Arena cap is getting out of hand

[SlapShot]

bad idea to place arena caps based upon each country.. it would encourage country hopping.. spying etc. Some would change country, fool around, spy, then when the hour was up, switch back to their "normal" country.

All that is available now.

As far as "encourage country hopping", I doubt it. Those who are "loyal" will remain "loyal". Those who don't give a crap what country they fly for, but want to get into a capped arena can do so and help balance that arena at the same time.

[Dadsguns]

Dads .. yes, those numbers do show an imbalance,,,,, but the door is closed to any more ........................

That is what needs to be determined is what is a healthy amount in that imbalance.  As an example, even 10 more on a side can have a negative impact at these low numbers of 33%. ie 33, 22, 22 waiting for the other sides to fill.

Having a 30% difference in imbalance probably is a little high, but getting it closer to 5% difference to start off with when there are lower numbers in the arena might be better between the 3 sides, and with that difference in percent would decrease as the players in the arena increases until it reaches capacity then it would be as this example a 0% difference on all sides, all sides would be equal at capacity.  When its at its lowest capacity it should be no more than as this example 5% difference in players per side.

It would be ideal to have a balance of 1 for 1 for 1, but I am not sure if that is even achievable since it would have to incorporate numbers that fluctuate due to logging off etc. as well...

[SlapShot]

That is what needs to be determined is what is a healthy amount in that imbalance.  As an example, even 10 more on a side can have a negative impact at these low numbers of 33%. ie 33, 22, 22 waiting for the other sides to fill.

Having a 30% difference in inbalance probably is a little high, but getting it closer to 5% difference to start off with when there are lower numbers in the arena might be better between the 3 sides, and with that difference in percent would decrease as the players in the arena increases until it reaches capacity then it would be as this example a 0% difference on all sides, all sides would be equal at capacity.  When its at its lowest capacity it should be no more than as this example 5% difference in players per side.

It would be ideal to have a balance of 1 for 1 for 1, but I am not sure if that is even achievable since it would have to incorporate numbers that fluctuate due to logging off etc. as well...

Your right ... but allowing 11 more people to enter for each of the countries that were at 22 is much better than not allowing the "balance".

[Dadsguns]

Your right ... but allowing 11 more people to enter for each of the countries that were at 22 is much better than not allowing the "balance".

My example is not preventing anyone to enter nor did it not allow the balance. 
It simply keeps the imbalance at a more manageable number than the example given of 10 players at 30% to a more manageable number of 5% difference in the imbalance which decreases as it gets closer to final capacity of 0% imbalance.

[AKDogg]

What he is saying Hitech is only allow enough people to balance the countries within the arena, then totally lock it till Blue is up in #'s.

[Dadsguns]

What he is saying Hitech is only allow enough people to balance the countries within the arena, then totally lock it till Blue is up in #'s.

Not necessarily. 
The objective is to bring more balance to each arena. If HT decides to lock out arenas or what ever he thinks needs to be done is up to him, my point is that the imbalance should not be greater than 5% advantage at any point as the arena fills up to maximum capacity in which then it would be 0% imbalance or equal sides at max.

My point being is players have had the chance to prove that we can balance the numbers out ourselves and were given incentives to do so but have horribly failed, what we have now is the polarized sides that refuse to balance things out for no other reason but to simply steam roll bases with such advantages that it cannot be defended against by the underpopulated side. 

[Swatch]

Why do you wish to switch from the simple method of once 33% is bish, no more bish are able to enter. It appears to me you just wish to raise the limits? btw in he 99 example I was just speaking of 33 % the limits would still rise as before.

HiTech

I'd like to throw in support for SlapShot's suggestion... I think it has solid basis, but needs some tweaking.  If you also combine that with hitech's method you will end up with a system that both balances and caps the numbers.

• Make the cap only relevant behind the scenes. Don't advertise the 'cap' numbers of an arena, just the number of people in the arena.
• Limit an arena on a per-country basis.
• Allow you to select your country upon entry
• After entry, prevent side-switching for 2(or 3) hrs, but once those hours are up, reduce the country-switching penalty back to our current 1 hr limit.  Also once that initial country-switching limitation is up, allow unrestricted switching, regardless of current arena #s so that somebody can go fly with their friends.

Examples:

What the Server knows:

• Both arenas are capped to 150 people right now.
• In Blue, there are 50 Bishops/44 Rooks/33 Knights
• In Orange, there are 19 Bishops/31 Rooks/49 Knights

What I see:

• LW Blue Arena:  (127 players)
• LW Orange Arena:  (99 players)

Example #1:
I decide to click on Orange to enter it and get a country select screen.  (or you can make this information available at the arena level)

• Bishops
• Knights
• Rooks

I want to join the Knights, so I do.  This maxes out the Knight's numbers in this arena under the current cap, but also in doing so, I've pushed the numbers in Orange (the smaller arena) to 66% of it's capacity.  This bumps up the allowable capacity in both arenas to 180 (10 additional spots per country).


Example #2:
I decide to click on Blue to enter it and get a country select screen.  (or you can make this information available at the arena level)

• Bishops
• Knights
• Rooks

The Arena knows that there are 33% of the capped #s in Bishops.  Therefore, that country is not an option, but up to 6 more rooks, and 17 knights can join before the arena is completely full.  But since Orange arena still has less than 66% of its capacity filled, then Blue can only grow to 150 players max.


The nice thing about this system is that it promotes even numbers on an arena by arena basis while deemphasizing the 'cap' to the player.  It also still limits the growth of one arena over the other.

[Crash Orange]

That's how it was in AW.  There was a small dedicated PAC group, but the overwhelming mass of players was in ETO.

There was almost always at least one full arena of RR Pacific except late nights. I'd say the split was about 2/3 Euro, 1/3 Pac. FR Pac was a wasteland. This was in the days of AW1 on AOL.

IIRC the most popular planes were the F6F and N1K, KIs and F4Us tied for distant 3rd. P-51s were rare, jugs were unheard of.

[grizz441]

There was almost always at least one full arena of RR Pacific except late nights. I'd say the split was about 2/3 Euro, 1/3 Pac. FR Pac was a wasteland. This was in the days of AW1 on AOL.

IIRC the most popular planes were the F6F and N1K, KIs and F4Us tied for distant 3rd. P-51s were rare, jugs were unheard of.

I remember seeing a lot of Oscars flying around too, or so I thought. It was quite a while ago.

[Oldman731]

There was almost always at least one full arena of RR Pacific except late nights. I'd say the split was about 2/3 Euro, 1/3 Pac. FR Pac was a wasteland. This was in the days of AW1 on AOL.

Could be, I forgot about the RR arenas.

- oldman

[ghi]

It still amazes me the how strong the force is for people wanting to play in the arena listed first.
1. Do a 1 time population split via random squad distributions followed by non squad players. Each person would then only be able to fly in 1 of the 2 arenas, and not have the choice to go to the other. I.E. Every night you would fly in the same arena.

2. Do very low cap multiple arenas, I.E. caps of 100-150 across 6-10 arenas.

3. Assign people to an arena when they enter and remove the choice of where they can enter.

4. Creating one "virtual" arena where it would contain multiple sets of people. The ground targets would all be common, but you could only see,fight, and speak with people in your "Set" of people.
HiTech

Reading this, i have next to my monitor on the desk sitting in boxes for years; "Il2 Sturmovick","Forgotten Battles",""Pacific fighters", i bought them all, tried but  kept paying and playing  Aces High, Why? Because AH offers something special;the fun and flavour of massive multiplayer.

[Traveler]

It still amazes me the how strong the force is for people wanting to play in the arena listed first. Just as DMGod showed, 2 = arenas but he waited 15 min just to get into the top one. I'm not blaming anyone for this, I am just amazed by it. People will claim many different reasons why they want the orange (I.E. like the terrain better), but we have actually just swapped positions on the list and then again everyone wanted the top arena.

The reason he waited 15 min. to get into the top arena was because that is the arena that his squad was in.  Why do you refuse to acknowledge that?  My squad always flies in the blue arena because it’s usually open and easy to get into. 

[hitech]

The reason he waited 15 min. to get into the top arena was because that is the arena that his squad was in.  Why do you refuse to acknowledge that?  My squad always flies in the blue arena because it’s usually open and easy to get into. 

Not sure what I am supposed to acknowledge?

People want to fly with their squad ? Check.
People want to fly in the top Arena? Check.
What people ask for and what they want are normally not the same thing? Check.
People will continue to fill an arena to the point of making the game less fun for most of the player base? Check.
Some people refuse to believe that I am a rational person and that I try make decisions only on what makes the greatest number of my customers happy, because that is what makes my business better? Check.


So what exactly am I supposed to acknowledge?

HiTech

[muzik]

So what exactly am I supposed to acknowledge?

HiTech

I would like to hear the precise reasons a single arena is considered "unhealthy." Excuse me for not digging through years of threads, but in all of the ones I've seen, there were no real answers. How can you even come close or why would you even try to solve a problem without laying out the precise causes?

[Bellator]

HiTech,
You’re not making all of the people happy all of the time. LOL
Which is an impossible task.
But to your credit, you will listen and interact with your customers.
I thank you sir for being involved and not turning a deaf ear to the community.

A solution will eventually be found!

<S> BELLATOR