2v1 country ganging needs intervention from htc

[DubiousKB]

Did you not get your copy of HiTech Trans in the mail after you subscribed?

HiTech

No!....

I'm thinking scuzzy got to it before it shipped out... I did receive a chunk of wool and a torn velcro glove... 

[lunaticfringe]

Just took this screen shot moments ago:



Rooks lost more than half their fields and Bish/Nit combined lost one single field.  43 players vs 5 on two fronts.  This is your three sided arena balance.


One country gets tag teamed like Poland in 1939, because it is easy to have double the numbers (or a shipload more in this case) and steamroll bases.

But this is bad for the game.  People logged out, including me.  It's time for a rule to prevent this.


Make a limit on % of bases that you can have on one country vs the other.  Specifically, Country A can't take more than 10% of Country B than Country C.  Once Country A has 10% of B, they must take from Country C before nay more captures from B.


People love easy mode.  That will never change.  But you can't let this dogpiling go on without limits.

not anybody's fault the rooks didn't  show up. and if you try to force people to switch sides-they will quit...what it is people have no class in this game--they always look for the easy road.....................eny doesn't really work-because the side with the highest eny/most people on-will horde to make up for it.. 

like 20 people (no eny) take up late war planes and the country that their eny is thru the roof- will take up 30-35 high eny planes and horde -no eny people still lose.

[Vraciu]

not anybody's fault the rooks didn't  show up.

That response will solve everything!  /sarcastic blue

[guncrasher]

we already have a two side arena and hardly anybody goes there.  Ava administrators are cool enough to set it up almost anyway you want.  just prove there that a 2 side way works and see what happens.


semp

[Vraciu]

we already have a two side arena and hardly anybody goes there.  Ava administrators are cool enough to set it up almost anyway you want.  just prove there that a 2 side way works and see what happens.


semp

Except that a two-sided AvA is not a two-sided MA.     That’s why nobody goes there. 

[Shuffler]

we already have a two side arena and hardly anybody goes there.  Ava administrators are cool enough to set it up almost anyway you want.  just prove there that a 2 side way works and see what happens.


semp

Evidently they do not like the name. That or they want everyone to be forced to play two sides.

[Arlo]

Nothing stops a player from playing 2-sided, as is. Spend half your time as a knight fighting rooks then switch to bish fighting rooks (or any combination you want fighting just one side).

Convince me otherwise.  (raises cup of coffee)

[guncrasher]

Except that a two-sided AvA is not a two-sided MA.     That’s why nobody goes there. 

would it be better if the change the name to 2 sided arena and ma to 3 side arena?

semp

[Vraciu]

would it be better if the change the name to 2 sided arena and ma to 3 side arena?

semp

Nope.   Too many variables out there.  Your label only addresses ONE of them--and not the most important.   

[guncrasher]

Nope.   Too many variables out there.  Your label only addresses ONE of them--and not the most important.   

then what exactly do you want?  and what makes you think that the 2 sided arena we have now, wont work?  what makes you think that in a 2 sided arena one side wont be constantly horded?  and most important, what makes you think that a 2 sided arena is what most players want?  after all the ava has been reconfigured several times with all planes available.


semp

[Vraciu]

then what exactly do you want?  and what makes you think that the 2 sided arena we have now, wont work?

Which one are you referring to, the actual two-sided arena or the defacto one falsely referred to as having three sides?

what makes you think that in a 2 sided arena one side wont be constantly horded? 

Oh, ENY, my experience in WBs where we switched sides for balance, etc.  (This is such a straw man argument it reminds me of Chicken Little.)

In any case it beats what we have 90% of the time now which is either:

1) Two sides against one (a two-sided arena lol)

OR

2) Two sides against each other with the third ignored (a two-sided arena with a built-in offline mode minus the drones ha ha).

I would rather be hoarded than bored in any case.   

and most important, what makes you think that a 2 sided arena is what most players want?  after all the ava has been reconfigured several times with all planes available.


semp

Silly rabbit.   You still do not grasp what makes the AvA ANYTHING BUT the equivalent of the MA, no matter how many sides. 


The AvA is not an MA.   One side.  Two sides.   Ten sides.    The key to the riddle is comtained in the NAME. 

[Arlo]

The NAME! Oh, that!

[Vraciu]

Yes, THAT.   

Hiding in plain sight for all the “smart people” to miss.   It’s quite entertaining to watch. 

[guncrasher]

Yes, THAT.   

Hiding in plain sight for all the “smart people” to miss.   It’s quite entertaining to watch.

so you think if the ava was renamed the ma that people would just accept it and fly in it?


semp

[Oldman731]

so you think if the ava was renamed the ma that people would just accept it and fly in it?

Heh.  I think his complaint is that all planes are not enabled for both sides in the AvA.

Boiled down to its essentials, it expresses a desire to be able to fly your favorite plane.  Many people want to always be able to fly their favorite plane.  Among them are many respected veterans.  While I recognize this, I've never understood it.  AH has so many planes, it seems a shame to ignore the variety.

That said, the AvA is not going to be the same as a two-sided MA.

- oldman