Ancedotal or for real?

[molybdenum]

Some maps are more popular than others, according to many of the people who post on these message boards. Some say they log off when they see a map they dislike. It would be interesting to plot daily player numbers over, say, the last six months based on which maps are up to measure how true this is. Is that even doable? I'm not sure. There would be a lot of variables (time of day, how many hours or days the map stays up, day of the week, etc). Maybe our resident statistician can weigh in?

Word has it that Mindanao and Buzzsaw have been taken out of rotation. Were there really significantly fewer players on when they were up? I didn't get that impression, but I don't always fly in my evenings, so if it happened, maybe that's when?

I really liked them both, and never lacked the opportunity to do something interesting on either.

[The Fugitive]

When I log in more often than not there are around 100 players playing. When Buzzsaw was up it was 70. The Mindanao map was a unbalanced map. I had asked Kenai if it was something that could be fixed like they have done with a few other maps and he said that was the issue, it would have to be totally rebuild in which case it wouldn't be Mindanao map any more to cure the ills.

[DmonSlyr]

The lowest #s are usually the largest maps during the day. BowlMA, craterMa, and ocoenia being worst. Other maps not performing well ive seen include USA map and 3 points. I could always tell when Buzzsaw was on just by the #s. Usually 20 people less than average. For me, since I dont have much time to play, If I dont see a battle, im probably gonna play a round of DCS or battlefield and then check back in. I just dont really care about Jabo anymore. My thrill is shooting people down and putting together a great fight and sortie with 3 plus kills. If I cant seem to find that on the map, than ill come back later. Weekend afternoon MA #s have been pretty dismal. This leads to a slower evening build up. Its all about getting people into fights early in the day and keep players in the fights later into the evening. This is achieved by maps that produce good battles.

I know I sound like a broken record. But ive been doing this for years now and can spot trends. I started taking a bunch of pictures of maps during night and day, but felt it would be too much to explain.

Maps like Ndisels are the perfect size maps. Where each front isnt so huge, but it does provide much opportunity for battles. Im not a fan of furball islands though but at times it does provide for a lot of fun.

Overall I think the key is balance to where both sides cant gang one side so much, and completely put them out of the fight so they cant find action when the tide changes and they are left taking back undefended bases.

[LCADolby]

Unless you have accurate tracked trend statistics its wholly Anecdotal

[Eagler]

With only 100 at peak, the number of bases should be reduced as 90% of the map has zero action at any given time..

Which requires smaller maps..

Still think 2 sides makes more sense than 3 with today's numbers..

Eagler

[The Fugitive]

The lowest #s are usually the largest maps during the day. BowlMA, craterMa, and ocoenia being worst. Other maps not performing well ive seen include USA map and 3 points. I could always tell when Buzzsaw was on just by the #s. Usually 20 people less than average. For me, since I dont have much time to play, If I dont see a battle, im probably gonna play a round of DCS or battlefield and then check back in. I just dont really care about Jabo anymore. My thrill is shooting people down and putting together a great fight and sortie with 3 plus kills. If I cant seem to find that on the map, than ill come back later. Weekend afternoon MA #s have been pretty dismal. This leads to a slower evening build up. Its all about getting people into fights early in the day and keep players in the fights later into the evening. This is achieved by maps that produce good battles.

I know I sound like a broken record. But ive been doing this for years now and can spot trends. I started taking a bunch of pictures of maps during night and day, but felt it would be too much to explain.

Maps like Ndisels are the perfect size maps. Where each front isnt so huge, but it does provide much opportunity for battles. Im not a fan of furball islands though but at times it does provide for a lot of fun.

Overall I think the key is balance to where both sides cant gang one side so much, and completely put them out of the fight so they cant find action when the tide changes and they are left taking back undefended bases.

Of the 20 maps we have left, all of them are the same size except BowlMA. So its not the "size" of the map your complaining about, but more likely the layout. From what I understand the guys who build these things try to funnel fights on each front. Youd have to ask Kong and Kenai, but that is what I think they try to do, create fights.

With only 100 at peak, the number of bases should be reduced as 90% of the map has zero action at any given time..

Which requires smaller maps..

.......

Eagler

I agree that some of these maps have way to many bases. Take "CraterMA" At present the coast is about 85 miles from the center of the map. If the red section with its bases was removed (25-30 miles) it would tighten up the fronts and make for more fights because it wasnt so spread out.



Map size is still 256x256, but the layout is changed. Heck you could knock down the crater walls some as they were there as a deterrent to bomb****s ruining GV fights in the crater. Seeing as there are no more GV fights in the crater, lowering the wall would give players an easier flight for cross front fighting to mix it up on the second front.

How much work this would be??? Dont know, but im betting it would be like building a new map 

..........

Still think 2 sides makes more sense than 3 with today's numbers..

Eagler

Sure it would give a single front for all fights. The problem, due to human nature, is that side balance would never come close. One side would always heavily out number the other side. And then that side would always be crying about ENY, which would never turn off.

[Eagler]

Then if players are too selfish for fair gameplay by balancing the sides on their own, the game should enforce even numbers as that's what the majority wants..doesn't mean it is not time to reduce the game to two sides from 3...not that I believe the energy is there for a change that big nor most code corrections but a guy can dream..

Eagler

[Animl-AW]

OMG the constant repeats.
It just recycles the same 4-5 subjects like they were never brought up before
I spend less time here.

<smh>

[Max]

Call for Herr Lusche...please pick up the blue courtesy phone

[Busher]

Then if players are too selfish for fair gameplay by balancing the sides on their own, the game should enforce even numbers as that's what the majority wants..doesn't mean it is not time to reduce the game to two sides from 3...not that I believe the energy is there for a change that big nor most code corrections but a guy can dream..

Eagler

I think you're exactly on point. Admittedly I like some maps more that others but the map is never the reason I decide to play or to log off.

Seeing a roster of 25-12-11 will usually mean that I am on for less than 1 minute. (even if I am in the 25. That's not war.. it's extermination)

[haggerty]

There are some maps that I particularly dont really enjoy, but its usually due to population at the time.  Sometimes I'll be in a situation where I have to second guess if I want to even up a sortie.  Fly a good distance to a base when I know that the defense will 100% be manned guns.  I might be lucky enough to kill all the auto and manned guns before dieing, but then what?  By the time I get back to my base some of these maps allows a single player to resup the guns before I can return to take advantage of the guns being down.

[oTRALFZo]

Still think 2 sides makes more sense than 3 with today's numbers..

Eagler

This is very debatable.
Have you ever been on the early hours? Very typical numbers are 28 vs 2 vs 4. on any given morning. Then to make matters worse, the 4 attack the side with only 2. This is player choice and what do you think will happen with 2 sides? Everyone will just pile on one side to pumbble the other. It would be far worse and much more toxic

[Eagler]

Then the players would have to be treated like children and have the game force even sides...

Eagler

[The Fugitive]

Then the players would have to be treated like children and have the game force even sides...

Eagler

But then you chase away the "side loyal" players, the squad loyal players. Next all you have left is 12 guys chasing each other up and down the front

[Randy1]

Extra long flights, and extra long GV travel stand out quite a bit on some maps.  A couple of maps GV'ers just log off because of poor game play.

Still, a  to  our map makers.  Keep in mind when they make a map they are trying to bring in something new, and different.  An experiment in game play if you will.  Let us be sure to not beat them up for giving map making a go.  They have made quite of bit of headway in my opinion.

Last's map as an example can have some of the best game play ever but it can get it out of balance taking one country out of good play on a bad day.   

Lusche might be able to see a map problem by looking at the number of kills per map day.