Author Topic: A Whine has been recorded... (Read 3740 times)

thrila · « **Reply #90 on:** October 07, 2003, 06:41:33 PM »

I really don't mind fighting the top 5 a/c. A lot of people who fly them aren't very good and can be shotdown fairly quickly and they usually give a fight, or runaway on the deck and are no longer a threat anyway.

I learned to fly with spits and i still fly spits now.... the spitIX is still my fave ride, i love spits.

I more or less use the same tactics when flying other planes (which i don't do often) and have success.

I can fly other rides.... but i'd much rather fly a spit.

muckmaw · « **Reply #91 on:** October 07, 2003, 07:17:27 PM »

I'm testing out the P-40E...

So far...pretty lethal, but the guns could use more ammo. Not for a spray and prayer like me, but I'll stick with it.

drone · « **Reply #92 on:** October 07, 2003, 08:55:58 PM »

Well folks this one is a real ballbuster lol ------like I said before, if you want a change stop flying your normal ride and fly a different one...to culminate all these posts into one, fly what is appropiate for the mission your on --

and if your just furballin quit your complaining and fly something that makes it more of a challenge for YOU......

I actually told a noob the other night to get out of the 51-D and fly a spit till he got used to the flight caracteristics of the simm--it wasnt any fun shooting him down all the time because he was learning......and I was in a FM-2.

oboe · « **Reply #93 on:** October 08, 2003, 12:06:36 AM »

I have to apologize to Toad if I my post was too harsh. Was late, I'd been drinking, and I had just lost a $50 bet on the Buccaneers on Monday Night Football. They were leading the Colts 35-14 with LESS THAN 4 MINUTES LEFT in the game, and managed to lose in overtime 38-35. I'm still shaking my head. #1 defense in the NFL and a 21 point lead late in the 4th quarter. Go figure. Sorry I aimed my outburst directly at you, Toad.

This discussion of diversity keeps coming up I think because there are valid points on both sides. In fact I respect Toad's position and appreciate how he can sum it up with the "Fly what you like; like what you fly" slogan. I also agree with him that the CT, scenarios, and snapshots can be alternatives for those who are fed up with the MA, and I agree that HTC doesn't see the lack of diversity in the MA as a problem, or they would do something about it.

What I disagree on is Toad's assessment of the basic underlying argument - that the pro-diversity crowd is out to dictate what planes people fly. My basic underlying argument is that if HTC advertises the game as having over 50 different aircraft, a user could expect to log in and see more than 5 of them being used.
It stands to reason that if they spent the time and effort to introduce the planes to the game, they'd want people to use them. I don't think it creates a very favorable impression of the game for new users - it reminds me of a garden owner who advertises 50 different species of plants, but when you get there you find the garden choked over with dandelion, ragweed, and quackgrass. If the other species are there you have to look hard to find them.

I don't see perking as "dictating" or forcing me to fly certain planes, and I think that's where we differ also. I think its possible to create circumstances or conditions in the game where at the end of the tour, we wind up with more balanced plane usage, and all the while pilots were free to choose what plane they flew. Could be perking, could be early war/late war arenas, could be something as simple as terrain design and configuration
or server scripted missions.

We'll never know unless we experiment a little. Its HTC's sandbox so how its setup is entirely up to them. It can't hurt to contribute to discussions though- the more players heard from the better idea HTC will have of player sentiment.

Toad · « **Reply #94 on:** October 08, 2003, 07:12:43 AM »

Don't worry about it Oboe. I use the BBS mainly for amusement purposes. It is, after all, a game.

Quote

Originally posted by oboe
My basic underlying argument is that if HTC advertises the game as having over 50 different aircraft, a user could expect to log in and see more than 5 of them being used.

Isn't that an unrealistic expectation when the game (HTC) allows each individual to choose for themselves which aircraft to fly?

Unquestionably, the overwhelming majority of the plane set is a "free choice" smorgasboard for the user. Nowhere in any of the advertising have I seen any other emphasis besides "you can fly over 50 different airplanes.

You go into a buffet restaurant and they advertise 50 different entrees, you don't complain because just EVERYONE is eating only the fried chicken.

Quote

It stands to reason that if they spent the time and effort to introduce the planes to the game, they'd want people to use them.

Maybe it just stands to reason that they want people to have a choice? Maybe they don't care what YOU fly, as long as you are happy flying it?

Quote

If the other species are there you have to look hard to find them.

No you don't. They're right there in the hangar. As Muck seems to have realized, arena diversity starts with YOU and it starts when you click on "Hangar".

You also have to accept the fact that some folks just don't share your goals. They don't care about diversity, they don't care what type of plane they meet in the air. They just want to fly what they fly.

And if this were some sort of democratic "vote", the "diversity crowd" would be in the tiny minority. How do I know? Think about it... people are voting with their mouse button in the hangar every time they launch. And a whole bloody bunch of them vote for Spits, La-7's, -51's, Niks and whatever the other one was.

So even you guys admit "the people have spoken" by the very basis of your argument. The problem is... you don't want to listen to them.

Quote

I don't see perking as "dictating" or forcing me to fly certain planes,

Of course you don't; you probably have thousands of perks like I do that you'll never use. This, however, isn't true of every player. And thus you ARE forcing those guys.

Quote

and all the while pilots were free to choose what plane they flew

With perking, you'd have to change that to "some pilots".

With separate arenas, it'd be true but HT has said he isn't going to do that. Repeatedly.

AH2 will give you dictated matchups though... but people will have to CHOOSE to play them. That may or may not be problematic.

Quote

the more players heard from the better idea HTC will have of player sentiment.

Somehow, I think HT will look at nightly usage stats and consider how many of his players like to fly the Big 5 before he worries about how a few posters don't like to see other people flying the BIg 5.

Just a guess on my part though.

beet1e · « **Reply #95 on:** October 08, 2003, 10:19:03 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
You go into a buffet restaurant and they advertise 50 different entrees, you don't complain because just EVERYONE is eating only the fried chicken.

But if the menu had 50 items, including fried eggs and curried beans, and EVERYONE was eating them, you might complain, once the farting started.

sourkraut · « **Reply #96 on:** October 08, 2003, 11:37:16 AM »

I think everyone should be required to put their CPID in the
signature block so that we can check the stats to see how
valid their arguments are.

oboe · « **Reply #97 on:** October 08, 2003, 12:35:37 PM »

I think server scripted missions could increase diversity without dictating what people fly. Let's say every 20 minutes or so the server creates a small to medium sized mission - jabo, level bomber with escort, fighter sweep, whatever. The server can check some database and employ little-used aircraft for the mission. For pilots who join the mission, the scoring mechanism could give them an ENY bonus or something, so that any kills or destroyed targets by the mission participants earn them big perk points.

So, its simply a carrot vs stick approach to getting some diversity in the planeset usage. Doesn't limit people's choice at all.

Toad · « **Reply #98 on:** October 08, 2003, 01:56:54 PM »

Oboe, if I understand your idea and what they've said about AH2, then you'll get a chance to see how it works. But it won't be in the MA and it shouldn't be in the MA.

Kweassa · « **Reply #99 on:** October 08, 2003, 04:11:04 PM »

My NPA could be in the MA...

...

I think..

Toad · « **Reply #100 on:** October 08, 2003, 05:28:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kweassa
My NPA could be in the MA...

...

I think..

Which is merely, and yet another, scheme to make people fly something that YOU want to see them fly.

oboe · « **Reply #101 on:** October 08, 2003, 05:44:10 PM »

I hear you Kweassa, who knows maybe it will get a chance there.
I'm not sanguine about it's prospects since Ive never heard HTC comment on your NPA. When they introduced perks they said they were going to play with them some, but they really haven't done much with the system. Basically I see the current perk scheme as responsible for solving the C-Hog problem and preventing aq similiar one with the Tempest and 262. Doesn't really do much else, IMO. Maybe encourages some side switching for low cost perk rides, but I doubt it.

Toad, my idea (and I don't truly know if its mine originally) is just the server scripting a few small missions an hour to give players some incentive to get into some of the less popular rides. Similiar to TOD, but without all the code to track mission success and award medals and promos etc. Players who have no interest in missions wouldn't even know they're going on, apart from the server occasionally issuing a MISSION UP notification on a squelchable channel. Flyers furballing away in La-7s and Spits may only notice an occasional formation of D3As and B5Ns escorted by A6Ms, or a gaggle of Fw190Fs hitting a radar site, or B-26s escorted by P-51Bs harrassing an enemy port. It would probably be indistinguishable from squad operations to most opposing players.

I came up with the idea in about 15 minutes, just to show how arena diversity could be affected with resorting to what you call "limiting" tactics like perks, or an RPS. How can you so quickly dismiss it as having no place in the MA? I can't see how what I've described would limit any player's choice, which seems to be your main problem with all the other plans proposed?

Personally I don't know how successful the TOD arena will be. Not supporting MA squads may wind up being a big negative I think. It'll be interesting to see what kind of community develops around it though.

Toad · « **Reply #102 on:** October 09, 2003, 12:07:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by oboe
my idea (and I don't truly know if its mine originally) is just the server scripting a few small missions an hour to give players some incentive to get into some of the less popular rides.

Try thinking of it this way. Any reasonable polling of HT's MA player base.. say considering what they choose to fly as their plane of choice... is going to show that a large part of HT's MA player base LIKES to fly the Big 5.

So, seems easy to understand why HT isn't too worried about this to me.

Further, why would HTC bother scripting MA missions when those who long for a) missions b) "realistic" matchups c) structured environment are going to have AH2: TOD?

If I'm on the HTC side of the desk, I'm thinking if you want server generated missions, we're dedicating an arena to that purpose. If you want MA action in all it's unruly and unpredictable confusion, we've dedicated a server to that purpose.

Lastly:

Quote

I can't see how what I've described would limit any player's choice, which seems to be your main problem with all the other plans proposed?

No, you're not limiting... in fact you're really offering nothing more in the way of plane choice than we already have.

What you're suggesting is that people will suddenly fly planes they wouldn't normally fly just to be in a "scripted mission.

Yet you yourself could offer this exact situation by building a "reare plane" mission package and encouraging your country mates to "JOIN THE MISSION" on CH2.

So, why do you need HT to do this for you? YOU have this capability RIGHT NOW. Try your theory and see how it goes. You don't need HT to do anything to implement this.

Go for it.

beet1e · « **Reply #103 on:** October 09, 2003, 06:33:11 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Try thinking of it this way. Any reasonable polling of HT's MA player base.. say considering what they choose to fly as their plane of choice... is going to show that a large part of HT's MA player base LIKES to fly the Big 5.

But maybe some people LIKE to fly one of the big five in order to improve their survivability given that they are going to run into many enemies flying planes belonging to the "big five" subset.

Toad · « **Reply #104 on:** October 09, 2003, 06:48:59 AM »

Maybe. But look at the K/D of those aircraft and consider whether flying one enhances survivability for the average player. Obviously, it does not. So there's a likely flaw in your argument right there.

Also, unless HT decides to change the MA setup into ... say... something an only incredibly tiny minority says they want, like a RPS, I doubt that situation would change.

Scripted server missions wouldn't be necessary as an attempt to change that; you can build any sort of mission you like right now and plead with your countrymen to "JOIN THE MISSION".