What type of setup would you like to see!

[Puma44]

Its old folks.  Not quite sure what you mean by this, Krusty.    ...or, did you mean "It's old, folks"?

Puma, you should do some searching.  About what?  

Okay I saved you the 2 seconds to look it up  Well, it's more like you wasted 2 seconds looking it up.   We are in a discussion now, not in the past.

The issue of icons keeps coming up in the AvA forum from a lot of those who don't tend to frequent the arena because they don't like no icons.  It seems that most who have an open mind about trying no icons, and give it a fair try, seem to have fun with it.  Just an observation, no scientific fact, charts, etc....

It is probably safe to say that everyone that plays AH has a unique system with it's own advantages and disadvantages that makes picking up the pixel planes different for each one of us.
 
Just as in the real world, pilots have different visual acuity affected by their eyes, glasses, sunglasses, windows/canopy, cleanliness of these that are viewed through, real world lighting obstacles, weather phenomenon, individual physical limitations, etc., etc., etc., that affect what distance they can pick up that first real world "pixel" and the distance at which they can determine the shape and identify the aircraft.  These distances can vary greatly from one individual to another also.

So, just as is done in the real world, tactics have can be used to optimized visual lookout and pickup of a bogey to gain the advantage, maneuver for a guns conversion, and make the kill shot......all without a big red banner.

Now, I realize that not everyone likes to fly tactically in game.  Not everyone wants to fly with a wingman, in game.  Some want to come at their opponent co-altitude, head-on, both dive for speed, pass each other, pitch up and see who can make the first turn and out fly the other guy; all with icons a blazing.  ...and that's fine.  But, the AvA has developed into an area where like minded players enjoy (for the most part, it seems) not having icons.  And yes, I know that we all have the individual choice of turning off icons (ALT I).  Is everyone aware of that?

So, it's still a wonder why the dislike continues about no icons in the AvA.  

Also, Krusty, you didn't answer my previous question of why is having icons turned on more historical?  I'm sure your have  your own perspective on it.  I'm just interested in understanding it.    
 

[Warty]

Here are some suggestions to increase *popularity* (not fidelity, etc.):
- regular icons, or icons at D20 and closer.
- fields REALLY close to together. Some of us (<cough>) have really short attention spans and don't like flying 20 mins to find (no) fight.
- limited # of fields
- change planes without telling folks (it's always a mystery, and once they log in to see what's available, maybe they'll try a hop or two and like it).
- only axis vs allies (but allow for some what-if type things, like Russian vs IJN/IJA, Korean war, WWII 1946 (ok, we need a lot of planes we don't have, but I can dream)
- tune flak way down. especially CV flak.
- no ground vehicles (need everyone flying; can turn that off if you start getting 50+ people in there regularly)
- for setups where IJN/IJA (for example) starts getting outnumbered, use the ENY or whatever to allow them to fly newer airplanes. (rushed to the front, etc.).
- make it about fun, not recreating history. (icons, etc.) allow, encourage dweebery. If you haven't noticed by now, it's what a lot of people WANT to do. maybe not all the time, but...

Good luck, I do want the axis/allies arena to succeed.

[Tyrannis]

well guys,

one thing i wish, is that if a certain event seems to be popular, it could get an extension past its deadline by a couple of days.


when i fly in "the 8th comes over" i was loving it, but i joined it only halfway through it. so i only got to fly in there 3 times before it was over, and i didnt like the AvA that came after it, so i shyed away from the AvA.

How about letting people also vote on the forums for what event they want next? (hate to compare it to cod, but like how in COD's multiplayer,you can vote for what map you want next, that would be great here. and you can make it so the same map cant be voted for twice in a row, so the AvA doesnt get spammed with the same map over and over).

also, ik you guys have already addressed this, but i really wish it would go to normal bombsites instead of manual.

ive tried guys, i really have, ive flown alot in the AvA as bombers, trying to get this manual bombsite down, (just did a little today in the b29s) but i just cant seem to get it. theres some things some people just cant do, even with training. and im sure theres other bomber pilots out there like me who just cant get the method down nomatter how hard they try.

so i'd really like to see the option to choose wether you wish to use normal, or manual bombsites before takeoff.

therefore the hardcore realism people arent forced to use the normal bombsites, and the casual bomber pilots who cant seem to get the manual down will still be encouraged to fly in the AvA.

I'd love to fly b29s during jet week, until i found out they were manual bombsite. now its basically another good AvA i have to skip because i just cant get the manual bombsite down.


just my opinions.  

Edit: also, like i asked for in another thread, it would be great if the proper skins for each plane available was put into the arena message to help with adding the realism factor.

ik the point of the arena msg is to encourage more research, but when i log into the AvA, i dont do it to read a arena message, then immediatly log off so i can go to google, and search for 20-30 mins for each type of properly used skin. i want to jump straight into the action, then go look up the info later while the ground crews clean the wreckage of my plane off the runway. 


Thats All.

[ImADot]

Some good thoughts, Tyrannis. But...

A lot goes into the research and setup for their "events".  Having players vote on what they want to see next would, in my opinion, impart an unfair burden on the [100% volunteer] AvA staff to try to accommodate.

Manual bombsite is one of the things that sets the AvA apart from the MA.  It would be unfair and unbalancing if players can choose which method they want to use for each sortie.

What I'd like to see, and this may make me a bit unpopular with the AvA crowd, is this:

• Keep it a two-sided map; after all, it's Axis versus Allies.
• Limit the available equipment accordingly for each side; no spit vs spit or zeke vs zeke, etc.
• Periodically (or by map if possible) narrow the choices by era if desired (EW, MW, LW)
• Short icons for both sides; 3.5k (2 miles)
• Manual bombsites
• Open gameplay with base captures and win-the-war map resets to the next map in rotation
• Try to limit the tweaking/customization of objects that would make auto-resets unmanageable
• Keep the countrywide 123 vox channel to encourage comms and coordination of forces for each side
• Turn ack leathality back to standard settings to discourage vultching
• Killshooter - the jury is still out on this. Off would add to the feeling of working as part of a team; you wouldn't want to shoot down your wingman or the escorts for your buffs, but would allow for very unsavory dweebiness...

It's a tough thing to come up with the perfect formula to make an arena both historical and attractive for the masses.

[jimson]

Keep it a two-sided map; after all, it's Axis versus Allies.
Limit the available equipment accordingly for each side; no spit vs spit or zeke vs zeke, etc.
Periodically (or by map if possible) narrow the choices by era if desired (EW, MW, LW)

These we do pretty much all the time, with occasional exceptions.


Open gameplay with base captures and win-the-war map resets to the next map in rotation
Try to limit the tweaking/customization of objects that would make auto-resets unmanageable

Base capture is usually enabled but we cannot have win the war auto resets, because
1.  The custom tables we write that include base ownership and what planes are enabled at which bases, cannot be saved so that they will still be in place after the arena resets.
2.  We cannot choose which maps will rotate in which order. It is random rotate, even the TA map could come up next, and none of the terrains it rotates to would have a 2 sided AvA configuration. Everything always has to be set up manually.

[gldnbb]

Love the current setup as it is,  finally getting a successful formula..   Bombers have their objectives,  fighters have their dogfighting fun.

I.  Icon settings:    Keep them short  or no icons.     I for one  loved the no-icons  because it sharpened your dogfighting skills,  watching the plane and where it is going,  having more concentration on the fight.  It has made me more focused on watching the enemy's wing banking or  Nose orientation.      In the MA, certain pilots just focus on distance and rate of closure by the numbers.   They don't always see how the enemy approaches and if the enemy is setting up to get one maneuver ahead   (ex: pulling early before a merge).      No icons also intensify the realism factor and adrenaline factor where now you can actually lose sight of a bandit (which is a legitimate tactic to gain the upper hand in future dogfight position,  and also sharpens the situational awareness).   It feels  AvA real,  and to me that is historical and I carry those skills learned back into the Main arena.

II.  Radar settings:   Would like to see no-dot dar continue when you are outside a radar ring.  However,  I would like to know if dar-bar can stay turned off  until you enter enemy radar.   That would be a great tool for bombers to grab historical altitude and for fighters on the hunt to protect it's goals.   This also adds to situational awareness, which in of itself is an adrenaline rush.

III.  Deaths:   Would like to try something like 3 deaths  and you have to wait in tower 2 (or 3 or 4 minutes).   This gives you the impression of protecting your aircraft so as not to do foolish things that prevent you from landing  (ramming others,  going into a 5 vs 1  on the deck slow that you know you'll die but you might take someone out in the process).   This would aid the transition of certain MA folks who like doing these things and  lessen the quality of a dogfight.

                   Is friendly kill-shooter and/or friendly collision turned on?  It sounds like fun, but don't know if many would like it


IV.  *Keep Bombing calibration the same throughout the week:      I often try to gets squad mates to come practice in the arena by  scheduling a night to do so,   and in one instance (B29 raid to Hiroshima?) I succeeded in having 1 person come along on a bombing run only to find the arena settings were changed some time during that day to enable auto calibration.   I think even remember seeing someone type on text that autocalibration was now enabled.      

      *Keep manual bombing calibration with the 'green'  training crosshair.  It's a fantastic compromise for folks who can't yet master accurate manual calibration.  It shows them visually what happens when the speeds are not matched up.   For those folks who say they just cannot learn manual calibration,  it is all about performing the necessary steps in at the right time.    When I first Joined aces high,  the autocalibration was a difficult learning curve to master.  Now I can do it in my sleep.   Point is, it gets easier with practice where manual calibration adds just 4 more steps than auto,  and requires a little more subtle movement but is doable.    I taught someone in about 15 minutes and while using the B29 aircraft at 30k and 300mph.   Besides,  a bomber was never meant to be laser accurate.

[Oldman731]

Besides,  a bomber was never meant to be laser accurate.

This is key.  A year or two ago someone else wrote that WWII medium and heavy bombers were not pinpoint target weapons.  That was for the dive bombers and, later, the fighter-bombers.  The heavies were city destroyers, factory destroyers, laying their bombs in patterns over an area.  The realistic bomb sight makes this so.  I suspect that people are just so used to taking out fighter hangers with B17s that they're disappointed they can't do it with a more realistic setting.

- oldman

[Seadog36]

I like AvA the way it is basically~ I enjoy the challenge of limited icons which as Krusty points out does undercut the strengths of allied rides because of the limited visibility of con when viewed from above against terrain. Forces me to turn my jug to the limits and gets me killed more but I can deal with it.

I work week on week off out at sea Wed to Wed so I never get to play a whole setup. Sometimes miss ones I really want to play like Pacific Thunder for example. The factor of low numbers makes setups like The Other Side of the Coin with long flights a no sell though the plane set was great.

I recall in one BoB map setup a German base was accidentally located in South Central England and while it lasted there was huge participation because of the close proximity of the bases and like a light switch everyone left when it became the usual and historical flight across the channel. Ranger's map in Blood Bath was great for getting quick action, yet being able to launch buffs far enough away to get altitude. It seemed to enjoy a lot of participation as well. Basically, closer proximity = better numbers though less historically accurate geography. I think a wider choice of plane sets also encourages participation.

On the bombsite question I prefer auto calibration though less historically accurate, I figured out manual more or less but if you are engaged with cons at all, it is onerous to try to make any kind of drop with the extra steps.

[captain1ma]

guys, alot of this stuff is very informative and very good,  so keep it coming. im going to ask that the CM's steer clear of commenting on this thread please. we want to hear what the community has to say. they dont need to hear our responses why or why not.

[Puma44]

Hey Seadog!  I'm trying to understand the perspective you and Krusty have on limited icons affecting the strengths of allied rides.  Would you care to elaborate more about it, please?    

Also, a slight detour off into the ditch.  How's your Swift coming along?  O.K., out of the ditch and back on track with the thread.    

[Puma44]

guys, alot of this stuff is very informative and very good,  so keep it coming. im going to ask that the CM's steer clear of commenting on this thread please. we want to hear what the community has to say. they dont need to hear our responses why or why not.

I understand what you're saying, Jaeger, but the CMs are a part a part of the community also.  As such, they have a right to be heard also.  Censorship, not a good thing.   Everyone has the right to express their opinion.  

Additionally, as part of the community, I prefer to decide for myself to decide whose responses I need to hear.    

As always, many thanks to you and the rest of the staff for your on going hard work as volunteers in creating the weekly setups.

[Seadog36]

Hey Seadog!  I'm trying to understand the perspective you and Krusty have on limited icons affecting the strengths of allied rides.  Would you care to elaborate more about it, please?     

Krusty and I don't usually see eye to eye, though on this point I agree.  109/zeeks are very difficult to see and BnZ/bounce from altitude as they are virtually invisible when seen from above. Forces the fight lower, giving the advantage to turnier a/c negating some allied a/c strengths 38/47/51.  This is not hard and fast, allies still have the hurri/spit/f4f. but a generalization. F4us in the right hands are very turney but are still better exploiting alt.

Also, a slight detour off into the ditch.  How's your Swift coming along?  O.K., out of the ditch and back on track with the thread.    

It's getting there, will have to wait til Sept when I can get back down to SC to finish her up.  Pretty excited to have her down to bare metal.

[Puma44]

So, if I understand your point correctly, it's about the size of the aircraft and it's ability to hide from detection using camouflage for the terrain flown over?    If I'm understanding it, how did this affect the fights back in the day (real world WWII)? How did fighter pilots overcome small, hard to detect aircraft and deal with better turning opponents?

She's looking lonely.  

[captain1ma]

nevermind.

[jimson]

Sorry Jaeger.

I did want to point out some of the things that we cannot do, so that folks would express what they would like to see within the parameters of what we can do.

They might think of workarounds that we haven't.