When did a 10 v 10 game become "good".
I can undestand using the EU server, but now latenight games are coming 2 hours EARLIER then normal, because the 7 extra pilots per team, are flying in the EU server.
And seriously people, when you have 10 v 10, the game isnt fun. Commanding sucks even more (and you need so much less skill), and flying isnt as fun because the furballs arent there and it turns into endless one on one fights.
so yeah, 10 v 10 game = bombrush or die. Sounds like fun, i need to buy 1 base, and build a bomber. Push base, bomb. I win. Woooo!
or.. i can go EXP! and we can stalemate and whore on each other for hours...
in a 10 v 10 game, 1 pilot can swing the mix (pretty much the only reason for the back and forth is pilots leaving/ joining latenight games).
P.S. calling me a bad comm or pilot, doesnt prove your point, it just makes you look stupid. (Unless a member of XT or an AZ vet, then you have enough respect to say that)
Latenight games?
Psych, your stupid
/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />
Totally agree that late night games just make me cry. i look forward to the day where late night means there are still 50 pilots online and playing.
/wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />
Totally agree that late night games just make me cry. i look forward to the day where late night means there are still 50 pilots online and playing.
FIZ wrote:QUOTE (FIZ @ Feb 28 2011, 04:56 PM) After Slap I use Voltaire for light reading.
QUOTE [20:13] <DasSmiter> I like to think that one day he logged on and accidentally clicked his way to the EoR forumCronoDroid wrote:QUOTE (CronoDroid @ Jan 23 2009, 07:46 PM) If you're going to go GT, go Exp, unless you're Gooey. But Gooey is nuts.
[20:13] <DasSmiter> And his heart exploded in a cloud of fury[/quote]
Psycho u must be tired when u wrote this.. I dont understand what u say.. Get some sleep and come back and explain.
What initially talk/mumble about is what happens in the afternoon for us in the EU, so infact u experience what we have to cope with on a daily basis.
So without further talk ill declare this an old man rant...
Join earlier and play.
Ill Whore you
Zapper
What initially talk/mumble about is what happens in the afternoon for us in the EU, so infact u experience what we have to cope with on a daily basis.
So without further talk ill declare this an old man rant...
Join earlier and play.
Ill Whore you
Zapper
Life suck's and then u play Alleg.
-.. ..- -.- . -. ..- -.- . .----. . -- .. ... - .... . --. .-. . .- - . ... -
-.. ..- -.- . -. ..- -.- . .----. . -- .. ... - .... . --. .-. . .- - . ... -
-
CronoDroid
- Posts: 4606
- Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 8:00 am
- Contact:
Well actually after Psych left we all invaded the EU server and had a few nice 15-20 player per side game.
But flying for certain commanders is still frustrating as hell. /doh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":doh:" border="0" alt="doh.gif" /> /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />
But flying for certain commanders is still frustrating as hell. /doh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":doh:" border="0" alt="doh.gif" /> /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />
-
Grimmwolf_GB
- Posts: 3711
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 7:00 am
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
If the EU players want a good ping for a change (this is the first weekend the server is up!), then maybe you could move to the EU server and suffer the "horrible" lag for a while. Trust me, one can fly pretty well with 90 lag, it is just not as smooth as you had it before. Then you could get your larger games up and running again.
-
Clay_Pigeon
- Posts: 3211
- Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:00 am
- Location: my pod
I really have no noticeable problems on the EU server, and my lag is 70-90.
Then again, I avoid dogfighting whenever I can.
Then again, I avoid dogfighting whenever I can.
"Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me." -2 Cor 12:9
"Never know how long I've waited, anticipated your smile pressed against mine." -Running
Psy
Funny thing to me: The comm has greater ability to effect the game outcome on smaller games via his own strategies/ideas. Sneaking cons forward uneyed is no longer impossible. It's easier to get 10-15 guys to do what you want vs 35. Bombers are now more then an early/game ending tp2 game option. Miner hunting takes a greater team effort. Sup is now a much stronger tech option, and IMHO Tac the weakest with clue playing a large factor in it's effectiveness. Dare I mention them caps those big old things are again an option core depending of course.
Individuals can change the course of the game I agree completely and the difference in that player's overall game effect between 10 per side vs 15 per side is significant. Personally I think Allegiance thrives on the 15-20 players per side. Wait a bit and see if the bomber rushes don't slow once comms start altering their strats a tad. An OP near the friendly aleph vs mid sector lives several orders of magnitude longer for example. Situational awareness is now much stronger then a paint by the numbers approach. Innovation is no longer a bad word. Although there are still "Rules of thumb" the successful comms followed. But yeah you dont get the sensor overload that big big games
You like gigantic furr balls and 30-40 vs 30-40 games sweet me too. The smaller game is a beast all of it's own and one Im happy to see show up from time to time. More then one game running at all times Allegiance experience would make me wet myself with joy.
MrChaos
Funny thing to me: The comm has greater ability to effect the game outcome on smaller games via his own strategies/ideas. Sneaking cons forward uneyed is no longer impossible. It's easier to get 10-15 guys to do what you want vs 35. Bombers are now more then an early/game ending tp2 game option. Miner hunting takes a greater team effort. Sup is now a much stronger tech option, and IMHO Tac the weakest with clue playing a large factor in it's effectiveness. Dare I mention them caps those big old things are again an option core depending of course.
Individuals can change the course of the game I agree completely and the difference in that player's overall game effect between 10 per side vs 15 per side is significant. Personally I think Allegiance thrives on the 15-20 players per side. Wait a bit and see if the bomber rushes don't slow once comms start altering their strats a tad. An OP near the friendly aleph vs mid sector lives several orders of magnitude longer for example. Situational awareness is now much stronger then a paint by the numbers approach. Innovation is no longer a bad word. Although there are still "Rules of thumb" the successful comms followed. But yeah you dont get the sensor overload that big big games
You like gigantic furr balls and 30-40 vs 30-40 games sweet me too. The smaller game is a beast all of it's own and one Im happy to see show up from time to time. More then one game running at all times Allegiance experience would make me wet myself with joy.
MrChaos
Ssssh
To an extent, I can understand the frustration with small games. However, I also think that they can serve a significant funtion within the game as a whole.
I count myself among the few who are branching out into the occational command situation. As a returning player, my knowledge of the game has certain holes, and as a skill, I'm seriously out of practice. Perhaps to the extent of starting over, perhaps not. Either way, I'd like to get better as a commander. To do that, I have to command - but I need to have the room to bork a game and learn somthing. This just isn't possible during prime, and I'd never attempt it. So, those late night, 10 or 20 person games make a great opportunity to command, and get practice. Especially since those 20 people will likely sit in the lobby begging for a commander for a half hour. So don't come down too hard on late-night small games. They are significant in their own way.
Second, I hate the bomber rush. With a passion - no - a rage that burns with the heat of a thousand suns of the hottest variety. Only hotter than that. /mrgreen.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="mrgreen.gif" /> As a player of many multiplayer strategy games, I dispise the "easy way" when it comes to strategy. It's just like peon-rushing in Warcraft 2, or mini-building in Battlecry, or farm hunting in the Age series, or any number of cheap and easy "victories" over an opponent. It doesn't demonstate ANY skill or strategy. It's simply a show of understanding of the easiest method to manipulate the mechanics of the game.
Not only that, but it takes little skill for a commander to pull off. It could be (and probably has) boiled down to a checklist of what to buy, in what order. All that matters is if the players can keep the miners alive for *just* long enough to get the required credits. It's a simple contest of who is fastest at clicking the right buttons (if both sides are rushing) or a quick end to the game if one side wants to have fun and experience the offerings of the game and the other just wants to win by the fastest, easiest method possible.
Why bother to construct and flesh out a series of tech, if all you're going to do is dump it all for a 5-minute win? It's pointless. That's not to say a quick victory is a bad thing always - but that a game should offer a richer experience. Something meaty, engaging, and exciting. For those who were around back in late beta and just after, you'll remember the excruciating experiences with the Devistator ships. Every game devolved into a race for the Devistator - first team up won, hands down. Every game was the same, and it became abysmal to play. It's the reason that I, and many others, left the game. After all, I'd played an endless series of the same game, the same way. Why on earth would I desire to continue playing the same loop over and over? It just wasn't fun - win or lose.
Obviously, the Devistators were a serious problem - more so than the bomber rush is, at least for now. At some point, someone intellegent fixed the issue, and we rarely see them today. It's again one of the reasons I returned - the game had become fun again. However, I can see that just over the horizon the bomber rush could become the same problem. Every game plays the same way every time. That sucks donkey balls. Personally, I consider any commander who performs a bomber rush every game to be an inferior, inept commander who likely has no idea how to handle a suprise or shift in the game and would simply resign once it became apparent that their juvenile "tactic" wasn't going to work.
I'm sick of these games that devolve quickly commanded by paint-by-numbers commanders. I'm tired of games ending in resignations four minutes in because the bomber plan isn't going to come together as fast as desired. I want an engaging game, something exciting, that requires skill and determination to complete. I want to see something better than basic tech developed during a game, so that I can play and have some fun! I'm tired of paint-by-numbers commanders. (I like that term. Very descriptive!)
I hope that many of you feel the same way, and perhaps we can make a small adjustment to prevent these bomber rushes from being so prevelant. My suggestion: The option to develop bombers comes only after the team has a techbase of any sort. I'd still leave the option to build bombers up as long as the garrison is around, regardless of the life of the techbase. This will extend the minimum game length by a few minutes at least, allow the other team chances to thwart the planting of the techbase, increase the time needed by the miners to fund bombers, and allow the players at least SOME tech to play with.
rushl
I count myself among the few who are branching out into the occational command situation. As a returning player, my knowledge of the game has certain holes, and as a skill, I'm seriously out of practice. Perhaps to the extent of starting over, perhaps not. Either way, I'd like to get better as a commander. To do that, I have to command - but I need to have the room to bork a game and learn somthing. This just isn't possible during prime, and I'd never attempt it. So, those late night, 10 or 20 person games make a great opportunity to command, and get practice. Especially since those 20 people will likely sit in the lobby begging for a commander for a half hour. So don't come down too hard on late-night small games. They are significant in their own way.
Second, I hate the bomber rush. With a passion - no - a rage that burns with the heat of a thousand suns of the hottest variety. Only hotter than that. /mrgreen.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="mrgreen.gif" /> As a player of many multiplayer strategy games, I dispise the "easy way" when it comes to strategy. It's just like peon-rushing in Warcraft 2, or mini-building in Battlecry, or farm hunting in the Age series, or any number of cheap and easy "victories" over an opponent. It doesn't demonstate ANY skill or strategy. It's simply a show of understanding of the easiest method to manipulate the mechanics of the game.
Not only that, but it takes little skill for a commander to pull off. It could be (and probably has) boiled down to a checklist of what to buy, in what order. All that matters is if the players can keep the miners alive for *just* long enough to get the required credits. It's a simple contest of who is fastest at clicking the right buttons (if both sides are rushing) or a quick end to the game if one side wants to have fun and experience the offerings of the game and the other just wants to win by the fastest, easiest method possible.
Why bother to construct and flesh out a series of tech, if all you're going to do is dump it all for a 5-minute win? It's pointless. That's not to say a quick victory is a bad thing always - but that a game should offer a richer experience. Something meaty, engaging, and exciting. For those who were around back in late beta and just after, you'll remember the excruciating experiences with the Devistator ships. Every game devolved into a race for the Devistator - first team up won, hands down. Every game was the same, and it became abysmal to play. It's the reason that I, and many others, left the game. After all, I'd played an endless series of the same game, the same way. Why on earth would I desire to continue playing the same loop over and over? It just wasn't fun - win or lose.
Obviously, the Devistators were a serious problem - more so than the bomber rush is, at least for now. At some point, someone intellegent fixed the issue, and we rarely see them today. It's again one of the reasons I returned - the game had become fun again. However, I can see that just over the horizon the bomber rush could become the same problem. Every game plays the same way every time. That sucks donkey balls. Personally, I consider any commander who performs a bomber rush every game to be an inferior, inept commander who likely has no idea how to handle a suprise or shift in the game and would simply resign once it became apparent that their juvenile "tactic" wasn't going to work.
I'm sick of these games that devolve quickly commanded by paint-by-numbers commanders. I'm tired of games ending in resignations four minutes in because the bomber plan isn't going to come together as fast as desired. I want an engaging game, something exciting, that requires skill and determination to complete. I want to see something better than basic tech developed during a game, so that I can play and have some fun! I'm tired of paint-by-numbers commanders. (I like that term. Very descriptive!)
I hope that many of you feel the same way, and perhaps we can make a small adjustment to prevent these bomber rushes from being so prevelant. My suggestion: The option to develop bombers comes only after the team has a techbase of any sort. I'd still leave the option to build bombers up as long as the garrison is around, regardless of the life of the techbase. This will extend the minimum game length by a few minutes at least, allow the other team chances to thwart the planting of the techbase, increase the time needed by the miners to fund bombers, and allow the players at least SOME tech to play with.
rushl