Basically, in the way I perceive it, its not necessarily the system that creates the horde. Its the unorganized, chaotic, and lazy nature of AH gamers who just love freedom but hate responsibilities, that created the horde. In other words, its our fault.
However, the system of the game should at least try to motivate people into organizing things out, so something more than brute force can be used in the game.
The more varied role for pilots there is in the game, the more different situations we may meet. In other words, the system should try to give people something to do, rather than do nothing, so whenever someone logs on he doesn't just go immediately join the largest green dar bar in the map.
The basic AH system hardly intervenes to balance and organize the arena so that war-like tactics can be utilized to bring out more dynamic and fun situations.
What I mean by this is, for example, look at Fighter Ace territorial combat. In FA, the AI system launches ground assaults in the positions it thinks it is needed, and this fact is relayed to the gamers so that they are motivated to either assist the ground assault as an attacker, or drive them back as a defender.
Now, the system itself isn't up to much(at least, I think it sucked). However, there are many such methods to motivate self-organization.
There are many ideas we can think about to reduce the inorganizational nature of AH gamers.
*Example of Ideas*
Idea #1
To reduce the horde problem the system can try to adopt a "fighter squadron" or "air force" concept. Each log in, we choose for ourselves on which of the two "fronts" to join and fight. If the pilot numbers for the two fronts becomes too lopsided, the system will try to distribute and assign players into the opposite front. This will stop people from clogging into a single front to form a gang-banging horde.
The system may calculate in certain ways to determine if things are going good or bad at a certain front - like, if a side continuously loses fields at a certain front, then the system will determine that it is losing the battle there. So, it will assign and move some of the squadrons at the another front, to come and fight at the losing front.
If a player really wants to be transferred to another front, then he will go to the Staff building in the airfield(the O'club perhaps?), and request a transfer. If he sees another player at the front he wants to go, who wants to come to your front, then you may trade places with him.
While this removes the freedom to move around anywhere from players, (which is probably subject of criticism to those guys who absolutely love AH freedom(which they only use as 'the freedom to ruin your own country' in most cases)), it does give an overall numbers balance to the fronts.
Each players at each front fights with the limited number of forces they are given with. (Although they can respawn endlessly). So, they'll have to make better use of power. It also simulates the feeling of being in a real airforce, and gives some life and color to the "War".
Idea #2
When the system sees an opportunity - when certain conditions are met - it might want to launch a GV strike, or a buff raid, or a sweep mission.
The system will notify of all the pilots in the country that it wants to launch an assault at certain point. It will need volunteers for the mission, and it will set objectives and condition perimeters;
ie.
"The HQ has decided to launch a strike to fuel refinery. 15 pilots are required in this mission. The objectives are to reach the target at 15,000 feet, start an attack, and destroy at least 50% of the fuel refinery. Successful mission will be rewarded with 30 fighter perks upon landing."
or...
"The HQ had decided to launch a GV strike to V37. 10 GV drivers are required in this mission. The objectives are to reach the enemy field and destroy at least one VH. Successful mission will be rewarded with 30 GV perks immediately upon mission completed."
This will interest the people in the opportunity to participate in organized missions with specific objectives and rewards.
Another example; the AI generated mission idea as hinted by HT, doesn't necessarily have to be exclusive in the TOD mode.
Every half an hour or so, the "HQ" deems a certain mission is necessary. It creates a fighter sweep mission in one country, and another fighter sweep mission towards the same area, in the enemy country.
Depending on mission participant numbers a certain objective and reward will be set. For instance, if 10 people participate in Rook side, and only 5 in Knight side, the Knight side requirements to be shoot only 30% of the Rook sweepers, while the Rook side will be required to sweep and shoot down all Knits. The target enemy planes will be highlighted in another color.
The MA version will lack the leadership or the evaluation phases, but it will reward the player with perks upon mission accomplished, and returned home safely.
.......
I don't necessarily think the above examples can be directly used in AH. Literally they are only examples. But the point is, AH MA being transformed into a large warring environment, doesn't mean we have to play the same brute-horde push everyday. New organization, incentives, AI missions, simulating military environment and conditions, etc etc... there are many ideas that can take the huge MA numbers and competitiveness to make something better out of it.
If people can't organize themselves, the system can at least try to help people experience something new, different, and fun - to make the best out of how AH is currently.
As it is, while people are so competitive, the system is so passive. However, with such great numbers in the MA, the only way to get rid of the brute-force tactics is to organize the people into an effective fighting force - and this is impossible without empowering a certain individual to become the "general". The only alternative is to let the system deal out more various situations, to increase the fun factor in the warring states.
