Pardon me while I just state the obvious (I'm sure everyone knows this but maybe it needs to be inserted in long meandering discussions from time to time):
I think the idea was always supposed to be a 'war' environment where all types of players could enjoy facets of a combat game (when it comes to the main arena). It was never intended to mimic WWII, precisely, or the arena would resemble the AvA more. For the convenience of the players, all modeled equipment is made available on all sides.
For reasons that not all of us necessarily understand or agree on, three sides are in the design (whether that is just traditionally handed down from AW or whether designers sat down and considered the ramifications of two,four or more sides is just kinda beside the point - it is what it is and has worked fine in that manner from the start).
Some toys overpower other toys (and there are so many to choose from) that they require the spending of perks earned by successes. Perks for fighters are earned in fighters, perks for bombers are earned in bombers and perks for GVs are earned in GVs. Some players do not agree that perks earned in the EWMA or the MWMA should carry over to the LWMA. Perhaps, however, it was intended as an incentive to fly in the EW and MW arenas (to draw LW players that way to experience a 'war' environment without the overpowering LW toys - again - outside of an AvA or scnario environment). But that is just conjecture on my part.
There are players that like flying fighter planes more than anything (some of which will focus exclusively on such) and cawd bless them. But that doesn't truly discount that there are players that like flying big bombers and raining down havoc below more than anything else. As it turns out, there are GVers that love driving tanks and ambushing other tanks more than the previous two options mentioned (that they choose AH over other online games that feature more models of tanks and such says a lot for AH in my opinion). Heck, for all i know there may be fleet types that enjoy ship on ship confrontations more than anything else (I presently advocate expanding fleet options just for that - if we don't already have such it will surely draw that type of player in).
And .... there are players that love it all (and there just isn't enough hours in the day to play all of it - when there are enough players online to keep it interesting).
That being said, the MA requires a design to satisfy all of those tastes in toys and fun. It's really so much more than two (or more) opposing players choosing their favorite fighter planes and jousting each other for fun and glory (to the potential pain and disappointment of players this describes to a tee). Many will point those players to the DA (which does suit such) and perhaps some will go. But some will refuse. This leads me to believe that part of them must realise there is indeed more to AH than the joust.
The dedicated bomber player. There are indeed fans of the big ord haulers. I won't even say that it is borne of where their strengths lay (can't play in the fighters effectively so fly a bomber - though, in my case, it may indeed come from a bad night of getting shot down left and right). No, I truly believe it's a passion for many. To immerse and enjoy it thoroughly, though, you need strategic targets that mean something on the map (something more than points and perks). It seems that the HQ epitomizes their Holy Grail (Holy Qrail?). Dale is hard pressed nerfing that strategic target without having a negative impact on the bomber pilot's passions (and just as hard pressed in not making adjustments when a lone bomber player reaches orgasm and everyone on one specific side of a low population map is forced to use every ounce of their intuition to find a fight before it ends [I've been there]). It's somewhat of a Pandora's Box. It's already been opened and the taste was sweet. It will always be the buff player's heaviest narcotic. It's as if it was actually a win in game design for that specific flavor of player.
All things affect all things (depending on circumstance).
The uncontrollable factor - the players (although there may have been some dedicated attempts). AH players (not necessarily all) have proven that through tenacity, guile and even just plain stubbornness they will not give in to elements programmed into the game (ENY) to encourage side balancing or trying more than one type of toy (even, dare say, a 'less uber' one). For those that maintain that behavior can indeed be influenced by programming, alone, I submit the sentence preceding this one. No, Virginia, Santa doesn't program Aces High. But isn't it a good thing that the game is designed for the PLAYERS to influence the fun? Yep, that means that players dedicated to ruining it can accomplish their goal (if there are no players dedicated to not letting them left in the game).
'Dale! Fix the game or I'll quit! Others have and I've learned from their example!'
Pfffft. There's only so much Dale can code and, quite frankly, if he could successfully code behavior control he'd be rich and AH would be a very small part of his world.
But .... changing the hardness of the HQ isn't much .... and it's not even asking for a behavioral change (it's just adapting the game to it).
Fair enough. But does it set a standard where Dale nannies the game for us more and more? Ok, just this one last change and we'll go back to just asking for more toys (more and more and more uber toys). (Psssst - Santa, I want battlewagon fights and torpedos on DDs and the Sparviero and the Spanish Civil War arena and ..... ).
AH is ..... complex. At least it is for the big picture observers (and Dale can't afford to be anything less than). Why don't we, as a community, try to be more of the answer than the problem? Mno, I'm not talking about having our own individual goals and platforms and pretending it's for the good of the game. I'm talking about burying the hatchet and working from various player type perspectives to help keep the game an enjoyable experience for all. Mno again, I'm not talking about the behavioral shame police using the BBS and channel 200 to make other players an example. I'm talking about what, to some degree, already exists:
- Earl's dedication to making missions for other players to enjoy.
- Squads building their play to encourage the whole community to join in (whether in opposition to their 'planned mission' or not).
- Participation in the work put forth by dedicated volunteers to offer something new (the AvA guys - they can't get enough credit).
- Hell, walk a mile in another player's shoes. Pick a night to fly with the buffs (or against them).
Now .... I'm not saying don't hunt the greifers. That's traditional fun spanning back to the AW days. I'm just saying - adapt and overcome, play more (yeah, fine thing for me to say), whine to Dale to fix our problems less ..... the fun is still there.
Don't Fear The Greifer
(Sung to the tune of 'Don't Fear the Reaper')
All our times have come
Here, but now they're gone
Seasons don't fear the greifer
Nor do the wind, the sun or the rain
(We can be like they are)
Come on baby
(Don't fear the greifer)
Baby take my hand
(Don't fear the greifer)
We'll be able to fly
(Don't fear the Greifer)
Baby I'm your man
La, la la, la la (heh)
La, la la, la la (heh)
Come on baby
(Don't fear the Greifer)
Baby take my hand
(Don't fear the Greifer)
We'll be able to fly
(Don't fear the Greifer)
Baby I'm your man
La, la la, la la
La, la la, la la
