPS game where insta-spawn can give you mega kills or that WunderShield or the BFG 9000. It's an aerial combat game. To get the bonuses here you don't have to run around the corner, grab the key, shoot the demon and get the gun. You have to fly several minutes in a given direction, think your way in, and then attack. It takes much longer to get a single kill here than it does in UT2k4. How many minutes did you have to fly for in order to bag your last kill? 5? 6? In 5 or 6 minutes in any FPS you can bag two dozen kills or more. My personal record in UT2k4 stands at 33 bots dead in ten minutes. That's why they have a respawn time of 5 seconds or so. To prevent mass scores from being run up. It's part of a system. You randomize the spawn location, give the player 5-15 seconds before respawn, and then it's back to work. Using tricks from FPS games in AH won't work because those tricks are built for FPS games, not flight games.

I'll say it again: If you want to slow down the Mongolian Horde you can not simply slap a respawn time limit in and call it magically fixed. Actual work has to be done to improve the strat system that hasn't changed in basic function since 1995. Slowing down the Horde requires actual supply limits. No more unlimited everything unless your field's bunkers have been plastered. Limited bombs, limited rockets, and limited troops based on actual lag time to ship those items from the factory to the front. The supply system is already in place to allow for this. What has to be done for it to work is implementation of hard limits on supplies. If you don't have trucks delivering your bombs and rockets, you will run out of them. If there's no supply ships moving freight into the port you took, you can't advance the front lines because things are in such short supply. Realistic adjustment factors that really happen will stop the Horde, not a "System: you can't fly for 40 seconds" message.



-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School
Put the P-61B in Aces High