I'm on to you guys.

[republic]

If you left because you perceive what Kong posted was accurate yet you claim it exists in the MA .... 

Nevermind .... 

To me, it's often better to fly in the MA because you have no expectations.  The guy faceshoots you, sure...it's the MA.  He vulches or ackdrags...it's to be expected, it's the MA.

But many of us are still grappling with the idea of the new AvA, which is far different than the AvA of old, as the many forum posts from the week the new war started can prove.

Which is better the old AvA or the new?  Depends on who you ask, an old AvAer or a new guy.  Who's right?  I guess we all are.

[a4944]

I agree with Kong although perhaps not his delivery.  I played almost all last night and got into only a couple good fights.  It's all about porking the bases to prevent good fights.  AvA has historically been about fostering good fights.  The "war" direction is doing the opposite.   With the frontline base porking, it is now 80% flying, 20% fighting.  When I first started playing, it was more around 40% flying, 60% fighting if not more.  I love the AvA maps and how close the bases are but all of the frontline bases are porked so it's no better than MA in that regard now.  I'm OK with trying new concepts and will stick with it but so far I am disappointed.  Please put the fight first and foremost when making changes when trying new concepts.  Minimize the "time to fight".  This is not a strategic board game.

Venom

[Arlo]

To me, it's often better to fly in the MA because you have no expectations. 

To me, if you have a different expectation in the AvA for some reason, your rationalization over what makes the AvA different from the MA is built on a false perception. It was never intended to act as a refuge from any flight tactic, good or bad. It was never intended to act as a refuge from poor sportsmanship. It was never intended to be anything other than an alternative for players who wanted something other than every plane in the AHII inventory available on a three sided pizza (or other imaginative terrain) flown under the bishop, knight or rook banner. Something a bit more like World War II was. Some players are just funny like that.

I've never found the rationalization of "Well this is no better than the MA, think I'll go back there to play and never come back." a particularly well thought out one.

[Arlo]

This is not a strategic board game.

Actually .... it's kinda headed that way. I think it's a good move, if done well. Things can always be addressed based on how the players react to the setup. You and Kong express a grievance that doesn't hit me quite as heavy. I flew with you to a base to check for bogies while Bug and co was covering the other one quite sufficiently (during the darbar blackout). Two were there. We had to eyeball them and I took my Hurri to the fight. They seemed more interested in deacking the base than engaging or evading so I got two in quick succession (I'm thinking they were under orders to suppress the ack at all costs, and cost them it did). Even with our opponents (and ourselves at both odd hours and peak ones) using a strategy of popping hangars to keep the other guy at bay (certainly a valid defensive move when outnumbered or anticipating such) more fights would happen if just the one-time Axis habitation of the arena in-force at most hours would resume. I think the political forum posturing and petitioning has taken it's toll.

[republic]

To me, if you have a different expectation in the AvA for some reason, your rationalization over what makes the AvA different from the MA is built on a false perception. It was never intended to act as a refuge from any flight tactic, good or bad. It was never intended to act as a refuge from poor sportsmanship. It was never intended to be anything other than an alternative for players who wanted something other than every plane in the AHII inventory available on a three sided pizza (or other imaginative terrain) flown under the bishop, knight or rook banner. Something a bit more like World War II was. Some players are just funny like that.

I've never found the rationalization of "Well this is no better than the MA, think I'll go back there to play and never come back." a particularly well thought out one.

With all due respect, the AvA was a very different place.  I'm sorry you didn't have the opportunity to experience that...but the idea that our "rationalizations" are somehow flawed...simply because our experiences have differed from your experiences...is a bunch of poo.

I think a bit more humility and less hubris would do us all some good.  We all have valid ideas and experiences concerning the arena, both the old timers who left long ago, the midtimers who enjoyed the 'happy times' and the new blood from the MA and Warbirds.

[Arlo]

I think a bit more humility and less hubris would do us all some good. 

I tend to agree.

And that could well be applied to one's presumption of an unwritten chivalric code supposedly making a player socially acceptable or a pariah (and if a stoning is in order then let the mass suicide begin). Just sayin'. *ShruG*

And this will be brought up again, I'm fairly certain. Although my trackrecord is dead-set against, no telling what may happen between now and then. Right now, though, I'm not betting on this horse.

[Odee]

This one knows too much. Time to call in "The Cleaner".

 

Good post Kong!   

However I think the whole point was to show a semblance of how difficult a war is to fight, and not how easy it is to vulch/pick/gang.

 

[XAKL]

I'd like to make it even more like MA by providing All the Planes repective to their countries and a giant map, none of this rotating planes and winning selected planes. 

VH hangers get early set planes

Small Airfield get Mid war planes

Medium Airfields get late war planes minus, the jets, Tempests, Ta-152,

Large Airfields get All planes All vehicles

MUGADAI of the MUNGADAI WARRIORS

[Arlo]

I'm pretty sure things can't be set that way by the staff due to settings limitations.

[JagdTankker]

I'm pretty sure things can't be set that way by the staff due to settings limitations.

you can set a certain plane to each field, it would just take a while to set it up.

then you gotta find someone who can do it.

[Arlo]

Ok then ... I'm thinking Mug was being sarcastic. 

[republic]

I tend to agree.

And that could well be applied to one's presumption of an unwritten chivalric code supposedly making a player socially acceptable or a pariah (and if a stoning is in order then let the mass suicide begin). Just sayin'. *ShruG*

The ideas (good or bad) for improving the AvA are hardly hubris, it's when one takes offense to anothers idea, or refuses to allow them the benefit of discussion when hubris rears it's ugly head.

[Arlo]

I beg to differ. Ideas are often both arrived at and delivered with an air of hubris. I find an attempt to make an arena that could use more numbers (for obvious reasons) more exclusive by suggesting unrealistic rules of chilvalry to be community enforced to the point of running off anyone perceived to play the game in an ungentlemanly manner (and, quite frankly, 90% of the aspersions cast upon others in the game are just that, perception .... and generally not very accurate) not only anything but humble ... I find it a foolish move. We disagree. The tact (and time) you're taking to explain your stance more thoroughly is not convincing me otherwise. And if you further perceive what we're doing as anything but discussion ... well there you go.

[republic]

My only stance is that change is possible, beyond that I really haven't voiced an opinion on the matter.

I'm sorry to say your wrong about the 'unrealistic' rules of chivalry.  They existed before you returned this time and before your 2 week return a few weeks ago.  I believe you when you say you were a part of CT in the past (your forum id is proof at least you existed here at that time), and I believe you when you say it wasn't 'chivalrous' then.  Why you can't fathom the reality that existed in the AvA while you were absent is beyond me.

Every idea should have proper discussion as to it's merits and faults.  No one's opinion is greater than any other.  The noob's 14.95 is just as important as the oldtimer of yor's 14.95.

So, in effect, I agree to disagree with you.

[Arlo]

My only stance is that change is possible, beyond that I really haven't voiced an opinion on the matter.

Really now? For someone who's voiced no opinion you sure seem at odds with mine.