46 replies to this topic

[DAYLEET]

Russ sounded confused that people were now saying they would game the system. Well they will if you put mc's and cbills in there obviously. CW should be the roleplaying part of the game, don't incentivise it with cash.


<Edit> Incentive with content and fun factor. People only complain about lack of people in CW when they first try it(i did). then if they persevere(i did) they realise the lack of people isnt the problem with CW, it's the effect not the cause. Been there/Done that.

Edited by DAYLEET, 28 October 2015 - 09:23 AM.

[CaptainScumBa11s]

This is a joke right?

[Alistair Winter]

No, he wasn't confused. I think he was just surprised by how the angry mob basically tried to shout him down before he could even explain his argument. He was saying that it would be possible to design an MC reward system that would incentivize would-be allies to go their own way and fight each other instead of cooperating. And everyone was going "Nooo, impossibru" without even seeing any kind of framework for how the reward system would work.

The idea that two units would basically just help each other and let each other win one week at a time only makes sense if helping each other provides greater rewards than fighting each other. And that's not a given. It depends on how the rewards are handed out.

[sycocys]

Why exactly wouldn't they game a system like that by letting each other win as fast as possible for MC rewards?

Took me about 2 seconds to realize that is exactly what they'd do with a system like that.

Edited by sycocys, 27 October 2015 - 07:55 PM.

[Xetelian]

Needs to be incentivised or it wont get any players.

[DAYLEET]

Xetelian, on 27 October 2015 - 07:55 PM, said:

Needs to be incentivised or it wont get any players.

No it don't. CW is about to get really nice feature, that alone should be incitive. Just no cash incentive.

[Xetelian]

DAYLEET, on 27 October 2015 - 07:57 PM, said:

No it don't. CW is about to get really nice feature, that alone should be incitive. Just no cash incentive.

Yes it does, it takes almost a half hour to finish a match while solo queue matches are less than 10 minutes.

Also building a CW deck takes a lot of time and effort so there should be a reward for doing that and playing.


If you so worried about OTHER people getting something for gaming the system your priorities suck.

[sycocys]

Anyone here remember when you got 100K (I think this was the number) c-bills for a win and 50k for a loss?

8 Jenners with cap accel vs 8 Jenners with cap accel for what a week or two straight. And that was people solo dropping for c-bill rewards - no pre-coordinated effort to game the system, just gamed it by default.

[DAYLEET]

Xetelian, on 27 October 2015 - 07:59 PM, said:

If you so worried about OTHER people getting something for gaming the system your priorities suck.

You need mc's to play a game mode that is already more rewarding because of everything... then your priorities sucks.

[Xetelian]

How is it more rewarding? You have to wait 20 minutes to find a match and then spend a half hour earning LESS cbills than you could in a 2 or 3 solo queue or group queue matches.

You seriously think that it matters if people do something that doesn't effect you in any way or your ability to have fun or anything remotely a problem for players.

People aren't as organized as you think and the vast majority wont be gaming the system.

Edited by Xetelian, 27 October 2015 - 08:10 PM.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Here's how it went:

Players: Incentivize groups to play against each other! We have too much 12-man v PUGs!

Russ: How about if we cap unit sizes?

Players: No! We'll just all join the same faction anyway!

Russ: How about if we make it so that only one unit can get the benefits of holding a planet, and make those benefits significant?

Players: No! We'll just all join the same faction anyway!

Russ: ??? How is that related to what I just said?

Players: Oh, you said something. Um... we'll just trade planets to spread the benefits around or something.

Russ: What if we limit how many big units a faction will be willing to hire, capping how many units can be in a single faction.

Players: NANANANANA I can't hear you!

Russ: Screw this noise. I'm out.

[Triordinant]

Xetelian, on 27 October 2015 - 07:55 PM, said:

Needs to be incentivised or it wont get any players.

If players have to be bribed to play CW then it's obviously NOT worth playing. They should fix it instead of bribing people.

[Monkey Lover]

They need to allow more than 1 unit to be tagged on a planet or only the largest groups will ever get mc rewards.

[DAYLEET]

Xetelian, on 27 October 2015 - 08:09 PM, said:

How is it more rewarding? You have to wait 20 minutes to find a match and then spend a half hour earning LESS cbills than you could in a 2 or 3 solo queue or group queue matches.

People aren't as organized as you think and the vast majority wont be gaming the system.

Cbills as a WHOLE need to be increased. I said cash, not cbills. I only play my best meta mech in CW so when i play it i don't earn less anyways. Right now theres nothing in CW to keep anyone interested but its coming slowly. You need Mc to get people interested then there's something wrong with your gamemode.

Im saying no to Cash because it forces people to exploit weak point in the system which pretty much ruins everything.

It's more rewarding because it;s a roleplay thing. You join a Unit, you get to play in the universe battletech, you get to capture planet or lose them. You do stuff with your guild with a goal. More stuff is coming for CW. People who do it for cbills or Mc can be disregarded. Fight for generalised cbill increase instead.

[DAYLEET]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 27 October 2015 - 08:11 PM, said:

Here's how it went:

Players: Incentivize groups to play against each other! We have too much 12-man v PUGs!

Russ: How about if we cap unit sizes?

Players: No! We'll just all join the same faction anyway!

Russ: How about if we make it so that only one unit can get the benefits of holding a planet, and make those benefits significant?

Players: No! We'll just all join the same faction anyway!

Russ: ??? How is that related to what I just said?

Players: Oh, you said something. Um... we'll just trade planets to spread the benefits around or something.

Russ: What if we limit how many big units a faction will be willing to hire, capping how many units can be in a single faction.

Players: NANANANANA I can't hear you!

Russ: Screw this noise. I'm out.

It's because people are like that that we need to make games less about monetary reward. But the whole game is a big cbill grind so we cant do that, but we can double all cbill reward across the board and lessen the grind.

[GreyNovember]

To be fair though, who actually cares about MC anymore?

[Adamski]

The way to spread the CW population better, is to bring back the underpopulated faction bonuses / overpopulated faction penalties.

But actually make them apply to ALL rewards in CW, not just the contract rewards.

Then actually give players a daily / weekly activity update, so players know which factions need players / have too many, and remove the stupid 3 day cooldown on breaking contract.

[Kotzi]

Fun would be a good incentive. Something else than attrition. Any sideobjects worthwhile to be capped because they bring a little advantage, just anything else than this dull snipingfest.

Edited by Kotzi, 28 October 2015 - 12:28 AM.

[Kmieciu]

CW is simply less fun than the group queue. I only played it during the last event. Earned all the rewards, went back to play solo/group.
The best aspect of CW are the premium colors I got for it and free mechbays at rank II of each faction.

[Elizander]

It could just be a fixed reward that only one unit per faction can win in a given time frame.

Sure you can help each other out, but it'll be on an every other cycle basis. If both of you want the rewards every cycle, you part ways and go separate factions and try to get #1 in your own respective areas.

To ensure that units who are adjacent and can affect each other's results don't work together, the earnings of each faction should be affected by the actions of the other. If 2 factions are fighting over a border, the unit that wins more simply gets more and the unit that loses that exchange gets less by a significant margin. They still both get something, but both of them can't have a full slice of cake each (example, one side invades a neighboring faction and takes some territory, they gain +100 MC while the loser gets a -200 MC penalty).

I'm sure there are a few more details that can be worked out in terms of minimizing the chance of units collaborating.

Edited by Elizander, 28 October 2015 - 01:12 AM.