Author Topic: We need 2 sides for low player numbers  (Read 8918 times)

Offline Vraciu

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14034
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #45 on: August 20, 2018, 06:04:50 PM »
You don't observe...

You want to harvest them...you take...yourself...  [Y]ou guys wanted...you would...you don't. You complain....you....your only evidence...your way.

You or some version of you...you...your feilds (sic).   You will not force them

You will still...so you will still not...so you...

As I've noted before, you (pun) sure know an awful lot about what everyone else is thinking.



If you guys wanted to go at it all night against other ACM players hard core, you would ditch the MA and go at it in the DA or a custom arena. Even the AvA but, you don't.

Please note the burning straw man here.



Quote
They don't want to fight you...

:headscratch: :headscratch:  Then why are they in a combat game? :headscratch: :headscratch:



Quote
[T]hey want to capture your feilds.

"[T]hey want to capture your feilds (sic) UNOPPOSED."

FIFY.


Quote
If you guys wanted to go at it all night against other ACM players hard core, you would ditch the MA and go at it in the DA or a custom arena. Even the AvA but, you don't.

"If [those] guys wanted to go at it all night against [nobody but an undefended base] hard core, [they] would ditch the MA and go at it in the [offline mode] or a custom arena. Even the AvA but, [they] don't."

FIFY.


Those who do not wish to engage in combat are not the future of this game.   They are in fact contributing mightily to its demise and are holding Hitech's business hostage.   New blood is needed and that new blood wants action.  They are not going to pay for empty arenas and a lack of combat.   PERIOD.   

The old paradigm no longer holds, whatever it was, and Hitech deserves a bit of good faith, support, and patience from us if we are going to revive this game.  :old:



« Last Edit: August 20, 2018, 08:03:40 PM by Vraciu »
”KILLER V”
Charter Member of the P-51 Mustang Skin Mafia
King of the Hill Champ, Tour 219
The Damned
King of the Hill Win Percentage - 100 (1 Win, 0 Losses)

Offline Rebel28

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 146
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #46 on: August 21, 2018, 12:16:51 AM »
bustr this entire post was very well thought out <S>


You or some version of you has been screeching exactly this at Hitech since the beginning of this game. The average players have been leaving since 2009 when NOE was taken away because they were here to play capture the flag in WW2 toys, not air samurai in WW2 toys.
4th Fighter Group
~ The Gunslingers ~

Offline nrshida

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8492
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #47 on: August 21, 2018, 03:31:57 AM »
Most of this is ACM players want to harvest the average players becasue it's a quick win and makes for a feel good when the kills landed message goes out.

Bustr, you've got some pretty weird and - I'm sorry to say - uninformed ideas about MA balance and your so-called ACM-sharks, Lions and now Air-samurai players as you're calling them. It's almost like an idea springs to your mind, and instead of testing its validity you just keep refining how you write it and with every new iteration become even more convinced of your own correctness since it reads more smoothly. Keep moving towards your ever-so-comfortable nirvana of correctness, don't let reason or balance get in your way...

I'm amazed I have the energy to bother posting here on this forum the state it's presently in, perhaps just for the sake of novelty, I thought I'd address your momentous ongoing attack on all things ACM with some alternate perspective. At least once, for the record...

You seem to be positioning yourself as an objective, unbiased, for-the-good-of-AH campaigner. But I'll remind everyone one of your earlier maps was designed expressely to train all things anti-fighter, so in the first instance I think your anti-fighter bias runs pretty deep.

Let's examine your predator-prey analogy: firstly it suggests there is once group which purely predates on another. Untrue. Untrue because the herd are also armed and want to eat the predators. And they try that with larger numbers. Has it ever occurred to you that ACM-centric players arise as a reaction to that and not the other way around. No. Of course it didn't, because you can't peek over the top of your own container.

You propose a division of the AH air combat-world into two discrete groups. Also untrue. It is more like a spectrum with noobs at one end and your ACM-sharks at the other. You further imply someone on the more advanced side always wants to predate on those to the less advanced side. Untrue. Untrue, ignorant and naive. For those who have committed to becoming skillful at ACM, you must seek, fight and be defeated by those to the more advanced side than you. Hence you must look for those who can challenge you and your present set of ACM theories & practices. Anyone less able than you doesn't do that and results in what you do with your writing: reinforces unfounded material.

But then here's the kicker (especially for you) the spectrum's not even a line, it's a 2D graph, the y-axis denoting experience. So you'd have a huge, and now increasing (thanks to reduction) bell curve in the middle of ACM ubernoobs. Not particularly skilled at ACM but magnificently experienced in knowing when they have momentary advantage and when they do not. When to attack a -e plane, to literally trip over each other to attack a damaged aircraft, to run in groups, run away, dive away, to friends, ack, CVs, hop in an 88-mm what-have-you. Those are the group which predates on noobs and ACM-masters alike. Because simply there's more of them than anyone else. Always has been, and that group is your sacred 'Average Joes'.

With an absence of ACM masters at one end, and an enormous herd of Average Joes with their heads down grazing all day long. The herd is unchecked, unchallenged, unaware of its surroundings. So new players come in, look around and leave very quickly - this is exactly what HiTech's stats reported. Would you stay, honestly, if you were new and inexperienced?

Do you know how many new players come to my Breakfast Club, by proportion? It's a lot. So much for your 'they all want to avoid combat' motif.

Any healthy natural system has a balance or is moving towards a balance. If it is not it is moving towards extinction. The balance is gone now, and when HiTech runs a minor test to explore a re-balance (and initiating all kinds of change suggestions) you all start with your ultimatums and tantrums and 'don't change nothing' nonsense.

Congratulations. WTG on stiffling any furter experimentation. Side-swapping to low numbers side untested. Zone ENY untested, cycling maps untested, etc. Won't likely be when your 'average Joes' immediately threaten to leave en masse if you change anything. And you say the ACM-players pressure HTC. Outragoeous and hypocritical behaviour. You lazy, inflexible crybabies.

Keep it then. Keep it exactly as it is. And as it is right now it is dying. Enjoy your decreasing savanna of green grass while the desert encroaches rapidly around you. Just keep looking down!


You're spraying your vitriol in the wrong direction old man.



Happy Friday Pipz!
-=Army of Muppets=-
"Get stuffed Skyyr, you freak" - Zack1234

Offline artik

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1907
      • Blog
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #48 on: August 21, 2018, 05:32:20 AM »
Once upon a time there was a great 2 side arena called Combat Theatre (AH1 days) it was moderately populated and hugely fun.

Today it is called Axis Vs Allies, but it is virtually empty most of the time...

If so I'd rather prefer to have one AvA like arena than what it happens today. But this is me. I always preferred historical match ups
Artik, 101 "Red" Squadron, Israel

Offline FESS67

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1051
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #49 on: August 21, 2018, 05:34:40 AM »
Further to nrshida’s point,

I flew incognito the other night with low numbers.  There was not much going on my side of the map so I changed teams based on a deduction made by looking at the dar bar.  My deduction was incorrect and I ended up on the side with more at that base.

Great, now my evening is screwed, my choice is to join in and beat up on the defenders or log.  I took off and headed to the enemy field.  What happened then goes against all that you think of me and those like me bustr. 

Instead of swarming in, we politely waited our turn.  We fought as evenly as we could, I changed my plane to a KI84 as that is what the enemy player was flying.  I flew low so as to not have a big advantage and we all had a blast.

Your opinion is the more skilled fighter pilot types are the problem.  I disagree.  The problem is much more complex than that however a playground devoid of players is compounding the problem.

No body want to go for a game of tennis and end up hitting the ball against the wall on their own.  May as well go play squash at least st when playing alone it is valid match practice.

I am bored in game more than not now.  Your thinking will see more like me quit and what you will have left is a bunch of guys racing each other to take undefended bases.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2018, 05:36:38 AM by FESS67 »

Offline Vraciu

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14034
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #50 on: August 21, 2018, 10:10:51 AM »
bustr this entire post was very well thought out <S>

Not so much.   See below.


Bustr, you've got some pretty weird and - I'm sorry to say - uninformed ideas about MA balance and your so-called ACM-sharks, Lions and now Air-samurai players as you're calling them. It's almost like an idea springs to your mind, and instead of testing its validity you just keep refining how you write it and with every new iteration become even more convinced of your own correctness since it reads more smoothly. Keep moving towards your ever-so-comfortable nirvana of correctness, don't let reason or balance get in your way...

I'm amazed I have the energy to bother posting here on this forum the state it's presently in, perhaps just for the sake of novelty, I thought I'd address your momentous ongoing attack on all things ACM with some alternate perspective. At least once, for the record...

You seem to be positioning yourself as an objective, unbiased, for-the-good-of-AH campaigner. But I'll remind everyone one of your earlier maps was designed expressely to train all things anti-fighter, so in the first instance I think your anti-fighter bias runs pretty deep.

Let's examine your predator-prey analogy: firstly it suggests there is once group which purely predates on another. Untrue. Untrue because the herd are also armed and want to eat the predators. And they try that with larger numbers. Has it ever occurred to you that ACM-centric players arise as a reaction to that and not the other way around. No. Of course it didn't, because you can't peek over the top of your own container.

You propose a division of the AH air combat-world into two discrete groups. Also untrue. It is more like a spectrum with noobs at one end and your ACM-sharks at the other. You further imply someone on the more advanced side always wants to predate on those to the less advanced side. Untrue. Untrue, ignorant and naive. For those who have committed to becoming skillful at ACM, you must seek, fight and be defeated by those to the more advanced side than you. Hence you must look for those who can challenge you and your present set of ACM theories & practices. Anyone less able than you doesn't do that and results in what you do with your writing: reinforces unfounded material.

But then here's the kicker (especially for you) the spectrum's not even a line, it's a 2D graph, the y-axis denoting experience. So you'd have a huge, and now increasing (thanks to reduction) bell curve in the middle of ACM ubernoobs. Not particularly skilled at ACM but magnificently experienced in knowing when they have momentary advantage and when they do not. When to attack a -e plane, to literally trip over each other to attack a damaged aircraft, to run in groups, run away, dive away, to friends, ack, CVs, hop in an 88-mm what-have-you. Those are the group which predates on noobs and ACM-masters alike. Because simply there's more of them than anyone else. Always has been, and that group is your sacred 'Average Joes'.

With an absence of ACM masters at one end, and an enormous herd of Average Joes with their heads down grazing all day long. The herd is unchecked, unchallenged, unaware of its surroundings. So new players come in, look around and leave very quickly - this is exactly what HiTech's stats reported. Would you stay, honestly, if you were new and inexperienced?

Do you know how many new players come to my Breakfast Club, by proportion? It's a lot. So much for your 'they all want to avoid combat' motif.

Any healthy natural system has a balance or is moving towards a balance. If it is not it is moving towards extinction. The balance is gone now, and when HiTech runs a minor test to explore a re-balance (and initiating all kinds of change suggestions) you all start with your ultimatums and tantrums and 'don't change nothing' nonsense.

Congratulations. WTG on stiffling any furter experimentation. Side-swapping to low numbers side untested. Zone ENY untested, cycling maps untested, etc. Won't likely be when your 'average Joes' immediately threaten to leave en masse if you change anything. And you say the ACM-players pressure HTC. Outragoeous and hypocritical behaviour. You lazy, inflexible crybabies.

Keep it then. Keep it exactly as it is. And as it is right now it is dying. Enjoy your decreasing savanna of green grass while the desert encroaches rapidly around you. Just keep looking down!


You're spraying your vitriol in the wrong direction old man.

Nrsida, this entire post was very well thought out.  <S>  Bravo.   


« Last Edit: August 21, 2018, 11:28:42 AM by Vraciu »
”KILLER V”
Charter Member of the P-51 Mustang Skin Mafia
King of the Hill Champ, Tour 219
The Damned
King of the Hill Win Percentage - 100 (1 Win, 0 Losses)

Offline Vraciu

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14034
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #51 on: August 21, 2018, 10:16:31 AM »
Further to nrshida’s point,

I flew incognito the other night with low numbers.  There was not much going on my side of the map so I changed teams based on a deduction made by looking at the dar bar.  My deduction was incorrect and I ended up on the side with more at that base.

Great, now my evening is screwed, my choice is to join in and beat up on the defenders or log.  I took off and headed to the enemy field.  What happened then goes against all that you think of me and those like me bustr. 

Instead of swarming in, we politely waited our turn.  We fought as evenly as we could, I changed my plane to a KI84 as that is what the enemy player was flying.  I flew low so as to not have a big advantage and we all had a blast.

Your opinion is the more skilled fighter pilot types are the problem.  I disagree.  The problem is much more complex than that however a playground devoid of players is compounding the problem.

No body want to go for a game of tennis and end up hitting the ball against the wall on their own.  May as well go play squash at least st when playing alone it is valid match practice.

I am bored in game more than not now.  Your thinking will see more like me quit and what you will have left is a bunch of guys racing each other to take undefended bases.

That’s what he advocates.   As he said in his most recent post I dissected, ”They don’t want to fight you.”

Well stated, Fess.   I do the same as you did the other night.   I called my guys off and we moved out over the water to let the uppers grab.   I wound up in an outnumbered 3 v 2 when it was all said and done.   So much for the ACM Shark-Predator theory.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2018, 11:29:29 AM by Vraciu »
”KILLER V”
Charter Member of the P-51 Mustang Skin Mafia
King of the Hill Champ, Tour 219
The Damned
King of the Hill Win Percentage - 100 (1 Win, 0 Losses)

Offline JimmyD3

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3800
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #52 on: August 21, 2018, 10:24:47 AM »
-1
Kenai77
CO Sic Puppies MWK
USAF 1971-76

Offline Mano

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2185
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #53 on: August 21, 2018, 04:46:08 PM »
- 1


Be patient. Mr HiTech will get the numbers back up.

 :salute
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else.
- Will Rogers (1879 - 1935)

Offline perdue3

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4662
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #54 on: August 22, 2018, 11:44:20 PM »
I think people will balance up.

+1 to OP.

They will not and when you force them into Emils and P-40's, they whine.
C.O. Kommando Nowotny 

FlyKommando.com

 

Offline Vraciu

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14034
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #55 on: August 23, 2018, 12:24:35 AM »
They will not and when you force them into Emils and P-40's, they whine.

Then they need to balance up.  See how that works?   :D
”KILLER V”
Charter Member of the P-51 Mustang Skin Mafia
King of the Hill Champ, Tour 219
The Damned
King of the Hill Win Percentage - 100 (1 Win, 0 Losses)

Offline lunatic1

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2795
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #56 on: August 23, 2018, 06:56:14 AM »
you all are just whistling Dixie, HiTech already said no to a 2 sided war-on nugetx's previous posts when he made his presence known.

nugetx came back dug up that poor dead horse and and is beating it again, give it up it's not going to happen.
C.O. of the 173rd Guardian Angels---Don't fire until you can see the whites of their eyes...Major devereux(The Battle Of Wake Island-1941.
R.I.P.49GRIN/GRIN-R.I.P. WWHISKEY R.I.P WIZZY R.I.P.

Offline flippz

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 690
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #57 on: August 23, 2018, 09:34:11 AM »
+1000 this is a phenomenal idea.

and to date no one has matched a decent rebuttal on why we don't do this.  other than the standard this is what dale wants or this is how its all ways been. 

I switch from time to time to get some action.  and theres nothing worse than like fess said, you play the shell game and come up still empty handed, even by looking at roster numbers.  if it was a 2 sided country war and team a had 50 players and team b had 25 players, guess what I know what team to switch over to.
how many folks do you think log in and see both there fronts completely dead and log?  or they log in on the weekend and see double dar on both there fronts and log?
if there was a two country war guess what time switch wouldn't be such an issue as there is a one front war and the base rollers could roll bases and dog fighters to dog fight.  I think folks would be more likely to even up teams and sides as for better game play.  it may also actually encourage MISSIONS and a collusion of team players to master mind a base strike (imagine that).  humans tend to flow like water and water takes the path of least resistance.  so lets say (average arena numbers) there 30 players per team, in our current states of game play there is going to be one front that is dead and the other team is gonna have 30 vs 15.  now if it was a 2 country one front war it would be 45ish versus 45ish.   

Offline nugetx

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 628
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #58 on: August 23, 2018, 11:28:31 AM »
you all are just whistling Dixie, HiTech already said no to a 2 sided war-on nugetx's previous posts when he made his presence known.

nugetx came back dug up that poor dead horse and and is beating it again, give it up it's not going to happen.


Offline caldera

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6437
Re: We need 2 sides for low player numbers
« Reply #59 on: August 24, 2018, 11:50:43 AM »
Just like Titanic Tuesday used to generate excitement, I would like to see Two Side Tuesday tried out.
 
Two countries, a one hour switch time and unlimited switch time to low numbered country.  Convert an AVA or scenario map.



If it fails, the proof will be there for all to see.  HTC can say "I told you so" and go back to business as usual.

Suppose it doesn't fail?  Having one day per week a little different would generate excitement.
"Then out spake brave Horatius, the Captain of the gate:
 To every man upon this earth, death cometh soon or late.
 And how can man die better, than facing fearful odds.
 For the ashes of his fathers and the temples of his Gods."