169 replies to this topic

[SmithMPBT]

A 30 day faction switching delay and a 100 million Cbill penalty, would prevent any strategic faction switching. And the 100 million as a dumb money sink.

[Sandpit]

This simply can't be considered for any kind of CW balance right now. This kind of thing is very arbitrary. Any big unit that wants to bounce around sides during "CW" can have effects like this. Mass exodus, new player influx, etc.

If PGI (or any of you for that matter) think you can "balance" drop decks and such with this kind of thing going on you're really going at it the wrong way.

Until PGI stops letting players switch sides during a war this is going to be what CW balance is and has been. Arbitrarily changing drop deck tonnages every time there's a shift in player population on each side.

If you can't see the fallacy in "balancing" under those conditions.... well... dunno what else to tell you.

SmithMPBT, on 31 December 2015 - 03:59 PM, said:

A 30 day faction switching delay and a 100 million Cbill penalty, would prevent any strategic faction switching. And the 100 million as a dumb money sink.

wouldn't it just be much easier for PGI to turn CW into seasons and once you pick a side for that season you can't switch.

Choose clan or IS for that season of CW and all the situations like this go away permanently

[SmithMPBT]

Sandpit, on 31 December 2015 - 04:07 PM, said:

This simply can't be considered for any kind of CW balance right now. This kind of thing is very arbitrary. Any big unit that wants to bounce around sides during "CW" can have effects like this. Mass exodus, new player influx, etc.

If PGI (or any of you for that matter) think you can "balance" drop decks and such with this kind of thing going on you're really going at it the wrong way.

Until PGI stops letting players switch sides during a war this is going to be what CW balance is and has been. Arbitrarily changing drop deck tonnages every time there's a shift in player population on each side.

If you can't see the fallacy in "balancing" under those conditions.... well... dunno what else to tell you.


wouldn't it just be much easier for PGI to turn CW into seasons and once you pick a side for that season you can't switch.

Choose clan or IS for that season of CW and all the situations like this go away permanently

Ya, but you're gonna have alot of unhappy people if the seasons are too long. But I definitely agree thats a good solution.

[Sandpit]

SmithMPBT, on 31 December 2015 - 04:09 PM, said:

Ya, but you're gonna have alot of unhappy people if the seasons are too long. But I definitely agree thats a good solution.

Just adjust season lengths

3-4 months per season seems good to me personally. That's 3-4 seasons per year.

[H I A S]

Celtic Warrior, on 31 December 2015 - 01:51 PM, said:

When our IS acct is winning 90% of our matches.

Picture it or it didnt happend.

[Sandpit]

Celtic Warrior, on 31 December 2015 - 01:51 PM, said:

When our IS acct is winning 90% of our matches... Yes we are doing work. Planet count doesn't mean as much as you think. I haven't played my clan acct since the last clan nerf, playing IS at the moment is like hitting the big red easy button.

90%
I'd like to see the statistical data on that
90% win rate would be pretty phenomenal So you win 9 out of every 10 games right?

[SmithMPBT]

I went 0-7 the other nite IS puggin, so the stats he's talking about are probably unit vs PUG. Which pretty much wrenches the issue from being IS being overpowered to, unit coordination is OP. A healthier CW population with a pug que should fix this. Steam has helped alot, I'm hoping it keeps gaining momentum.

Edited by SmithMPBT, 31 December 2015 - 04:50 PM.

[LupineShadow]

SmithMPBT, on 31 December 2015 - 04:43 PM, said:

I went 0-7 the other nite IS puggin, so the stats he's talking about are probably unit vs PUG. Which pretty much wrenches the issue from being IS being overpowered to, unit coordination is OP. A healthier CW population with a pug que should fix this. Steam has helped alot, I'm hoping it keeps gaining momentum.

Greenduck and I pug dropped with a PUG the other day, and he spent 60% of the match d/c'd (Read, 11v12). I said little, but directed the group of puggles, and we ended up stomping the clan 48 - 18. Just because you're a pug group does not mean that you can't have a little organization, methinks.

[Sandpit]

LupineShadow, on 31 December 2015 - 05:44 PM, said:

Greenduck and I pug dropped with a PUG the other day, and he spent 60% of the match d/c'd (Read, 11v12). I said little, but directed the group of puggles, and we ended up stomping the clan 48 - 18. Just because you're a pug group does not mean that you can't have a little organization, methinks.

he was just giving an anecdotal counter to the guy who claimed "90% win rate"

[SmithMPBT]

By the way, premium time is still onsale for half price, less than 50 bucks for a year. In world of tanks its about 85 dollars and World of Warcraft about 150 bucks so its not a bad deal. Dont flame me, public service announcement

[LupineShadow]

SmithMPBT, on 31 December 2015 - 06:55 PM, said:

By the way, premium time is still onsale for half price, less than 50 bucks for a year. In world of tanks its about 85 dollars and World of Warcraft about 150 bucks so its not a bad deal. Dont flame me, public service announcement

*Swipes credit card*

Also, for all the scrubs like me who made new accounts... HALF OFF MECHBAYS! I already bought 20 :x

[Anjian]

Khobai, on 31 December 2015 - 12:12 PM, said:

I agree they need to add some kindve logistics to CW.

Planets that are closer to your homeworld should be easier to capture/defend than planets farther from your homeworld.

Maybe have dropdeck tonnages change based on proximity to your homeworld? The closer to a factions homeworld the planet is the more tonnage that faction gets during drops.

That would make it progressively harder to push deep into a factions territory.

An elaborate system of 'quirked' drop weight planets should not just be based on proximity to homeworld, but also strategic hub planets. This makes capture of these planets important and sets the state for special 'events'.

Quirked drop weights means some planets might actually weigh more for Clan and weigh less for IS, while others are equal and others are vice versa.

Not only that, but the faction participants can be forced to have different weights as well. For example, In this planet, Clan Wolf is allowed a 260 weight drop, but Jade Falcon is only allowed 240 tons. FRR gets to drop 270 tons but Marik only drops 240 tons.

This can be extended in a way that some planets can allow for two or more factions on the attack as allies, although faction owning the primary attack wins the planet, while some planets on the defense will exclude one or more Clan or IS factions in the defense as allies.

Planets also get different LP, GXP, EXP and credit awards. The conquest or successful defense of some planets can also make you earn special badges, cockpit items, mechbays, and modules.

Planets will also be quirked to have movement boosts or penalties, temperature boosts or penalties, different lighting levels, air filters, sky effects. If a large planet shows up in the sky, all the maps being fought in the planet will show it.

[Sandpit]

Anjian, on 31 December 2015 - 07:58 PM, said:

An elaborate system of 'quirked' drop weight planets should not just be based on proximity to homeworld, but also strategic hub planets. This makes capture of these planets important and sets the state for special 'events'.

Quirked drop weights means some planets might actually weigh more for Clan and weigh less for IS, while others are equal and others are vice versa.

Not only that, but the faction participants can be forced to have different weights as well. For example, In this planet, Clan Wolf is allowed a 260 weight drop, but Jade Falcon is only allowed 240 tons. FRR gets to drop 270 tons but Marik only drops 240 tons.

This can be extended in a way that some planets can allow for two or more factions on the attack as allies, although faction owning the primary attack wins the planet, while some planets on the defense will exclude one or more Clan or IS factions in the defense as allies.

Planets also get different LP, GXP, EXP and credit awards. The conquest or successful defense of some planets can also make you earn special badges, cockpit items, mechbays, and modules.

Planets will also be quirked to have movement boosts or penalties, temperature boosts or penalties, different lighting levels, air filters, sky effects. If a large planet shows up in the sky, all the maps being fought in the planet will show it.

I've said for years that if PGI wants more variety, all they need to do is add different drop deck tonnages for different planets.
Problem solved.

[Anjian]

Sandpit, on 31 December 2015 - 08:02 PM, said:

I've said for years that if PGI wants more variety, all they need to do is add different drop deck tonnages for different planets.
Problem solved.

What I propose should not be a blanket Clan or IS drop weight but also different ones for each faction, along with inclusion or exclusion of certain factions in the drop list (a defense may only include Ghost Bear and Smoke Jaguar but not Wolf or Falcon, for example); allied factions on the Attack. The closer the planets are towards the center of the Inner Sphere map, the more inclusive guest alliances on the Attack and Defense modes are available with gradually increasing drop weights.

Variable drop weights can mean like this. For example, a planet in Steiner space means Steiner and JF will have the highest drop weights, Marik and Wolf gets average; Bears, Jaguars, Kurita, Davion and Liao only gets low drop weights. However if Liao manages to capture a hub near Terra, their dropweights towards the north will improve. This also gives incentives for Clan and IS factions to attack fellow Clan or IS factions to gain hub planets.

Strategic planets can allow for all out guest alliances on the attack and defense with max drop weights. Winner gets an increase of drop weights within the region, and participants gets extra prizes (badges, modules, extra xp, credits, gxp and LPs).

[Anjian]

CW3 appears to allow a system of voting which planets to attack, the voters being the loyalists, I would also submit its also time to make ranks matter. The votes should also be weighted by rank, and those with the highest rank will have the greatest weight. This gives incentives for faction loyalty and makes rank truly matter.

Hub or strategic planets are also planets well known in lore, such as Sarna, Capella, Liao (the planet not the faction), Benjamin, and Twycross.

This gives the Inner Sphere map both the sense of lore and structure. We can preface every planet with a short history and introduction.

Edited by Anjian, 31 December 2015 - 08:23 PM.

[Sandpit]

Anjian, on 31 December 2015 - 08:14 PM, said:

What I propose should not be a blanket Clan or IS drop weight but also different ones for each faction, along with inclusion or exclusion of certain factions in the drop list (a defense may only include Ghost Bear and Smoke Jaguar but not Wolf or Falcon, for example); allied factions on the Attack. The closer the planets are towards the center of the Inner Sphere map, the more inclusive guest alliances on the Attack and Defense modes are available with gradually increasing drop weights.

Variable drop weights can mean like this. For example, a planet in Steiner space means Steiner and JF will have the highest drop weights, Marik and Wolf gets average; Bears, Jaguars, Kurita, Davion and Liao only gets low drop weights. However if Liao manages to capture a hub near Terra, their dropweights towards the north will improve. This also gives incentives for Clan and IS factions to attack fellow Clan or IS factions to gain hub planets.

Strategic planets can allow for all out guest alliances on the attack and defense with max drop weights. Winner gets an increase of drop weights within the region, and participants gets extra prizes (badges, modules, extra xp, credits, gxp and LPs).

the "reason" behind it is irrelevant to me. Make it like you suggested, make it vary weekly, make it vary by planet, make it vary by faction, make it vary by all of those. I just think varied drop deck tonnages would be a lot of help

[Hawk_eye]

Khobai, on 31 December 2015 - 01:39 PM, said:

the whole point of offering bigger rewards for staying in one faction is to discourage players from switching factions every week.

the biggest rewards should go to the players that stay in ONE faction for the entire CW season.

swapping factions midseason should reset your reward level to 0 for the faction you left. you should not get rewarded at all for leaving a faction and being a traitor.

at the beginning of each new season you would be able to change factions ONE TIME with no penalty.

While I generally agree, the problem I see with this is that part of the rewards are mech-bays.
What if there is a mech in the bay the player would lose?
Would the mech vanish too? Would the c-bill cost be refunded?

[Khobai]

Quote

While I generally agree, the problem I see with this is that part of the rewards are mech-bays.
What if there is a mech in the bay the player would lose?
Would the mech vanish too? Would the c-bill cost be refunded?

thats why the rewards need to be completely restructured.

[Weeny Machine]

One of the reasons is that "faction" warfare doesn't deserve its name. There is no faction pride, no reason at all why you should stay for an extended period on one side or the other. That's why units or players change houses/clans/sides like their underwear

[Cappy]

This game needs a player economy to make CW worthwhile. Players/units need to be able to actually pay mercenary units. The planets need to confer some monetary advantage to everyone under the faction's banner (somehow). Units need unit banks that members can draw and deposit from/in. There needs to be a drop system (salvage) and auction house.

PGI has always seemed reluctant to allow any sort of player freedom that isn't tightly restricted and used to funnel people towards purchasing MC -- not a judgement call, it's fair, but it's part of why it's taking so long to progress the game beyond an arena shooter; Trying to find ways to fit a game inside the f2p environment.

Edited by Cappy, 01 January 2016 - 07:48 AM.