2 LW arenas

[muzik]

You don't need another arena, you need players who want to "play" the game instead of horde and NOE base after base.

   Not so long ago you were defending the split arenas. It's even funnier since I told a certain someone that if a single arena was proposed there would be a mass rollover.  I wonder how many more are out there. I dont see the support for the split these days. 


Been a while since Ive played, who can tell me what's the average number of players you see during peak hours these days? What are the highest numbers you see?

[muzik]

Ok soooooooooooo what does 90% of what you all posted here have to do with 2 LW arenas. What would be so wrong having 2, if I dislike a map or bored with a map I could go to another arena, just have NO arena caps 

What kind of game would it be if every time one country or another was at a disadvantage tactically they could all just leave the map for a better position? And what if you were the country with the advantage and the entire enemy force logged off for the other arena?

[Slade]

Some of us prayed for many years for a single LW to return.

Yes we did.  Please just one big fun arena.  Always something to do!  Can nearly always find planes and vehicles to engage. 

Only advantage I see to having fewer planes in an arena is doing milk runs...which I tend not to do.

[Gary26]

Since we got back to 1 LW, the fun & fight is back in game. And no one longer each arena dominated by one chesspiece alone. THAT stuff was "stale".

+1.
no longer have one MA to gather in.

[grizz441]

Ok soooooooooooo what does 90% of what you all posted here have to do with 2 LW arenas. What would be so wrong having 2, if I dislike a map or bored with a map I could go to another arena, just have NO arena caps 

Hawker if you dislike a map you should try winning it.

[HawkerMKII]

Hawker if you dislike a map you should try winning it.

We do unlike the rooks/nits who cant win on their own. So again, whats the big deal about having 2 LW arenas?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

[grizz441]

We do unlike the rooks/nits who cant win on their own. So again, whats the big deal about having 2 LW arenas?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

You are also against caps though aren't you?  So basically what you want is two uncapped populated arenas.

[Karnak]

We do unlike the rooks/nits who cant win on their own. So again, whats the big deal about having 2 LW arenas?

LMAO if you actually think there is a difference between Rooks, Knights and Bishops.

Well, historically the Bishops had the worst K/D ratio of the lot, so HTC took that stat away from us.

[The Fugitive]

   Not so long ago you were defending the split arenas. It's even funnier since I told a certain someone that if a single arena was proposed there would be a mass rollover.  I wonder how many more are out there. I dont see the support for the split these days. 


Been a while since Ive played, who can tell me what's the average number of players you see during peak hours these days? What are the highest numbers you see?

Yes, because at the time split arenas are what was needed. As the numbers dropped it was wasn't possible to support a good number of players in two arenas any more so yes I support a single arena now. Again, when the numbers climb back up I will support a split arena agian.

The whole point is GOOD GAME PLAY. If there are only 20 people on a side your not going to have good game play, the same goes for 200 per side. The whole idea here is for people to PLAY the game, NOT to find loop holes, and ways around good game play.

If good game play isn't important, then give them the the nukes and let them roll the maps faster. At least that way when they finally get bored they will leave and we can get back to our regularly scheduled game

[muzik]

Yes, because at the time split arenas are what was needed. As the numbers dropped it was wasn't possible to support a good number of players in two arenas any more so yes I support a single arena now. Again, when the numbers climb back up I will support a split arena agian.

The whole point is GOOD GAME PLAY. If there are only 20 people on a side your not going to have good game play, the same goes for 200 per side. The whole idea here is for people to PLAY the game, NOT to find loop holes, and ways around good game play.

If good game play isn't important, then give them the the nukes and let them roll the maps faster. At least that way when they finally get bored they will leave and we can get back to our regularly scheduled game

Gameplay?  You seem to have forgotten your facts in such a short time. It was about the cesspool.  Gameplay was sacrificed, supposedly to clean up the toxic environment. Even many of the split supporters conceded that.

In case you cant remember, there werent enough players to support 2 arenas 90% of the time during the split. Try real hard and you might recall the 100-200 caps that lasted almost all day until the peak hours.

Admit it, you are just playing Simon Says with HT.

[The Fugitive]

Gameplay?  You seem to have forgotten your facts in such a short time. It was about the cesspool.  Gameplay was sacrificed, supposedly to clean up the toxic environment. Even many of the split supporters conceded that.

In case you cant remember, there werent enough players to support 2 arenas 90% of the time during the split. Try real hard and you might recall the 100-200 caps that lasted almost all day until the peak hours.

Admit it, you are just playing Simon Says with HT.

I'd love you to find some quotes that will back that up ! LOL!!

 "cesspool", is of course another name for poor game play. Huge hordes, lack of fights, players going out of their ways to avoid a fights. That is what caused the split arenas to curb that type of play some what. It never cleared it out, but it did help and gave players more avenues to look for their type of game play.

There were plenty of players to support two arenas, and even the Euro crowd was ok at the first, but as numbers dropped they were the first effected. Eventually HTC switched to the multiple arenas to give the Euro guys some relief, while the "prime time US" players continued to have good numbers to support 2 arenas. Again the number drop finally caught up with them and HTC switched to a single LW arena.

And yes I have supported HTC decisions in EACH of the changes (though I thought they were a bit slow to react each time). All of these changes, while helping, I don't think address the real problem and that is the poor play of the player base we have today, as well as over the last few years. Too many "gamers" have joined in and not enough "simmers".  So in stead of people looking to "reenact" the battle of yesteryear, you have players looking to cut corners and do the easiest, quickest thing to get to their end game. Their "end game" is more often than not  the capture of a base, the capture of as many bases in a certain time limit, or the winning of the war that day/night.

It is very rare that you see missions that are well planned out and/or executed, and that is because there is no "history" in the game with todays players, it's all about rolling the next base. 

[muzik]

I'd love you to find some quotes that will back that up ! LOL!!

Back up what specifically?

"cesspool", is of course another name for poor game play. Huge hordes, lack of fights, players going out of their ways to avoid a fights. That is what caused the split arenas to curb that type of play some what. It never cleared it out, but it did help and gave players more avenues to look for their type of game play.

Since ht would never say what exactly an unhealthy arena was, I couldnt in all fairness say you are wrong about that. But since hording and base sneaking NEVER stopped, then split arenas and caps were a complete failure and there is no use in ever going back to them.

And as for lack of fights, the split and caps were the biggest cause of this in the history of the game.

There were plenty of players to support two arenas, and even the Euro crowd was ok at the first, but as numbers dropped they were the first effected.

BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

Are you going to sit there and tell me that arenas locked at 100 to 200 people was enough people? 2 at 200 was more fun than a single 400? Because that's what it was for the majority of the day until they tried to fix a useless system by changing to a single arena for off peak.

Do you remember what that did for player numbers? Yea that's right, it gave us at LEAST another whole hour of low numbers. When the single closed and split, it was at least a half hour if not more before those arenas were re-populated. then when it went back to a single at night, half of the 200 or so that were still on didnt log in after reset. Altogether I think it was more like 2+ hours of avoidable low numbers as a direct result of the arena changes.

If 200 players is enough, why is it you are supporting the current single arena? There must be an average of 500+ players during peak. That must be one heck of a cesspool.