NOT FUN ANY MORE!!!

[grizz441]

Could it be we accept the fact that we have some say in whether we have fun within the parameters of the game?  There are a ton of choices in how you play, a ton of options as to what you can fly, drive, etc.  People come and go and come back again.  Sometimes folks just need a break too.

Could it be the parameters of the game are acting as a hindrance to the game's full blossoming?  It works well enough to keep its cult following of ww2 enthusiasts and the trickling in of new players, but truly great games continue to steadily grow over time.

[doc1kelley]

i agree with you dan, people seem to complain no matter what HTC does or doesn't do to the game. people need to realize that HTC wouldn't make changes to the game if they didn't find it necessary. even if HTC makes changes and later finds out that they didn't work, they always try to do the best thing for the game along with giving the members what they want. we are all human and at some points we are never satisfied but many that are unhappy just seem to like to whine and cry about it a little too much IMHO.

Yes the people will complain if you gave them a newly printed fifty dollar bill, but the fact remains that the game itself has evolved from just an air combat simulation where capturing bases was meant to engage in air combat into a whole different animal in itself.  The hard-core live just to fight majority has left the room with Elvis and yes, we do have a lot of dinosaurs that live and cry by the creed that the game is just about promoting air combat, but that just doesn't float the majority of the casual player's boat.  I have to state that Grizz and company does GET IT!  The meat and potatoes of the game has evolved into something more along the lines of women like my wife, needy and high maintenance!  The majority of the player base needs a goal for them to achieve and they don't live for the "Fight".  They want to feel like they are going to accomplish something for their efforts and just winning a dogfight against another player is not enough.  You can blame it on society as personal responsibility and honor have been replaced with the liberal doctrine.  The bottom line is that the player base needs something to receive for their efforts.  Hitech wouldn't constantly strive to improve the game if he still thought it was all about just the personal fight strictly airplane to airplane and person to person combat.  To grow the game, you have to grow the rewards.  In a perfect world, we could have a game that perfectly reflected the real look and feel of true air combat, but in reality it would be hours upon hours of boredom and just a few minutes of true fear, and you wouldn't be able to jump back into the air because you would be dead or recovering from an injury.

All the Best...

   Jay

[pervert]

The meat and potatoes of the game has evolved into something more along the lines of women like my wife, needy and high maintenance!  The majority of the player base needs a goal for them to achieve and they don't live for the "Fight".  They want to feel like they are going to accomplish something for their efforts and just winning a dogfight against another player is not enough.  You can blame it on society as personal responsibility and honor have been replaced with the liberal doctrine.  

Well said

[Shuffler]

Why is everything instantly called a whine? Should we never think about the game, look for possible improvements or adjustments? Never gather any ideas or opinions on how things could further evolve? Just because "you can't please everyone all the time" we should stop to think about how to increase AHs's appeal? Should I just shrug my shoulders when I see my fav game has much less people playing than years ago? (Yes, the business side is not my business, but I want a thriving game population just for egoistical reasons )

Dan just posted the way the win the war types are posting. Do you suggest that both sides of this discussion have different rules?

Your idea of what is appealing is just that... your idea. It is not necessarily appealing to anyone else.

The Game is a business. One that has been very successful. One that wishes to continue being successful.

HT monitors what is said on the boards. It doesn't mean he will do what someone else thinks they want.

[Solar10]

Small towns & High Dar = Not fun - Steamrolling
Big towns & Low Dar = Not fun - Stalemate

Big Town & High Dar
or
Small Towns & Low DAR = Might work.


BTW.  I don't care either way.  I can find a good fight most times.  I get more satisfaction from a good 1-1 than taking a town.

[Lusche]

.

nevermind. It's pointless.

[gldnbb]

 The bottom line is that the player base needs something to receive for their efforts.  Hitech wouldn't constantly strive to improve the game if he still thought it was all about just the personal fight strictly airplane to airplane and person to person combat.........  To grow the game, you have to grow the rewards.


   Jay

Yes the player base needs something to receive for our efforts,  and not just the fighter jocks (air combat) who by happenstance benefit the most of it all.

With the radar settings now they are,  it is much much harder to receiving something for our efforts.  THe dar bar from rear bases also don't help.   The tight-arena caps,  squash cooperation so that HTC can 'pack em in'.   All these issues go against what you just said.    It does not makes it worth pouring your heart out trying to capture a base,  and just denegrates the fight into about    "airplane to airplane and person to person combat".

I can't even remember the last time I witnessed one side winning the 'war'.      Bases are taken here and  then taken back,  arena maps are frequently changed, and what you have instead  is a meat grinder  of  base takes on all sides,  with a deluge of air-air combat.

[Yeager]

because a small squadron still can't kill a town by itself efficiently anymore because it is too spread out.  

Are you kidding?  Most players who kill towns have learned where all the buildings are.  It isn't like there are ten thousand buildings on an ever changing undulating landscape.  Its a stagnant things.  Its simply a matter of memory and it isn't that hard.  People have GOT to be learning the new town layout by now?  Hell, two of us can kill a town now in a few minutes if left unchallenged by defenders.  Now, if there is a large defending force, then overwhelming counter force needs to be brought into play.  I still think HTs biggest flaw has been in thinking 500+ people can have a good time in a single arena.  There is such a thing as "too many people" in the sandbox.

[betty]

ok, i have a question for all the "base takers"....

would you feel more victorious if you took a base that had opposition or would you feel more victorious by taking a base that is undefended?

to me, IF and that is a BIG IF, i were to try to take a base (which i have done many times in the past), i would much rather have opposition that to take one that is not defended. sure you have to work for it but if you really want it bad enough, you will get it right?

just curious is all....

[Soulyss]

ok, i have a question for all the "base takers"....

would you feel more victorious if you took a base that had opposition or would you feel more victorious by taking a base that is undefended?

to me, IF and that is a BIG IF, i were to try to take a base (which i have done many times in the past), i would much rather have opposition that to take one that is not defended. sure you have to work for it but if you really want it bad enough, you will get it right?

just curious is all....

I could be wrong here, because I don't engage in that part of the game very often but I think the amount of satisfaction would come with the goal they are striving for.  If the goal is the base then yes, a hard fought and won battle for the field would probably be more satisfying, however is the goal is the map at large and "winning the war" then I would say it's the opposite because one field is just one step in the process and it's more of a race, getting multiple bases is the goal, and if someone is playing for finite period of time then the object would be to get as many fields in that given period of time to achieve the same sense of accomplishment.

But I'm just taking a shot in the dark here.

[thndregg]

ok, i have a question for all the "base takers"....

would you feel more victorious if you took a base that had opposition or would you feel more victorious by taking a base that is undefended?

to me, IF and that is a BIG IF, i were to try to take a base (which i have done many times in the past), i would much rather have opposition that to take one that is not defended. sure you have to work for it but if you really want it bad enough, you will get it right?

just curious is all....

I've done both. Usually what has resulted in the past sneaks I have done, both failed and successful, is that the opposition at defended bases is split. My point is distraction first off. If the sneak works, then the result is a counter-force trying to take it back and then we are defending. OMG.. did I just describe a resulting fight?

[1Boner]

ok, i have a question for all the "base takers"....

would you feel more victorious if you took a base that had opposition or would you feel more victorious by taking a base that is undefended?

to me, IF and that is a BIG IF, i were to try to take a base (which i have done many times in the past), i would much rather have opposition that to take one that is not defended. sure you have to work for it but if you really want it bad enough, you will get it right?

just curious is all....

So if those guys were going on a NOE mission to a base and no one ups to defend it, are they supposed to turn around or abort the mission?

Alot of bases were left "undefended" because no one wanted to defend them.


And don't hand me that "they were too hard to detect" crap. No they weren't.


There are tons of bases on the map--if some guys decide to take some off the beaten track base, who cares?? How does that affect your furball?

[betty]

So if those guys were going on a NOE mission to a base and no one ups to defend it, are they supposed to turn around or abort the mission?

Alot of bases were left "undefended" because no one wanted to defend them.


And don't hand me that "they were too hard to detect" crap. No they weren't.


There are tons of bases on the map--if some guys decide to take some off the beaten track base, who cares?? How does that affect your furball?

i know many squads in the game that love the NOE missions, and so be it, i was just curious in which they would feel more victorious. and personally i could care less if people are taking bases, just as long as their not TT bases then its all good. yes boner im a furballer, i go where the fight is, i was just simply asking a  question....

[68ZooM]

ok, i have a question for all the "base takers"....

would you feel more victorious if you took a base that had opposition or would you feel more victorious by taking a base that is undefended?

to me, IF and that is a BIG IF, i were to try to take a base (which i have done many times in the past), i would much rather have opposition that to take one that is not defended. sure you have to work for it but if you really want it bad enough, you will get it right?

just curious is all....

Not just a base taker here, i try do do whats fun at the time kinda person, first off, in this game now there is no way to take a undefended base...unless that country is blind and can't see the town or Field flashing on the map OR theres no one online for that country, go see EW and MW Arenas for that scenario, to many are concerned with rank and score to bail from a plane and go to that Field to help defend or just show up to furrball and could care less if the Field falls.

 As far as what i have seen from helping with a town and Field attack for capture is that the attacking force there is holding there own, more friendlies show up ( your assuming to help) but they just want to furrball with the defenders and not help with taking the base, that's where taking of the base or town gets real hard, like someone posted it takes longer for the attackers to get back to the Field/town then the defenders, UNLESS you drop the FH and VH and BH all in one pass and totally capping thus not allowing anyone to up, this scenario falls under the horde scenario, seems like the horde way is the trend now

[CptTrips]

ok, i have a question for all the "base takers"....

would you feel more victorious if you took a base that had opposition or would you feel more victorious by taking a base that is undefended?

to me, IF and that is a BIG IF, i were to try to take a base (which i have done many times in the past), i would much rather have opposition that to take one that is not defended. sure you have to work for it but if you really want it bad enough, you will get it right?

just curious is all....

I may have missed it, but I don’t think I’ve seen anyone in this thread demand to always have undefended base captures.  I know for a fact, I’ve fully stipulated (several times) that making base capture too easy would be sub-optimal.

What I’d like to see from you, and others, is a good faith admission that we also don’t want base capture to be too hard.  That also would not promote an ideal play-balance.

Once we both stipulate that, we can then begin to have a rational discussion on where that ideal balance point lies.  Which might be exactly where it is right now.  Or perhaps more towards one side or the other.

If I did nothing but dismiss anything you said as the babbling of the brainless ADHD furball-mafia, then we wouldn’t make much progress.  

If you do nothing but dismiss out-of-hand any suggestion, or re-balancing idea as nothing but valueless whining, then it will also be hard for us to have an intelligent exchange of ideas.

Is what is appealing to me appealing to everyone?  No.  And visa versa I might add.  What we are searching for is what can be appealing to the largest number of the current and future customers, while being  dissatisfying to the smallest number possible.

That’s not a binary equation, and there will be no black and white answer.   I don’t know the exact answer;  neither do you;  and (shock) neither does HTC.

It’s a learning process for everyone and player feedback and discussion are important inputs to that evaluation.

Regards,
Wab