Author Topic: CT needs more pilots... (Read 4915 times)

jamusta · « **Reply #60 on:** August 31, 2004, 01:08:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Arlo
No it isn't. Address them here.

Well there have been times I really enjoyed the CT then there have been times I hated it. I come in the CT to escape the gamey MA when it frustrates me. Alot of times I come in the CT to find the same gamey tactics. I have seen vets not change sides to balance numbers. There is still the ganging, running, ack hiding milkrunning, parking the ships off shore and the cherrypicking. I dont mind getting picked off in a furball but there have been multiple times when I have been low and slow truning 1v1 just to have the fight interrupted. I expect these things in the MA but to go to the CT and see this is very dissapointing.

hitech · « **Reply #61 on:** August 31, 2004, 01:27:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by CurtissP-6EHawk
THERE IS NO FULL DOT DAR IN THE MA EITHER!!!! There is basicly no difference in MA dar and CT dar. I just asume HTC close down the CT than to open up a dot dar were you can see dots everywhere. What is soo damnn funny is when I do log into the MA, the dar is always dead from guys bombing the HQ. SO technicly, there is more dar in the CT than MA.

CurtissP: It'this basic idea of why the CT has lower numbers than it could have. Not the radar setting in paticular. But the all or nothing thought proccess. Go back and read my suggestion & goal post in the CT Staff forum.

You have your idea of the perfect CT, other people have theres, what needs to happen for the CT to increase it's numbers is find the one idea that everyone has in common about the CT. (IMO it is different planes for different sides)

Implement that, and everything else just make it apeal to the LARGEST cross section. It is the not willing to give on the small things that limits the numbers most.

HiTech

TexMurphy · « **Reply #62 on:** August 31, 2004, 01:45:50 PM »

Detail fixation is the biggest enemy.

There is no one change that will change the online numbers.

Its a series of changes that all follow a vision.

Its that vision that has to be decided first.

Should it be:

A) A server with WW2 immersion
B) Hard core sim server
C) MA in WW2 setting

First when that is decided one can move on and discuss details how to achive the said vision.

Im not sure of what the current one is and in what direction things are moving but one thing is sure since the numbers are as low as when I was here a year ago things just arnt happening atm.

Tex

TequilaChaser · « **Reply #63 on:** August 31, 2004, 01:54:31 PM »

as far as things happening atm....least we not forget that Fall is right around the corner, and with Fall comes more people online more often...........Winter gets here it gets even better

VWE · « **Reply #64 on:** August 31, 2004, 02:03:05 PM »

Quote

Hi HT! How many scotch IOU's have I written to date? (heh) Add one more if ya come fly with us this Thursday.

Sure... as long as he is on the Allies side, that way when ya'll get smacked down with the big hand of God again, ya'll won't whine as much about the missmatched aircraft cause you had the creator on your side.

CurtissP-6EHawk · « **Reply #65 on:** August 31, 2004, 02:22:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
CurtissP: It'this basic idea of why the CT has lower numbers than it could have. Not the radar setting in paticular. But the all or nothing thought proccess. Go back and read my suggestion & goal post in the CT Staff forum.

You have your idea of the perfect CT, other people have theres, what needs to happen for the CT to increase it's numbers is find the one idea that everyone has in common about the CT. (IMO it is different planes for different sides)

Implement that, and everything else just make it apeal to the LARGEST cross section. It is the not willing to give on the small things that limits the numbers most.

HiTech

I guess what I should have said is that if the CT litteraly becomes a mini MA then I will leave. I dont like the MA. So you are correct in a way. Right now there are things we like and dislike. Push the ballance over the edge and something will collapse be it the arena or the players. In this case, I will collapse. Right now we have about 20 dedicated players. Change the settings and you might get 20 more but loose the 20 already here. Therefore, I fight for the settings that will keep me here.
BTW, I cant get into the CT staff forum.

Arlo made a point. MA guys complain about "FULL" radar but yet to counter it, HQ is always DEAD leaving NO RADAR at all. At least in the CT, HQs are usually left alone. I have always wanted maned ack on top of HQ but it gets ignored. HQ is less defended than airfields.

The PTO maps have limited radar areas while the BoB maps have many radars with areas that cover two grids. If the is a fight on the map, I have no problem finding it. These guys wont use thiere heads to THINK and therefore "finding" the fight. They want it all HANDED to them.

B17Skull12 · « **Reply #66 on:** August 31, 2004, 02:25:18 PM »

um the CT is already a minima with out the planset the ma has.

Sable · « **Reply #67 on:** August 31, 2004, 02:35:13 PM »

So since we're talking about WW2 immersion, here's another question. Do people need to be able to capture fields all the time?

Our last two setups have been '41 and '43 ETO and there wasn't any base capture going on during either period. Do we really need to let the Germans capture dover, or the Brits take Calais? I agree with TheBeeg's statement above that those kind of things hurt immersion.

On the other hand, is the field capture dynamic of the game a "make or break" option for players in the CT? Will people stop playing in the CT if they can't capture a base?

TexMurphy · « **Reply #68 on:** August 31, 2004, 03:07:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sable
So since we're talking about WW2 immersion, here's another question. Do people need to be able to capture fields all the time?

Our last two setups have been '41 and '43 ETO and there wasn't any base capture going on during either period. Do we really need to let the Germans capture dover, or the Brits take Calais? I agree with TheBeeg's statement above that those kind of things hurt immersion.

Id say no it doesnt hurt immersion, it hurts realism feeling. These are two very different things.

Immersion is flying in a WW2 setting. Realism is recrating the actual scenario.

Immersion is flying English vs Germans over the english channel in roughly the era planes, meaning some planes that actually where not there can be. Why can it be so? Because its immersion and not realism. Sure it will hurt the immersion of the educated historian, but for that person only realism can create immersion.

Tex

jamusta · « **Reply #69 on:** August 31, 2004, 03:20:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by CurtissP-6EHawk
I guess what I should have said is that if the CT litteraly becomes a mini MA then I will leave. I dont like the MA. So you are correct in a way. Right now there are things we like and dislike. Push the ballance over the edge and something will collapse be it the arena or the players. In this case, I will collapse. Right now we have about 20 dedicated players. Change the settings and you might get 20 more but loose the 20 already here. Therefore, I fight for the settings that will keep me here.
BTW, I cant get into the CT staff forum.

Arlo made a point. MA guys complain about "FULL" radar but yet to counter it, HQ is always DEAD leaving NO RADAR at all. At least in the CT, HQs are usually left alone. I have always wanted maned ack on top of HQ but it gets ignored. HQ is less defended than airfields.

The PTO maps have limited radar areas while the BoB maps have many radars with areas that cover two grids. If the is a fight on the map, I have no problem finding it. These guys wont use thiere heads to THINK and therefore "finding" the fight. They want it all HANDED to them.

Once again no one is trying to turn this into a minin MA it is a mini MA. If you read my post you would see why losing dar isnt a real issue in the MA. THE CT DOES NOT HAVE THE NUMBERS TO NOT HAVE DAR!!!!! The set ups in the CT are great I just dont want to waste 30 minutes to find a fight. So I will check it out tonight and if it is as they say then I would ask the squad if they want to come into the CT for ops nights or whatever.

Mister Fork · « **Reply #70 on:** August 31, 2004, 03:31:10 PM »

Current CT setting for DAR (and has been for past two weeks) is FULL RADAR. FULL - EVERYTHING. Unless the pilot wants to fly below dar as NOE, if he's above the height, he should appear on dar.

Point#2 - full friendly has been enabled for almost a year now. You see your friendly pilots all the time. If you see a bee-hive of friendlies, maybe, just maybe there might be enemy forces close by.

VWE · « **Reply #71 on:** August 31, 2004, 04:02:23 PM »

Quote

Point#2 - full friendly has been enabled for almost a year now. You see your friendly pilots all the time. If you see a bee-hive of friendlies, maybe, just maybe there might be enemy forces close by.

Nooooo!! Really? Oh man... next sortie I'll look for that! Thanks ol' wise one.

Slash27 · « **Reply #72 on:** August 31, 2004, 04:06:33 PM »

Also i find my self fling the orginal Il2 more these days offline. I find it much more fun than AH and i get kills now and then,

Arent you back in school yet?

jamusta · « **Reply #73 on:** August 31, 2004, 04:07:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mister Fork

Point#2 - full friendly has been enabled for almost a year now. You see your friendly pilots all the time. If you see a bee-hive of friendlies, maybe, just maybe there might be enemy forces close by.

Tried that was close to enemy field. Only one problem, friendlies were ganging 4 to 1 already so no fun there. I didnt want to make it 5 on 1.

B17Skull12 · « **Reply #74 on:** August 31, 2004, 04:24:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Slash27
Also i find my self fling the orginal Il2 more these days offline. I find it much more fun than AH and i get kills now and then,

Arent you back in school yet?

No we get til next week after labour day.

Author Topic: CT needs more pilots... (Read 4915 times)

VWE

VWE