Maybe along with this, it's time to implement a limit on squadron size.
Otherwise, this strategy will just lead to more gang banging by the big squads. I frankly think the squadron orientation in Warbirds has been as much bad as good. It promotes gangbanging by discouraging squadron members from changing sides to even numbers out. Over all, it's a positive, but as Jabo notes, it has to be nurtured and encouraged somehow- and side balancing needs to be taken into account at some point as well. We have a lot of players come in, try the game, get hammered by veteran players and squads and leave; sometimes before their trial period is expired.

Lots of games limit squad clan size. Its important to do in today's age with millions, maybe even billions of people playing online. The good games have a strong hacker\cheater code as well. Again with so many people playing if only 0.001% of your players are hackers it adds up fast and disillusions the players that want to play with honour. So much of a game goes into it before you write the code. You need to plan all this in advance. You sell your product as a package. Nothing wrong with open ended worlds but you need to have the rules in place to make them inviting to everyone. That means limiting squad size, spawn campers, hackers and P2W. So many games are complete cash grabs with zero support and no vision. Anything combat sim has to look ahead. You invest so much that you need a decade of good returns. Thinking how your players will play the game is very important. Adding too many rules or modifications after the fact often shows that a game company did not think their entire design through.

Well I would personally advocate something like

Open Action Arena
- No squads allowed just open everybody is playing as individuals as team CO-OP
- All rides for all sides

Simulation Arena
- Squads can form.
- You fly in an pure axis vs allies environment.

_________________
VISIT OUR FACEBOOK PAGE HERE
https://en-gb.facebook.com/RAF-Duxford- ... 822661588/

I think maybe one more level after SA would be good. This could be the total VR ultra-realistic arena with axis vs allies.

I like the idea of no squads in the open action arena but using built in VOIP software you could only talk to the guys that were either in your tower or took off from the same base. Form ad hoc squads on the fly if you wanted to. Several new FPS games have this and its pretty fun to get close to an enemy and talk to him when they are in range. Good way to simulate realistic WW2 voice coms where range and quality of your radio mattered as well as your frequency settings. Once you get up to squadron based arenas you have more flexibility in ground control and inter squad communication. Takes more planning but is more effective and rewarding.

Lots of cool stuff and ideas coming online for games in general but open world combat sims need a reboot. Outside the box from much of the 3D third person survival games and short range intense FPS. The formula is there, its just brainstorming and thinking to how best to apply it to our specific genre.

This will be interresting. Suggestion:
1. Easy to use. The majority of online gamers does not spend time to achieve an aviation degree
1*. provide an attractive FREE Version.
1**.Do NOT give privileges to ANYONE. It will be seen as lobbyism and drive potential customers away.
2. Think about a motivating scoring system. One should be able to monitor the learning curve by skill-based stats.
3. Think about multiple arenas once u got one arena populated

I remember the last desaster when WB went on STEAM plattform, and at the same time, allowed a lobby to demolish the FMs to a degree that the whole product was unacceptable. Just at the right time, under the eyes of newcomers from STEAM plattform.

I expect that the S3 enthusiasts will try to keep their world intact and by doing that, inhibit progress.

I'm not looking for approval, nor do I need new friends. Think about the money you guys put into this. And good luck!

Greenx I think you probably represent the majority of the players that will play a combat sim. All your points are valid and will help a game be successful. Its the numbers of players that allow a game to invest and succeed. WildBill is probably the only developer that continues to support a game that is not making money. That is unusual and generally because he loves combat aviation above all else. For WB2020 to succeed we need 10,000 Greenx playing to their hearts content. This could be in a fast action arena where the fights are fast and furious and all skill/scoring is rewarded. Say of those 10,000 players, 8,000 love it and continue to play until they find something else. But 1,000 want more and delve into the meat of the combat sim that is WB2020, they join and support squadrons and play in realistic events. They continue to play until they find something else or want the full experience and 500 move on to the VR hyper-realism with full combat controls where being a real pilot is a definite advantage. They play and invest at the top level until they find something else. The cycle repeats month in and out. Its how a combat sim can appeal to the casual gamer and take those that want more to higher levels that will sustain it. The first time I played rugby I was all about the game and how to play it, as I got better and understood how skill matters I wanted to play at a higher level, I wanted to be the best. Then came along kids and family and changing priorities but I still loved the game and wanted to play it at least at a casual level. I loved the game at any capacity. The same should be for an online combat sim. Give us all the diversity and meaning we need. Let us choose how much or how little we need it. Give us a virtual home where we need to return to regardless of what life and fortune has dealt us.

Hey Jabo, I understand your comment was'nt meant to express how average I am
(or not?)
Point is: there are no 10.000 guys out there who would play and pay, no matter what. Let's say 200, worldwide. And an overlapping, but independent community who gathers for a Sunday 8 PM eastern event, where they hang out with friends.

This results in a population from 0-15 in the 24/7 arena, S3 i dont know, maybe up to 100?

This is exactly what you will get if you count on 10.000 greenx'. They just aint out there.

Modern GFX will make some of the usual suspects curious. The question is, if one of us oldfashioned WB adicts understands the internet of today, at all. I myself prolly dont.
Looks like guys dont invest on equipment, they expect to have instant action and a full range of options using mobile phones. Cloud gaming.

However, lets see how things go, you may count on (one) greenx.

Greenx no offense was meant. I was not to say you are average but represent the majority of players.

When I say 10,000 players it is not unheard of even by less than cutting edge games.
Pacific supper time and these are the games on steam that have 10,000 players online right now playing them.

Current Players - Peak Players - Game
289,548 917,982 Dota 2
212,337 562,121 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
132,852 839,003 PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS
64,234 102,820 Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege
51,100 52,054 Team Fortress 2
46,195 54,349 Risk of Rain 2
41,882 74,922 Warframe
31,365 60,963 Sekiro™: Shadows Die Twice
30,159 33,194 Borderlands 2
29,541 49,413 Rocket League
28,468 40,823 Rust
28,146 69,371 Grand Theft Auto V
24,348 39,445 ARK: Survival Evolved
23,954 30,575 Sid Meier's Civilization VI
23,428 40,572 Path of Exile
21,223 57,989 Football Manager 2019
19,890 25,740 Sid Meier's Civilization V
19,380 33,816 Garry's Mod
19,220 26,690 The Elder Scrolls Online
17,085 29,541 Source SDK Base 2013 Multiplayer
15,199 17,313 Terraria
13,642 16,063 Black Desert Online
13,149 15,537 The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Special Edition
12,564 14,967 Stardew Valley
12,036 20,158 Hearts of Iron IV
11,739 18,627 Total War: WARHAMMER II
11,106 17,258 Paladins
10,846 20,067 War Thunder
10,544 18,580 Dead by Daylight
10,422 13,397 Fallout 4
10,364 12,465 FINAL FANTASY XIV Online
10,241 21,241 Killing Floor 2
10,183 20,353 Arma 3
10,021 12,086 SMITE

Now to get these players you have to look at how these games structure themselves. Few if any are really MMO and even those that are do not have 10,000 players in one arena. If WB2020 goes back to the same old formula it will not have 10,000 players online and will die. It needs 10,000 players online at any given moment to transcend the usual limitations and develop quickly and continuously. Success breeds success. Make it an engaging easy to play game with great mechanics and graphics but build it with depth to sustain it longer than and develop a dedicated loyal fanbase. If I was a developer looking how to re-vitalize WB2020 I would look at Counter Strike - Global Offensive, Team Fortress, Warframe, Rocket League, War Thunder and Arma 3. What are they doing right?

Good point, and (in a way) embarrassing statistics. Let's see what WB 2020 can make of it.
I like stats and clever guys to interpret it.
When I think of WB 2.0 (the version that made me addict) and the customer profile it was addressed to, what will change for WB 2020, and how much will we appreciate it?
Maybe 90% of the core WB 2.0 guys were native english, thereof the majority US. Male. Lifestyle, ancestry and culture that was similar, or at least understandable, to the owners lifestyle and culture. That was sufficient for a player base of 1.000 +.
I am very curious what can be said about cultural background, ancestry and lifestyle of the 100.000 + online gaming communities.

It is good to have the discussion at least.

PAYMENT STRUCTURE
I would say that people generally shy away from rolling monthly subscriptions these days.
If it can be avoided, they prefer to pay nothing at all..

A popular payment structure seems to be that players make a 1 off purchase the initial base game.
Further payment is only necessary in order to purchase seasonal "expansion packs" (major updates)

Of course… Any major update / new content has be worth the player paying for …
Mostly expansion packs are NOT mandatory but it may lessen your experience / game options / terrain options etc if you don’t have it.

There also tend to be micro-transactions within the game to purchase new plane skins, sound packs and all kinds of cosmetic things like that.
This is how many games seem to function now.

MMO
Warbirds is similar to EVE online in this regard.
Both operate what is referred to as “single shard” by developers, where everybody is on the SAME server and playing in the same sandbox.

Many so-called MMOs work with multiple servers and “Instancing” to lighten the server loads.
People could be grouped into a particular server or instance by their IP / geolocation for example.

Each server might be limited to maybe a maximum of 32 other people - that will appear in your "instance" at any one time.
Other players might be right there with you - but you will never see them because you are not playing in the same instance.
(Basically being in parallel dimensions is probably a good way to visualise it)

_________________
VISIT OUR FACEBOOK PAGE HERE
https://en-gb.facebook.com/RAF-Duxford- ... 822661588/