104 replies to this topic

[Scout Derek]

DarklightCA, on 21 April 2016 - 03:28 PM, said:

If that's the case than so is your arguement against increasing MC rewards as there is nothing to prove that it would take money away from PGI. What PGI is providing as planetary rewards for a ENTIRE UNIT is extremely pitiful, so pitiful that it has all units stumped as to how they even give it away or divide it.

Fair enough, I guess when it comes to things like this it is difficult. Anyhow, I do agree on increasing MC, but I don't agree on overly increasing it.

DarklightCA, on 21 April 2016 - 03:28 PM, said:

I am not asking PGI to increase rewards 50x, I am asking them to adjust the planet generation higher than what it is as well as remove the ridiculous cap which serves no purpose but to eliminate any competitive element in the gamemode and hinder successful units from being rewarded for being successful.

I know, I admitted it was my mistake on that part.

DarklightCA, on 21 April 2016 - 03:28 PM, said:

There are many games other than World of Tank's that have a simular system that works for their game, I used World of Tanks because as a game it's the most like MWO. They give away bigger premium currency to clan's who are roughly the size of your average MWO unit and it has no effect on their profits because even as their rewards are larger, it's adjusted enough that the clan's have enough to spread around so players are actually rewarded for conquering territory but not too much where those clan's can get enough of it where they can replace real money for content. It will work with MWO, the only thing that is different is the premium currency that needs to be adjusted to where it's good for MWO.

Hmm. Okay. I still want to see, however, not out of competition on who's right or wrong, but out of curiosity now that I read again and again, how this would all turn out, and the reaction's toward such a change.

Edited by Scout Derek, 21 April 2016 - 03:39 PM.

[hybrid black]

Scout Derek, on 21 April 2016 - 03:38 PM, said:

Fair enough, I guess when it comes to things like this it is difficult. Anyhow, I do agree on increasing MC, but I don't agree on overly increasing it.


I know, I admitted it was my mistake on that part.


Hmm. Okay. I still want to see, however, not out of competition on who's right or wrong, but out of curiosity now that I read again and again, how this would all turn out, and the reaction's toward such a change.

[Clownwarlord]

hybrid black, on 21 April 2016 - 02:48 PM, said:

Well had 6 tags the last time I looked send we ste still planning on switching factions when the time comes. if we could have more then 6 planets it would maybe make larger units stay in one place but, then no one else in that faction would be getting planets.

You then run in to the problem of smaller units not felling rewarded in that faction so they move so a faction with even smaller units then, those smaller units fell pushed out and switch to find rewards.

No matter what PGI does with FW it will not work for two reasons. One is that the population of MWO is to small for such a game mode. Two the player base of MWO would rather complain then adapt to the change in game, economy and, out of drop meta. Any one that denies that there is out of game meta going on or thinks it is bad for the game is the true problem with MWO

Well IF the community would work to solving this problem then the easiest way to do it would be having a unit cap of 50 to 100 and everyone be active play faction warfare. By this alone would have a better chance of spreading out the community to fill the different factions and so that you would always have some one to play against.

But sadly we will have clumps of players in faction blocks just because they are all in the same unit, and then on top of that there is just not enough people wanting to be active in faction warfare because of unbalance game mode (which also can never be fixed just because it would be impossible).

[hybrid black]

clownwarlord, on 21 April 2016 - 03:44 PM, said:

Well IF the community would work to solving this problem then the easiest way to do it would be having a unit cap of 50 to 100 and everyone be active play faction warfare. By this alone would have a better chance of spreading out the community to fill the different factions and so that you would always have some one to play against.

But sadly we will have clumps of players in faction blocks just because they are all in the same unit, and then on top of that there is just not enough people wanting to be active in faction warfare because of unbalance game mode (which also can never be fixed just because it would be impossible).

Well it could work but that's what alliances are for. Most people don't care about the reward they just want to be at the top so, you will just have 3+ 100 man units moving around to geather

[Clownwarlord]

hybrid black, on 21 April 2016 - 03:47 PM, said:

Well it could work but that's what alliances are for. Most people don't care about the reward they just want to be at the top so, you will just have 3+ 100 man units moving around to geather

Yep you asked for community to help with making faction warfare work but even with a solution you find the way to break that too. This is why we have nothing nice ... .

[hybrid black]

clownwarlord, on 21 April 2016 - 03:58 PM, said:

Yep you asked for community to help with making faction warfare work but even with a solution you find the way to break that too. This is why we have nothing nice ... .

That's gaming the more restrictions you place the more the players will break it and, the worst it will break.

Let me ask you what is worse a system. Most people can break but don't gain much or, one very few can break but get a big advantage?

Edited by hybrid black, 21 April 2016 - 04:11 PM.

[Deathlike]

Scout Derek, on 21 April 2016 - 10:50 AM, said:

Then maybe they should include a new calculation for all this then, for both large, and small.

Something like this :

90MC X (Total amount of players/30) + 100MC (If unit size is larger than or equal to 100 Members) + 90MC (original amount)

That's just an example. If I really wanted to integrate how well it was, I'd include Overall Tier unit bonus, Planet's owned bonus, and battles won/loss bonus/reduction.

Give me a chart... it reads better than a straight formula (graphs optional).

[pwnface]

clownwarlord, on 21 April 2016 - 03:58 PM, said:

Yep you asked for community to help with making faction warfare work but even with a solution you find the way to break that too. This is why we have nothing nice ... .

If players can break it they will.

Deathlike, on 21 April 2016 - 04:13 PM, said:

Give me a chart... it reads better than a straight formula (graphs optional).

I feel like this keeps getting glossed over.

New MC reward proposal:

First 5 planets are worth 25MC per phase.
Second 5 planets are worth 20MC per phase.
Third 5 planets are worth 15MC per phase.
Fourth 5 planets are worth 10MC per phase.
Any additional planets beyond the first 20 only give 5MC per phase.
No maximum MC earnings.

Let's say a unit in CW owns 30 planets.
First 5 x 25 = 125
Second 5 x 20 = 100
Third 5 x 15 = 75
Fourth 5 x 10 = 50
Last 10 x 5 = 50
Total = 400MC

(these values could be adjusted or up for debate but provides us a base line)

Each attack phase this unit would earn 400MC or 1200MC per day.
Planets expire every 12 days but could be shortened to 7-10days to keep units more active.

This makes it more rewarding for smaller units who don't have the manpower to hold 30+ planets but still gives reasonable rewards to larger units.

1200-1500MC per day for the most winningest units in CW that have 100+ members doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

[Clownwarlord]

hybrid black, on 21 April 2016 - 04:08 PM, said:

That's gaming the more restrictions you place the more the players will break it and, the worst it will break.

Let me ask you what is worse a system. Most people can break but don't gain much or, one very few can break but get a big advantage?

I prefer a third option, break something you fix it and beat the crap out of who broke it. Justice served.

Seriously though there has to be a way to solve it otherwise this game will just die because people continually look to break it.

Question for you though, if you had the choice to break a game and not get in trouble and ultimately kill the game would you do it? Or would you find a way to repair the breaks and then penalize those who break it?

Edited by clownwarlord, 21 April 2016 - 04:22 PM.

[Deathlike]

pwnface, on 21 April 2016 - 04:14 PM, said:

I feel like this keeps getting glossed over.

New MC reward proposal:

First 5 planets are worth 25MC per phase.
Second 5 planets are worth 20MC per phase.
Third 5 planets are worth 15MC per phase.
Fourth 5 planets are worth 10MC per phase.
Any additional planets beyond the first 20 only give 5MC per phase.
No maximum MC earnings.

Let's say a unit in CW owns 30 planets.
First 5 x 25 = 125
Second 5 x 20 = 100
Third 5 x 15 = 75
Fourth 5 x 10 = 50
Last 10 x 5 = 50
Total = 400MC

(these values could be adjusted or up for debate but provides us a base line)

Each attack phase this unit would earn 400MC or 1200MC per day.
Planets expire every 12 days but could be shortened to 7-10days to keep units more active.

This makes it more rewarding for smaller units who don't have the manpower to hold 30+ planets but still gives reasonable rewards to larger units.

1200-1500MC per day for the most winningest units in CW that have 100+ members doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Should there be a decay on how long you own the planets under this system?

I think the gripe units (generally loyalists) had was that "ownership" of a planet occurs for too long, thus why there is a system for that (12 days - 36 cycles) of MC collection. Maybe something of that nature could be altered for Merc units, and apply longer or applied on a permanent basis (but scaling less rewards because it's permanent until ownership changes under this instance).

Edited by Deathlike, 21 April 2016 - 04:21 PM.

[pwnface]

Deathlike, on 21 April 2016 - 04:20 PM, said:

Should there be a decay on how long you own the planets under this system?

I think the gripe units (generally loyalists) had was that "ownership" of a planet occurs for too long, thus why there is a system for that (12 days - 36 cycles) of MC collection. Maybe something of that nature could be altered for Merc units, and apply longer or permanent (but scaling less rewards because it's permanent until ownership changes under this instance).

Planets expire every 12 days but could be shortened to 7-10days to keep units more active.



I feel like Merc units shouldn't be allowed to tag planets at all and should be ineligible for the MC rewards. Give mercenary units/players a 20% C-Bill boost over Loyalist players but don't allow them to hold planets or get MC.

Edited by pwnface, 21 April 2016 - 04:23 PM.

[hybrid black]

clownwarlord, on 21 April 2016 - 04:19 PM, said:

I prefer a third option, break something you fix it and beat the crap out of who broke it. Justice served.

Seriously though there has to be a way to solve it otherwise this game will just die because people continually look to break it.

Question for you though, if you had the choice to break a game and not get in trouble and ultimately kill the game would you do it? Or would you find a way to repair the breaks and then penalize those who break it?

Break it. If there going to punish players for not doing what they want in game there bad devs. Just beacuse you plan on something being done one way doesn't mean players see it the same way. So punishing people for thinking out side the box and doing what works would kill the game 10000 times faster then anything else.

Thinking out side the box is what makes things fun in a game and real life. There are two kinds of people the ones that lead and find new things and the ones that complain and follow.

If they punish players for doing what they don't want the small population that this game has would be cut even more.

The best example rate now is players using the enemy longtoms to kill them self by running in to them. Did the devs think of this? No but players did.

Would you take the longtom on the head or run it in to the other team?

If you pick to just take it beacuse that's how the devs made it you are just dumb. If you run it in to the other team you are breaking the system.

Edited by hybrid black, 21 April 2016 - 04:33 PM.

[Karamarka]

A lot of people are also missing an extra point of why increasing MC is a good idea,

MORE MC = MORE INTEREST = MORE PLAYERS = FASTER QUEUES.

[pwnface]

hybrid black, on 21 April 2016 - 04:30 PM, said:

If they punish players for doing what they don't want the small population that this game has would be cut even more.

The best example rate now is players using the enemy longtoms to kill them self by running in to them. Did the devs think of this? No but players did.

Would you take the longtom on the head or run it in to the other team?

I'm glad you guys like that .

[Clownwarlord]

hybrid black, on 21 April 2016 - 04:30 PM, said:

Break it. If there going to punish players for not doing what they want in game there bad devs. Just beacuse you plan on something being done one way doesn't mean players see it the same way. So punishing people for thinking out side the box and doing what works would kill the game 10000 times faster then anything else.

Thinking out side the box is what makes things fun in a game and real life. There are two kinds of people the ones that lead and find new things and the ones that complain and follow.

If they punish players for doing what they don't want the small population that this game has would be cut even more.

The best example rate now is players using the enemy longtoms to kill them self by running in to them. Did the devs think of this? No but players did.

Ok then I can see your point, but then how would you fix this issue with:
- Preventing solo pug players from being crushed by units.
- Making sufficient economy pay out for participating (MC, CBills, and XP).
- End ghost drops.
- And spread the populace throughout the 10 or how many factions there are.

I have an idea but even I do not like it.
- First get rid of mercs. Force everyone to join a faction and stick with it.
- Next Limit unit sizes to 50 to 100 (some where in there not sure of number exactly).
- Then force only so many players/units allowed in a faction at any given time.

Another more viable solution, is a population limit per faction and that be it. So if every faction is only allowed 2000 players and there are lets say 20000 players in total then it will spread those 20000 players evenly across the factions. (I have no idea of the actual numbers for MWO just using random numbers for example).

Edited by clownwarlord, 21 April 2016 - 04:39 PM.

[hybrid black]

clownwarlord, on 21 April 2016 - 04:36 PM, said:

Ok then I can see your point, but then how would you fix this issue with:
- Preventing solo pug players from being crushed by units.
- Making sufficient economy pay out for participating (MC, CBills, and XP).
- End ghost drops.
- And spread the populace throughout the 10 or how many factions there are.

I have an idea but even I do not like it.
- First get rid of mercs. Force everyone to join a faction and stick with it.
- Next Limit unit sizes to 50 to 100 (some where in there not sure of number exactly).
- Then force only so many players/units allowed in a faction at any given time.

I'm going in to wright a final il respond to this when I get out

[Carl Vickers]

Deathlike, on 21 April 2016 - 10:22 AM, said:

It's capped @ 30MC per cycle (6 planets worth, 90 MC per day - 3 cycles per day).

Don't spend it all on one shot camos, ya hear?

Add to that you get a max of 180 MC from a general planet. Once that runs out after 2 days you loose tag on the planet as well.

clownwarlord, on 21 April 2016 - 04:36 PM, said:

Ok then I can see your point, but then how would you fix this issue with:
- Preventing solo pug players from being crushed by units.
- Making sufficient economy pay out for participating (MC, CBills, and XP).
- End ghost drops.
- And spread the populace throughout the 10 or how many factions there are.

I have an idea but even I do not like it.
- First get rid of mercs. Force everyone to join a faction and stick with it.
- Next Limit unit sizes to 50 to 100 (some where in there not sure of number exactly).
- Then force only so many players/units allowed in a faction at any given time.

All I can say is nope, nope and nope.

[pwnface]

Carl Vickers, on 21 April 2016 - 04:39 PM, said:

Add to that you get a max of 180 MC from a general planet. Once that runs out after 2 days you loose tag on the planet as well.

It's 12 days right now not 2.

[hybrid black]

pwnface, on 21 April 2016 - 04:35 PM, said:

I'm glad you guys like that .

Well were doing this to falcon last night on the steiner planet in till our scouts get it down under 90%

[pwnface]

clownwarlord, on 21 April 2016 - 04:36 PM, said:

Ok then I can see your point, but then how would you fix this issue with:
- Preventing solo pug players from being crushed by units.
Play better or join a unit?
- Making sufficient economy pay out for participating (MC, CBills, and XP).
CBill payouts are decent right now IMO
- End ghost drops.
Get more players to play Faction Warfare
- And spread the populace throughout the 10 or how many factions there are.
Let Loyalists be the ones who get to dictate what faction contracts are available.