Corpsecandle said:
#1 & 2. I'm hoping role would be taken into account here...I wouldn't want my "scout" attempting to focus on dealing damage due it's superior XP gain. In addition, weight class differences ought not to be taken into account, this would encourage players to focus on larger mechs rather than actually focusing on useful objectives.
I agree. I will retool.
Scott said:
#2. Crits are luck based, you shouldn't get more experience for something you don't really have control over.
I disagree here. If everyone has the same chance for crits and more XP, then it is fairly even for everyone. It is exciting when somewhere it is logged that you had a critical hit, and that you can see an associated XP gain post-game. Keeping gameplay exciting is really important in a F2P title. Aside from that.. nearly all damage is based on programmed die rolls after a fashion, so nearly any variable is based on chance. Bottom line, crits must exist.
Corpsecandle said:
#3 & 4. Getting XP for spotting a mech seems like rewarding a someone for finding a landmine by standing on it; it's not connective logic. Relaying locaitons makes sense though. Not sure how "Accurately" could be taken into account. From all indications information relay is a passive feature.
I think my brain was considering the relaying. Like if you pinpoint a Gridpoint where you think there are enemies and you get a little XP boost if you were right (though it gives you no overt confirmation during gameplay). But then everyone would be pinging the grid like crazy, like in other games we know... So I will retool / remove these. Needs more analysis.
Corpsecandle said:
#5 & 6. Sure, why not (though I don't know about ricochet being in the game)
Missiles might ricochet if say you were getting double-teamed at close range. Say if all you had were missiles, everyone will fire anyways even if the range is too short for the missiles to arm or "do full damage". If they spiral around in tight arcs they could do additional damage. Every effort you make to try to damage an enemy 'Mech should be chalked up. I say for desperate moments like that, you should get rewarded for trying. Though missiles just popped into my mind, I was really thinking of Gauss rounds when I added this trigger. I thought I read somewhere that because of the use of CryEngine3, there are more physics involved including assigned materials > models, and angles of penetration and deflection when calculating kinetics. I assumed kinetic rounds would ricochet when striking panels with high angles, which could lead to indirect damage if it hits a nearby enemy. Probably wouldn't spill over much XP but every bit will help right?
Scott said:
#6 This is covered by the points for destorying a module,limb, or Mech. Doesn't matter how you did it.
#7. Should be covered in the destruction of limb, module, or Mech. I suppose add pilot to that list to include this.
I figured any additional variables, actions, reactions, etc..that are children of the parent item should be quantified so I just listed them.
Will add pilot death bonus. Though we all have that concern that people don't go cockpit-hunting, I think Pirhana may have balanced this well.
Scott said:
#9 These attempts apply real-world experience to the pilot. AS in, next time they will be better at DFA. Plus they already get bonus XP for detroying the pilot/mech.
Do you mean a dedicated DFA skill bar to increase success of the maneuver? Success should only be based on your ability as a pilot to correctly gauge your speed and theirs and initiate a jump that would land you on top of them. This is tricky. I had thought about suggesting a button or pilot command that would put the 'Mech in "DFA mode" which could only be triggered when in the air - that would enable collection of bonus XP from a DFA attempt. I abandoned this concept for some reason though I can't remember exactly why, maybe an unnecessary layer. Yes they would get the standard bonuses for damaged 'Mech and components.
Scott said:
#11 We don't know how capturing works, plus damage is damage, shouldn't matter if the enemy is in the base or not.
Also @ Grokmoo. We all know how capturing works, and when programming it into a game you can only get so creative on how to initiate the base capture. You can't do it remotely so you have to have a 'Mech within X proximitity of the bases centerpoint (radius) or else a defined boundary. Maybe a single 'Mech needs to jack-into a terminal or hack into a security tower or something. It does not change that at least a single 'Mech must be in or near the base area. The point of bonus XP here is disrupting the progress of the base capture "meter" or timer. There will always be a meter or timer of some sort. It might not be in our HUD, but might be lights atop the base tower or something. There will be an overt method of letting the pilots know that a capture is in progress.
To clarify, I am not saying that you get bonus XP for damaging the capturing 'Mech. I only refer to the action of disrupting the capture countdown.
Scott said:
#13 The way you have it listed sounds like you get bonus xp if you use pilot skills and bonus xp if you don't. Since pilot skills are the result of XP, I don't think using them should result in more XP.
I don't see how it reads that they get bonus XP if they dont use said abilities. I'm actually not sure what abilities exactly I am referring to. I am thinking about abilities that might be class based like spy drones, launching radar beacons or anything that you as a pilot must trigger. Maybe a consumable ability that a module or your role provides. It would likely benefit you to use them all during combat, and you might not always get a chance to use some of them.
But I agree, difficult to tell who uses what and why, or if the ability used significantly damages anything or changes the outcome of the game. I'll pull it.
Corpsecandle said:
#14 & 15. I get what you're trying to do here. You're trying to make a smarter player by rewarding smart play. However if you look at it from another angle, you're actually rewarding players for not participating which is always a bad thing. The last thing I want to see is an assault mech fitted out up with a crap load of machine guns and command modules running away from the opposing team so he can maximize is AFK XP.
Hrm. There is that angle. Good catch. What if you get this bonus only if you are actively firing at a target when it is either within range, when it is firing at you and total percentage of gametime that you were moving and firing at enemies? If a 'Mech is camped and gets blown up, it shouldn't get any XP even with full bins because the game notes that players participation was too low.. I would also submit that if the player truly did not move from it's spawn point, the pilot should not get any XP associated with the team winning the game.
Scott said:
#15 This discourages ammo usage, which repair/reload costs already does. Shouldn't matter what type of weapons you use, you shouldn't be penalized for using them.
A game should always provide multiple methods of discouraging and encouraging things. Your 10 year old cousin is not going to conserve ammo because he knows it is going to cost him more money to reload after the game. Your 23 year old girlfriend is not going to conserve ammo on purpose to get .002% more XP. I say the % of bonus XP you get from conserving ammo is based on the %age of time you are contributing to the game, Eg, actively moving and firing. This bonus metric rewards the veterans who take time to aim and spend ammo wisely. The huge wave of
cannon fodder general players are going to be firing everything they have like its counterstrike: reborn.
Edited by TimberJon, 18 June 2012 - 10:07 AM.
1
