Author Topic: Defining bad game-play  (Read 36704 times)

Offline Dadsguns

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1979
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #255 on: April 20, 2009, 09:33:24 PM »
Nothing that you do is new, unique, or hasn't been done time and again for 10-20yrs before you ever heard of WW2 flight sims.

Good, then its nothing new.  You can now get some sleep for a change.  See you in the friendly skies......  :lol


"Your intelligence is measured by those around you; if you spend your days with idiots you seal your own fate."

Offline The Fugitive

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17921
      • Fugi's Aces Help
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #256 on: April 20, 2009, 09:43:07 PM »
WOW,a day at work and people get worked up...


 Any side would of fought to get those bases back..WHY?? because while the FB is going on,there are some rooks somewhere in that mass who are trying to get the port and get the CV back again,they are on every side..This is why bish needed to get back 9 and 10 to protect the areas west of those bases..WHY?? because rooks have people on their side just as every side does who wants to take bases..We are protecting our interests,dont rooks and nits??I bet they do..


 As far as what I said to you fugitive..I have the screenshot of 99% of the convo.

 I never said anything about trying to break up the FB,only that the base needed to be taken back..If taking bases and holding them is not rook priority,then why ruin GV'ers fun by keeping V10,which was just as down and dirty fighting as was at A9..when,if rooks would of given it up,there could of been some "FUN" gv fighting by rooks and bish,But that is not the reason why you guys took 9,and why rooks kept 10...It is because it is LAND which you did not own prior..If the furball between the CV and A9 was such a big deal,and such "FUN"why did rooks keep killing the "FUN" by killing the CV??I know why:
      Because of the natural propensity of sides to MOVE into other territory which they do not own..


    You were only on for that long as you say and then PM me that I am ruining your fun??And that if it is the same in the north,which BTW you guys were fighting nits,that you were going to log off?? and THANKS to ME for ruining your fun???...

  Not ONE BISH was upset that we got 9 and 10 back..why is that?? because it was a detriment for you guys to be that close to our mainland in that area..


  And for the record here is the screenshot I took of our convo...

 Where I am telling you all sides do that,you had spoken to me about not needing that many to take a VBASE,and my reply was that I have no control over the bish,and that a mission had not been posted..

 You guys holler about there not being enough furballs,or AvA combat..it is all over the map if that is your true gripe..If it is just that there are many in a mission,well,it is nothing out of the norm for any side to run missions of that sort.. :salute

                                  



I believe the PM I sent you was congrats on killing another fight.  You replied that "you were tired of the FB "so you set out to take the base. I did give you crap about taking the VB, but not because "you took it" I couldn't care less whos base it is, it was the WAY you take the bases that is the issue. I just don't understand how you people don't get this.

Taking bases = GOOD !
Running Mission = GOOD !

This.......




.... BAD !!

Can you understand that? 20 vs 3 is poor game play?

The other thing you guys are a riot about is this "It is because it is LAND which you did not own prior..." !! Give me a break!! ITS PIXELS !!! ITS A GAME !!! THERE REALLY IS NO WAR !!

Yes you "ruin my fun" and many others as well. With your game play, and defense of this poor game play, as well as leading other towards this game play you are ruining what was once a great game. To you it might be great now, but it is only mediocre game these days, it has lost its greatness some time ago. As long as their are players who defend this type of play, and their main reason in defense of it is "well they do it too!" The game will never get better, unless HTC steps in. AND YES THE KNIGHTS RUIN IT AS WELL AS THE ROOKS.

I'll keep to my guns, and call for better game play and if 1 of every 100 that reads these boards looks to get better, and avoid lame play I'd be very happy. Someday even you ....if you stay around in the game long enough will see the light. See I've been there before, leader of a big squad (bish squad btw), had to capture as many bases as we could for the war effort, thought that was the only fun there was...ruining others fun just to grab another base. I learn eventually that the fun was the game itself, flying and fighting, winning WAS the battle. Plans changed, and became more challenging, hence more fun, for both sides. For now its more important for you guys to "own the land" than it is to play the game. Its like the guy who flys a spit all the time NEVER trying another ride. Sure hes having fun, but he is also missing out on some much more the game has to offer.

Yes I will still fly against your horde. Yes I'll get frustrated and look elsewhere for a "good" fight. And yes on many a night I'll log off in stead of dealing with the stupidity of lame game play. After all this IS a game and I play it to have fun.  


Offline oTRALFZo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 941
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #257 on: April 20, 2009, 10:24:58 PM »

   NOw we get to the real reason for the attack on dadsguns,you are getting personal,that he wont fight you in the DA...


Why not get in the DA with him? As "elitist" as Lute may seem, hes a good guy given you dont give him a pissant attitude. I gaurantee that you will come out of it with a wealth of information and new found respect for eachother.
****Let the beatings begin***


in game name: Tralfaz

Offline NoBaddy

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2943
      • http://www.damned.org
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #258 on: April 20, 2009, 10:45:08 PM »
Why not get in the DA with him? As "elitist" as Lute may seem, hes a good guy given you dont give him a pissant attitude. I gaurantee that you will come out of it with a wealth of information and new found respect for eachother.

Oh don't be silly. They know everything they need to know. Outnumber & capture. What else is there?? :rolleyes:

NoBaddy (NB)

Flying since before there was virtual durt!!
"Ego is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity."

Offline LYNX

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2263
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #259 on: April 20, 2009, 11:07:26 PM »
B.S. it does. I do not have time to treat Aces High like a paying career. When it really gets down to it, this is the most trivial thing to devote hours upon hours to. Silly wabbit.
Meanwhile, Boxboy's quote in my sig is where I stand.

This is it right here.  Did I hit the nail on the head or what.   :rofl  The fact that you've missed the point between score (rank) and STATISTICS.....again :(  is beside the point right now.   

So what your inferring above is and correct me if I'm wrong, you don't have a lot of time to play Aces High.  So by default this explains your poor skills in this combat sim game.  So!.... if that's correct this means the time you have isn't used to improve your game.  Learning the ins & outs of combat maneuvers combined with situation awareness and gunnery.  It's used solely to mission up

Do you not see the irony here.  The fact you lack the skills or can't be bothered to learn them you deem it, in your own mind as a mission planner, necessary to swamp a place like a port with 20+ P47's (enough to take a large field) in the name of team work, camaraderie and fun. 

Oh well!  I suppose when you've given up learning there isn't much else for you to do.  What worries me is the new guys that come here have less and less skilled folks to set an example.   :uhoh


Offline thndregg

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4032
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #260 on: April 20, 2009, 11:10:08 PM »
Bish and squad get along with me fine. Comradery is fun. That's why I play, when I play. Sorry if it spoils your sandbox.

If and when Hitech stops me, that is when you will be happy.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2009, 11:12:02 PM by thndregg »
Former C.O. 91st Bombardment Group (Heavy)
"The Ragged Irregulars"

Offline AH Vet

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #261 on: April 21, 2009, 12:14:35 AM »
  What worries me is the new guys that come here have less and less skilled folks to set an example.   :uhoh



What woorries me is the new guys come along and see LYNX setting an example as a skilled player who they look upto and want to reach the same uberness and skill level.  Then they will quit there job and give up on life so they can play aces high every hour god sends so they can be super uber like there hero LYNX.


Offline LYNX

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2263
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #262 on: April 21, 2009, 12:40:20 AM »
Bish and squad get along with me fine. Comradery is fun. That's why I play, when I play. Sorry if it spoils your sandbox.   This in its self doesn't spoil my sand box. 

If and when Hitech stops me, that is when you will be happy.  On the contrary.  I'll be most pissed off if that happens because the punitive messures that HTC takes, if at all to be fair to add, will affect US ALL.

I have no objections to missions or the occasional NOE missions.  I'm a strat player like yourself.  What I object to is these rather pathetic skilless over kill missions that have been occurring of late.  I say of late because that's bang on.  I'm not sat here saying "in ye olden days it was like this blah blah".  I've been here since 2002 and the only time I witnessed a mission like these was over 4 years ago.  A 30 man Lgay mission by, of all people, GHI.  The first eastern block mission planner  :D 

These types of over kill missions are becoming a little to frequent.  I would hate them to become acceptable.  I would loath them to be adapted by all sides.  I think there bad for game play on the whole but using your Hitech example neither of us know what their thinking.  So lets hypothesis.  Say they do change something like making the mission planner have a maximum of 12 players per mission from any given field.  What would you do then.  Roll with the punches as in the case of ENY, split arenas, the same small maps for months on end.  Would you adapt or just say "oh heck the games not fun anymore.  I'm outta here"

Offline LYNX

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2263
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #263 on: April 21, 2009, 12:55:12 AM »
What woorries me is the new guys come along and see LYNX setting an example as a skilled player who they look upto and want to reach the same uberness and skill level.  Then they will quit there job and give up on life so they can play aces high every hour god sends so they can be super uber like there hero LYNX.

Hey shade boy.  Instead of being facetious.  Why not interject or hypothesis :rolleyes: about the topic?

Offline oTRALFZo

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 941
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #264 on: April 21, 2009, 04:52:24 AM »
Well, here's a double edged sword. Let's say these guys are average players. Let's say it takes more average players to take a base than the skilled players you talk about.  Are the average players to refrain from taking bases because they are not elite? Let's say you can take the base with half as many players...that's great but........ so what? You have the benefit of getting in the game sooner than many of the average players. Because they are further down the learning curve, are they somehow less entitled to try to take bases? If they need the numbers to have a good chance at success, should they be deprived of this fun?

You can argue that they need to get better.... OK.  Why can't they try to take bases in the mean time?  While this is going on the skilled pilots can continue to encourage these folks to improve.  The vets can offer advice, training, etc.

 Lute, you know I hold you in high regard but, IMHO, your position smacks of elitism. We need a continuing influx of players to keep the game alive. Discouraging noobs will contribute to the demise of the game.  Yes, I understand you are trying to "show them the way" to improve.. I get it. I think that many of these hordelings are people who enjoy teamwork and the comraderie of a group objective. Many of them would also get slaughtered if they ventured outside the cozy confines of the horde. Some will evolve, some will quit, others will be hordelings for life. I just don't think we should belittle them overmuch... just enough perhaps to encourage them to fly from the nest (horde).   :salute

Lifetime hordelings cannot be cured, they can only be shot down, again, and again, and again.    :aok
Great post Steve. Like most here, my AH time is sometimes limited to a sortie or 2 or 20. I dont have time  to run missions or what have you.  During those times, Ill scope the map and look  for the nearest furball or head into tank town for a brief enjoyment. Those armchair generals that are in question the ones that wanna win da War3 at all cost are the ones that look at places like tanktown or furballs as a "waste in resourses". that the ones that are in there arent helping the "ultimate cause". So what do they do?..they bomb it, obliterate it AT ALL COST to make sure their countrymates have nothing else to do but help in reseting the maps. Ive seen it.
Shoot them down you say?..Id love too. Have you ever played hopscotch with these guys around the map on a night?..they do EVERYTHING to avoid me shooting them down. You stop the NOE at say A35. Give it 2 minutes before you see wayyyy off a base flashing with 50 GVs trying to camp the feild. rinse and repeat. This goes on and on all night trust me
****Let the beatings begin***


in game name: Tralfaz

Offline frank3

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9352
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #265 on: April 21, 2009, 05:09:21 AM »
Can you understand that? 20 vs 3 is poor game play?

How can it be bad gameplay? Because your team didn't menage to up enough players to counter the attack? Or because the enemy did go through the trouble of working as a team?

Offline thndregg

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4032
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #266 on: April 21, 2009, 07:30:19 AM »
Maybe if I advertised where our mission is (despite the darbar that stays visible for minutes on end) on ch.200 it'll help the other side get organized and (GASP!) it will create a fight.
Former C.O. 91st Bombardment Group (Heavy)
"The Ragged Irregulars"

Offline Dadsguns

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1979
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #267 on: April 21, 2009, 07:44:55 AM »
Maybe if I advertised where our mission is (despite the darbar that stays visible for minutes on end) on ch.200 it'll help the other side get organized and (GASP!) it will create a fight.

 :rofl  Been done already,,, still didnt stop it.  They didnt even show up.

How can it be bad gameplay? Because your team didn't menage to up enough players to counter the attack? Or because the enemy did go through the trouble of working as a team?

Which this is the result.


Fug, your snapshot says more than just bish attacking your town, there were as many rooks if not more around that base, where were they?  20k+ above the base, NW of the base attacking the CV preventing any aircraft getting in, several at the V-base covering for any bombers, EVERYTHING was covered, except your own base.  We took advantage of this, its that simple.

As for lynx saying he is seeing MORE of these missions, Your out of touch or your making it up, As for Bish goes, I see less of these missions than the last several years and many longtime bish will agree with that.  I do recall seeing many missions posted over and over with missions in the past, there is nowhere near that amount going on now.

Maybe running them more often and at the same pace as the past will jog your memory and give you a warm and fuzzy.

Shoot them down you say?..Id love too. Have you ever played hopscotch with these guys around the map on a night?..they do EVERYTHING to avoid me shooting them down. You stop the NOE at say A35. Give it 2 minutes before you see wayyyy off a base flashing with 50 GVs trying to camp the feild. rinse and repeat. This goes on and on all night trust me

Is this kind of like the day I shot you down 3 times in a row to kill some tents at an airfield, taking them down at all cost..... and then hide in the "BIG RED DAR"  Is that the kind of avoidance you speak of, help me understand what you mean by avoiding YOU shooting THEM down.   :lol
« Last Edit: April 21, 2009, 07:59:46 AM by Dadsguns »


"Your intelligence is measured by those around you; if you spend your days with idiots you seal your own fate."

Offline thndregg

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4032
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #268 on: April 21, 2009, 08:17:24 AM »
:rofl  Been done already,,, still didnt stop it.  They didnt even show up.

Which this is the result.
I'll have to test this out then (again) Friday night. I'll post a "Lead the Rook By The Nose" mission. I mean, what's the worst that can happen? More of this? I'm still alive and kicking so far.
Former C.O. 91st Bombardment Group (Heavy)
"The Ragged Irregulars"

Offline Dadsguns

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1979
Re: Defining bad game-play
« Reply #269 on: April 21, 2009, 08:30:24 AM »
(Image removed from quote.)I'll have to test this out then (again) Friday night. I'll post a "Lead the Rook By The Nose" mission. I mean, what's the worst that can happen? More of this? I'm still alive and kicking so far.

Sounds good. 
Whats going to be funny is the type of resistance that shows up, everything from under the kitchen sink that can peel a tater......  :lol  if anything at all.

Alive and well myself, as a matter of fact getting ready for summer, got the Jetski and Boat ready, tents weather proofed, camping gear, got a 2 week camping trip planned out....   


"Your intelligence is measured by those around you; if you spend your days with idiots you seal your own fate."