Just an observation

[DmonSlyr]

A few things that are concerning to me.

I am ranked #6 in K/H this month. It's a 10.5 kills per hour. This means that only 5 other players get more than 11 kills per hour on average. Think about that. The majority of players I recon are in the 3 kills per hour. Even 6 kills per hour is top 100! With the majority of players getting 3 kills per hour, this is indicative of slow game play. This to me is very glaring reason why many haven't stuck around. It takes a long time for most average players to even get a kill in the time they are playing. Its crazy for me to believe honestly, but the #s don't lie here. Back in 2008, I was pushing 16 kills per hour. My point is that, with lower player #s, the time to find guys and shoot them down has increased significantly. Ie, it takes much longer to find players to shoot down.

My hypothesis is this: Do Kills/Time have an impact on whether a player sticks around in the game longer?

If a player can only achieve 1 or 2 kills per hour on average. Are they getting what they want from the game?

If a player has quicker access to fights, will they have more fun because they get more kills per hour?

This is what I want to prove, do smaller maps with closer bases create more action, thus a higher kills/time, thus keeping players around longer?

Would players being able to get kills faster be more beneficial in keep them around longer?

My opinion is yes, it would benefit the game much more for players to be able to get kills faster.



Another thing I noticed this weekend. BowlMA was up again, all Thanksgiving break for 5 days now, after it was just up all last weekend. Yesterday, Rooks had 15 bases total, bish and knights both had more than 20% of rook bases. Knights went to go attack bish, bish kept fighting rooks or rooks were mainly going after bish. The knights were left with hoards going base to base with no defense. I did not roll one time late afternoon and last night because it was pointless. There were no fights for knights. I did not know who was winning the rook bish battle. My guess was the rooks. So here I am, sitting on the knights side, trying to find a fight, but there is nothing, on a huge bellybutton map with 150 bases, and I can't even fly over the rooks/bish side to join their fight...

My point is, why is there no incentive for Bish to fight knights? It went like this all afternoon.

Would it be better to close out a map after 2 or 3 days instead of 5 if a team cannot win? IMO, having a map stay up for this long, with boring gameplay,  and far distances to attack fields ect, has a big impact on that kills per hour stat which has a big impact on keeping players in the game.

If we can increase the average kills/hour for players, it will bring in and keep more players. That is what we should be focused on.

[RotBaron]

‘Would it be better to close out a map after 2 or 3 days instead of 5 if a team cannot win? IMO, having a map stay up for this long, with boring gameplay,  and far distances’ (between bases)

having a map stay up for this long Is boring

[Arlo]

having a map stay up for this long Is boring

Maps are pretty but I don't fixate on how long they're up. If anything, having them roll like a deck of cards being shuffled can be a tad irritating.

[RotBaron]

Maps are pretty but I don't fixate on how long they're up. If anything, having them roll like a deck of cards being shuffled can be a tad irritating.

I agree, however several days it gets boring. Finding a balance probably isn’t easy for HTC, however long travel times for seconds to minutes with enemy’s can be a tad irritating too.

[Arlo]

I agree, however several days it gets boring. Finding a balance probably isn’t easy for HTC, however long travel times for seconds to minutes with enemy’s can be a tad irritating too.

Not to me. Like I said, I'm not fixated on the map I'm on, winning it or anything like that. I enjoy long periods of stability where launching doesn't mean a server reset before I get to the action.

[SPKmes]

I am under 1 kph... I am usually pretty busy... I give out many assists

[DaddyAce]

Never looked at my K/H before, but just checked it.  Was surprised to find I was ranked 18 at 10.26 K/H.  But, other than scenario type events,  I usually play maybe half an hour to a couple hours most days, and almost exclusively fly fighters looking for good fights.

But to get to your point, I think finding good action quickly would surely be a plus, especially with keeping new players.

[Lusche]

Never looked at my K/H before, but just checked it.  Was surprised to find I was ranked 18 at 10.26 K/H.

That K/H would have ranked you ~ #50 ten years ago = better than 98,9%. Today (at #16) it's better than 98,5%, so not that much difference percentage wise, as AH has only about one quarter of the pilots compared to Nov 2010.

Here's the average arena K/H in fighter mode for the past ten years:

But, other than scenario type events,  I usually play maybe half an hour to a couple of hours most days, and almost exclusively fly fighters looking for good fights.

On a general note, K/H depends not only on raw skill, but also a lot on style of play and timezone. A good pilot playing at US prime time looking for quick fighter combat will have a better k/h than someone playing more 'strategically' during off hours - combat opportunities were much less then.

Even with much more action overall back when I was still playing, my k/h was always somewhat "suffering" from being a high altitude bomber hunter in fighter mode and flying at euro times mostly (not that it mattered to me, I also got a higher hit% and K/D because of my playing style).

[Shuffler]

Not all folks fight. Many attack bases and blow stuff up.

[RichardDarkwood]

I am ranked #6 in K/H this month. It's a 10.5 kills per hour. This means that only 5 other players get more than 11 kills per hour on average. Think about that. The majority of players I recon are in the 3 kills per hour. Even 6 kills per hour is top 100! With the majority of players getting 3 kills per hour, this is indicative of slow game play. This to me is very glaring reason why many haven't stuck around.

Wow

This is all that some of you got. Kills per hour. There is way more than this

[DmonSlyr]

Wow

This is all that some of you got. Kills per hour. There is way more than this

Of course there is way more to it, I am just using it as an indicator. My arguement is that if we look for ways to help increase kills/hour on average, it would possibly prevent more players from leaving the game and looking for something more actionable. Lusche's chart is interesting, but you can noticeably see a decline in k/h as the #s decrease. Would be interesting to see what 2007-09 average was.

[hitech]

Lusche: Have you ever computed the median kph?

HiTech

[RichardDarkwood]

Of course there is way more to it, I am just using it as an indicator. My arguement is that if we look for ways to help increase kills/hour on average, it would possibly prevent more players from leaving the game and looking for something more actionable. Lusche's chart is interesting, but you can noticeably see a decline in k/h as the #s decrease. Would be interesting to see what 2007-09 average was.

I don't think kills per hour is why people are leaving.

[Eagler]

I don't think kills per hour is why people are leaving.

I think lack of kills per hour might be a reason some dont stick around

Smaller maps would help that

Nothing like flying to a base two sectors away to get HOed on first pass

Eagler

[RotBaron]

I think lack of kills per hour might be a reason some dont stick around

Smaller maps would help that

Nothing like flying to a base two sectors away to get HOed on first pass

Eagler

 . 

Yes they certainly would!