Jump to content

Changes To Fix Current Fp


20 replies to this topic

#1 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 01:24 PM

These changes are intended to address major problems with the latest FP update, namely:
1. People loyal to factions not in a conflict feel left out
2. People really hate some of the game modes because of problems in them

Here are my suggested fixes:

1.
(a)
Restore faction loyalties, and for each conflict grant a mission to the loyalist player to participate in external conflicts. For example, as a Kurita loyalist, in a conflict involving Faction X and Faction Y, you'll get one of two messages:

"Warrior, it is in the interest of House Kurita for Faction X to succeed in this conflict. Our Dear Leader orders you to [covertly] lend them your assistance."

or

"Warrior, the conflict between Faction X and Faction Y allow us to infiltrate their ranks. Join either side in this conflict and relay intelligence back to us."

Which message you get will depend on lore, and obviously the first message will not give you a choice as to whom to help. While undergoing a mission, you still earn LP with your faction.

(b ) Further differentiate loyalists, mercs, and freelancers with: earn 1MC per 100LP for loyalists, earn 100 C-bills/1RP for mercs, and earn 2GXP per RP equivalent for freelancers.

2.
(a) Scouting: Smoke diving is unstoppable and really not fun. Change scouting so that 1) remove the second timer for the hovering dropship phase, one attacker must be at the LZ to extract after the first timer, and 2) if there is 1 defender present in the LZ, extraction fails and the dropship leaves immediately but changes to one of the other LZ. Basically the attackers have 2 chances to extract, and if a defender stands in the LZ twice, the attackers lose. Because the second timer is removed, if the defenders are not on the ball, the attackers can extract more easily. But if the defenders are spread out and appropriately mobile, smoke diving will be prevented. Fighting it out remains a valid option.

(b ) Skirmish and assault: Add early win condition: Get 20 kill lead. When the early win condition is met, the match ends. Give the winning team bonus C-bills and RP/LP.

(c) Incursion: Double base structure health for the non-functional buildings. (i.e. radar, ACT, jam build health remains the same)

(d) Siege: Add a large bonus to attackers for winning early based on time, on the order of 1,000,000 C-bills and 1,000 LP/RP for finishing in 5 minutes, decreasing to 0 bonus at 25 minutes (out of the 30min match time). In other words, if finishing at the 15 minute mark, the attackers get 500k cbills and 500 LP bonus). Add an early win condition for the defenders: Get a 20 kill lead, and the match ends, with a bonus. Basically gen rushing becomes more rewarding, but you have no leeway if you don't attempt to shoot the defenders as a match would finish in the defender's favor in 2 waves.

(e) Conquest: increase limit to 1500 resources (from 1250)

(f) Domination: Add a large bonus for winning early based on time, on the order of 750,000 C-bills and 750 LP/RP for finishing in 5 minutes, decreasing to 0 bonus at 15 minutes.

Edited by Nightbird, 22 May 2019 - 01:35 PM.


#2 QueenBlade

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • WC 2017 Bronze Champ
  • WC 2017 Bronze Champ
  • 710 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 01:25 PM

+1

#3 SilentScreamer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 554 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 03:28 PM

View PostNightbird, on 22 May 2019 - 01:24 PM, said:

These changes are intended to address major problems with the latest FP update, namely:
1. People loyal to factions not in a conflict feel left out
2. People really hate some of the game modes because of problems in them


Totally agree with your assessment of problems.

Not sure I agree with the "mercy rule" type-suggestions. If you implement the early win conditions, teams won't have a chance to make a comeback from a bad first wave. Of course, I'm sure that only happens in a very small percentage of games.

The idea of having Loyalists not belonging to the current conflict as "mercenaries" has merit. +1 Personally would like to have my Davion Loyalty back and I agree PGI seems to have really missed the mark on eliminating that aspect from the game.

#4 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 05:18 PM

Mercy rules are needed to reduce the impact of bad matches causing teams to quit playing. They're often asked for by the casual players tired of getting farmed at the drop ship. Early end rules will reduce the chances of that happening.

Edited by Nightbird, 22 May 2019 - 05:19 PM.


#5 justcallme A S H

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Referee
  • CS 2019 Referee
  • 7,606 posts
  • LocationMelbourne, AU

Posted 22 May 2019 - 08:50 PM

View PostNightbird, on 22 May 2019 - 01:24 PM, said:

(b ) Skirmish and assault: Add early win condition: Get 20 kill lead. When the early win condition is met, the match ends. Give the winning team bonus C-bills and RP/LP.

(d) Siege: Add a large bonus to attackers for winning early based on time, on the order of 1,000,000 C-bills and 1,000 LP/RP for finishing in 5 minutes, decreasing to 0 bonus at 25 minutes (out of the 30min match time). In other words, if finishing at the 15 minute mark, the attackers get 500k cbills and 500 LP bonus). Add an early win condition for the defenders: Get a 20 kill lead, and the match ends, with a bonus. Basically gen rushing becomes more rewarding, but you have no leeway if you don't attempt to shoot the defenders as a match would finish in the defender's favor in 2 waves.


All good stuff there, behind basically all of it and I'd say most others would be too. A couple of gaps on the above.


20 Kill Bonus - The winning side gets a bonus however for the losing gets nothing. So say it's 24-4 and the match promptly ends then the side that is the loser is now having potential C-Bill & RP/LP points removed from them as if the game went on there is no reason to say they could not earn more at the final scoreline might end up being 48-16 or something. More kills to the losers means they get more.

So if a match ends sooner there does need to be some sort of compensation for the losing team as well. I mean you could punish them for losing/being bad or whatever, but that doesn't really help anyone IMO.


5 MIN Win bonus - I get that higher skill groups can easily 12-0 a wave early however and fair enough. The more concerning part however is doing that type of reward will further encourage units who gravitate toward the PvE gen-rushing to basically double down and fully committ to it all the time. Not really sure that's going to increase the fun or engaging part of gameplay for anyone. It's just to make it all worse.

#6 LordNothing

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 11,667 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 08:59 PM

not sure i like 2-d as that would lead to more rushes. but the rest looks good.

View PostNightbird, on 22 May 2019 - 05:18 PM, said:

Mercy rules are needed to reduce the impact of bad matches causing teams to quit playing. They're often asked for by the casual players tired of getting farmed at the drop ship. Early end rules will reduce the chances of that happening.


really depending on how bad its going. i dont want my match cut short because of a technicality, especially if the wait times are long. sometimes you are in the hole the entire match and can still have a good game out of it, worth lots of cbills, xp, lp/rp. the match maker should help reduce the bad matches if we can get the population up (perhaps with an fp exclusive event after the bugs are fixed).

Edited by LordNothing, 22 May 2019 - 09:01 PM.


#7 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 22 May 2019 - 09:06 PM

View Postjustcallme A S H, on 22 May 2019 - 08:50 PM, said:

All good stuff there, behind basically all of it and I'd say most others would be too. A couple of gaps on the above.

20 Kill Bonus - The winning side gets a bonus however for the losing gets nothing. So say it's 24-4 and the match promptly ends then the side that is the loser is now having potential C-Bill & RP/LP points removed from them as if the game went on there is no reason to say they could not earn more at the final scoreline might end up being 48-16 or something. More kills to the losers means they get more. An early win bonus is needed to keep the winning team from ejecting t

So if a match ends sooner there does need to be some sort of compensation for the losing team as well. I mean you could punish them for losing/being bad or whatever, but that doesn't really help anyone IMO.


I would set the minimum earnings for going into a match at 250k c-bills and 300LP, for both winners and losers. You can reduce the earnings from actions in a match if the total compensation gets to be too high. I would stay away from creating a early loss bonus though, it just feels wrong. An early win bonus is needed to prevent teams from ejecting to keep the match going (to earn cbills), the bonus creates an incentive to end the match early when its lopsided.


View Postjustcallme A S H, on 22 May 2019 - 08:50 PM, said:

5 MIN Win bonus - I get that higher skill groups can easily 12-0 a wave early however and fair enough. The more concerning part however is doing that type of reward will further encourage units who gravitate toward the PvE gen-rushing to basically double down and fully committ to it all the time. Not really sure that's going to increase the fun or engaging part of gameplay for anyone. It's just to make it all worse.


Keeping in mind there is a 20 win gap early win condition for defenders, if gen-rushers ignore defenders and go after gens only, they only have 2 waves instead of 4. In other words, ignoring fighting and rushing gens becomes much much more difficult. Instead the reward is intended to incentivize attackers that 12-0 the defenders to not farm spawns, but rather to burn the gens to maximize earnings.

Edited by Nightbird, 22 May 2019 - 09:19 PM.


#8 justcallme A S H

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Referee
  • CS 2019 Referee
  • 7,606 posts
  • LocationMelbourne, AU

Posted 22 May 2019 - 09:56 PM

Oh yeah look I know - Against GOOD players (not many) the gen rush is gonna fail. Those are few and far between overall.

I was just thinking from the mid-tier level. Lots of teams dunno hwo to stop it and it's realistically easier to gen-rush at the mid level and try win a game by shooting it out on attack because of skills and what not. Also if a team defends the gen area there are going to be 3-5 deaths from the gen blockers on the 1st and maybe 2nd wave which is going to let 2 full waves of gen-rushing occurr at the least.

So they would likely have it done or have it almost close to done, after the first wave. Just devils advocate there as it definately feels dangerous to head down that path.

#9 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 23 May 2019 - 12:34 AM

Sure, keep thinking, but also consider if Siege mode is even worse for casuals than scouting or incursion in terms of frustration. All of my early end conditions are to prevent 48-12 and worse matches, i.e. drop ship farming, which cause players to rage quit. That's the reality today with no changes.

Compared to that, some gen rushing teams that give defenders a lot of free kills is not really a problem in my book.

#10 BROARL

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • @ui_title_%s_Rank_19
  • @ui_title_%s_Rank_19
  • 267 posts
  • Locationinvasion

Posted 23 May 2019 - 03:59 AM

incentives for losing teams count: in the old days units could win planets by defending, they didn't have to win every game, they just had to win enough to prevent the attack being successful. this was almost a measure of incentive for lesser teams to drop against better teams and keep trying and learning, thus preventing the prevailing team from having to ghost drop all night. the rewards were not enough but the idea was correct i think.

*also: bring back counter attack if you want to encourage objective based wins?
*also: put the quickplay maps into the invasion roster somehow? put a solaris elevator into solaris city or mining collective, who needs a dropship?

#11 Marquis De Lafayette

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blazing
  • The Blazing
  • 1,354 posts
  • LocationIn Valley Forge with General Washington

Posted 23 May 2019 - 05:57 AM

View Postjustcallme A S H, on 22 May 2019 - 08:50 PM, said:


All good stuff there, behind basically all of it and I'd say most others would be too. A couple of gaps on the above.


20 Kill Bonus - The winning side gets a bonus however for the losing gets nothing. So say it's 24-4 and the match promptly ends then the side that is the loser is now having potential C-Bill & RP/LP points removed from them as if the game went on there is no reason to say they could not earn more at the final scoreline might end up being 48-16 or something. More kills to the losers means they get more.

So if a match ends sooner there does need to be some sort of compensation for the losing team as well. I mean you could punish them for losing/being bad or whatever, but that doesn't really help anyone IMO.


5 MIN Win bonus - I get that higher skill groups can easily 12-0 a wave early however and fair enough. The more concerning part however is doing that type of reward will further encourage units who gravitate toward the PvE gen-rushing to basically double down and fully committ to it all the time. Not really sure that's going to increase the fun or engaging part of gameplay for anyone. It's just to make it all worse.



Agree on both counts. We don’t want to tempt some to break that 5 min mark via objective-based play. Because I can guarantee if you add extra rewards...people will be tempted to do it. In early 2018 it became clear to even Bacon (who played objectives hard in 2017....for any who don’t know...i know you know) that playing like that drove people from the mode and just wasn’t fun for anyone...plus planets didn’t matter anymore...so the unit changed course. Whatever we do shouldn’t actively incentize this type of play.

Nightbird: I think anything less than 3x the building heath on Incursion would be a mistake. I don’t think 2x would often hold up if someone threw 4 waves purely at the base. 3x would be were I would start and adjust up/down from there

#12 Shanrak

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 199 posts

Posted 23 May 2019 - 08:23 AM

I like the ideas but I think turret hp should be boosted for incursion.

As for early attacker invasion bonus, that's fine but boost the gens a bit, put a turret on top of each and make it so you must destroy the generators in order, 1-2-3, make some doors on generator 2&3 that won't open until the previous generator is destroyed.



#13 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,695 posts

Posted 23 May 2019 - 09:06 AM

View PostNightbird, on 22 May 2019 - 01:24 PM, said:

These changes are intended to address major problems with the latest FP update, namely:
1. People loyal to factions not in a conflict feel left out
2. People really hate some of the game modes because of problems in them

Here are my suggested fixes:

1.
(a)
Restore faction loyalties, and for each conflict grant a mission to the loyalist player to participate in external conflicts. For example, as a Kurita loyalist, in a conflict involving Faction X and Faction Y, you'll get one of two messages:

"Warrior, it is in the interest of House Kurita for Faction X to succeed in this conflict. Our Dear Leader orders you to [covertly] lend them your assistance."

or

"Warrior, the conflict between Faction X and Faction Y allow us to infiltrate their ranks. Join either side in this conflict and relay intelligence back to us."

Which message you get will depend on lore, and obviously the first message will not give you a choice as to whom to help. While undergoing a mission, you still earn LP with your faction.

(b ) Further differentiate loyalists, mercs, and freelancers with: earn 1MC per 100LP for loyalists, earn 100 C-bills/1RP for mercs, and earn 2GXP per RP equivalent for freelancers.

2.
(a) Scouting: Smoke diving is unstoppable and really not fun. Change scouting so that 1) remove the second timer for the hovering dropship phase, one attacker must be at the LZ to extract after the first timer, and 2) if there is 1 defender present in the LZ, extraction fails and the dropship leaves immediately but changes to one of the other LZ. Basically the attackers have 2 chances to extract, and if a defender stands in the LZ twice, the attackers lose. Because the second timer is removed, if the defenders are not on the ball, the attackers can extract more easily. But if the defenders are spread out and appropriately mobile, smoke diving will be prevented. Fighting it out remains a valid option.

(b ) Skirmish and assault: Add early win condition: Get 20 kill lead. When the early win condition is met, the match ends. Give the winning team bonus C-bills and RP/LP.

(c) Incursion: Double base structure health for the non-functional buildings. (i.e. radar, ACT, jam build health remains the same)

(d) Siege: Add a large bonus to attackers for winning early based on time, on the order of 1,000,000 C-bills and 1,000 LP/RP for finishing in 5 minutes, decreasing to 0 bonus at 25 minutes (out of the 30min match time). In other words, if finishing at the 15 minute mark, the attackers get 500k cbills and 500 LP bonus). Add an early win condition for the defenders: Get a 20 kill lead, and the match ends, with a bonus. Basically gen rushing becomes more rewarding, but you have no leeway if you don't attempt to shoot the defenders as a match would finish in the defender's favor in 2 waves.

(e) Conquest: increase limit to 1500 resources (from 1250)

(f) Domination: Add a large bonus for winning early based on time, on the order of 750,000 C-bills and 750 LP/RP for finishing in 5 minutes, decreasing to 0 bonus at 15 minutes.


God damn. These are all great ideas.

Quoted and liked my own post just so I can like the suggestions twice.

Edited by MischiefSC, 23 May 2019 - 09:07 AM.


#14 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,695 posts

Posted 23 May 2019 - 09:11 AM

View Postjustcallme A S H, on 22 May 2019 - 08:50 PM, said:


All good stuff there, behind basically all of it and I'd say most others would be too. A couple of gaps on the above.


20 Kill Bonus - The winning side gets a bonus however for the losing gets nothing. So say it's 24-4 and the match promptly ends then the side that is the loser is now having potential C-Bill & RP/LP points removed from them as if the game went on there is no reason to say they could not earn more at the final scoreline might end up being 48-16 or something. More kills to the losers means they get more.

So if a match ends sooner there does need to be some sort of compensation for the losing team as well. I mean you could punish them for losing/being bad or whatever, but that doesn't really help anyone IMO.


5 MIN Win bonus - I get that higher skill groups can easily 12-0 a wave early however and fair enough. The more concerning part however is doing that type of reward will further encourage units who gravitate toward the PvE gen-rushing to basically double down and fully committ to it all the time. Not really sure that's going to increase the fun or engaging part of gameplay for anyone. It's just to make it all worse.


Here's the thing though. There's no gameplay change you can make that's going to get the teams that gravitate toward a gen rush to play for kills vs a good killing team. I get that you dislike gen rushing - so do I. However some people enjoy it and some people and teams just lack the gun hands to consistently win on kills. That's okay because I really still want them all dropping and playing and filling matches.

What this does is mean you can stop their gen rush on 2nd wave if they can't manage to kill anyone, so they HAVE to keep a degree of aggression. It doubles down both sides. It raises the stakes so you can't just count on 4 suicide waves to win vs anyone but it certainly rewards you for a very aggressive push and roll.

Gen rushing sucks because it's super super easy. 4 waves is a lot of time and opportunity. This cuts that to less than 2 - unless you're also killing the enemy along the way.

#15 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 23 May 2019 - 11:45 AM

View PostMischiefSC, on 23 May 2019 - 09:11 AM, said:

Gen rushing sucks because it's super super easy. 4 waves is a lot of time and opportunity. This cuts that to less than 2 - unless you're also killing the enemy along the way.


Exactly. It rewards gen rushing while killing the defenders, and penalizes PvE. Glad someone gets it

#16 Derek_Wildstar

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 8
  • 49 posts

Posted 24 May 2019 - 01:03 PM

the 20 kill rule will make things worse IMHO cause they will just stomp you worse, so they can get to the next game quicker, stomp rinse repeat. IS vs Clan tonnage first wave is usually heavily IS and IS usually get well into your 2nd wave pretty deeply before their 1st wave is even depleted. that's where alot of the imbalance comes from, 10 extra tons goes along away ..

Edited by Derek_Wildstar, 24 May 2019 - 01:05 PM.


#17 mrmike5234

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 46 posts

Posted 24 May 2019 - 01:12 PM

Makes way too much sense, never happen.

#18 Rick T Dangerous

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 353 posts
  • LocationExactly above Earth's center

Posted 24 May 2019 - 01:56 PM

View PostNightbird, on 22 May 2019 - 01:24 PM, said:

These changes are intended to address major problems with the latest FP update, namely:
1. People loyal to factions not in a conflict feel left out
2. People really hate some of the game modes because of problems in them

Here are my suggested fixes:

1.
(a)
Restore faction loyalties, and for each conflict grant a mission to the loyalist player to participate in external conflicts. For example, as a Kurita loyalist, in a conflict involving Faction X and Faction Y, you'll get one of two messages:

"Warrior, it is in the interest of House Kurita for Faction X to succeed in this conflict. Our Dear Leader orders you to [covertly] lend them your assistance."

or

"Warrior, the conflict between Faction X and Faction Y allow us to infiltrate their ranks. Join either side in this conflict and relay intelligence back to us."

Which message you get will depend on lore, and obviously the first message will not give you a choice as to whom to help. While undergoing a mission, you still earn LP with your faction.

(b ) Further differentiate loyalists, mercs, and freelancers with: earn 1MC per 100LP for loyalists, earn 100 C-bills/1RP for mercs, and earn 2GXP per RP equivalent for freelancers.

2.
(a) Scouting: Smoke diving is unstoppable and really not fun. Change scouting so that 1) remove the second timer for the hovering dropship phase, one attacker must be at the LZ to extract after the first timer, and 2) if there is 1 defender present in the LZ, extraction fails and the dropship leaves immediately but changes to one of the other LZ. Basically the attackers have 2 chances to extract, and if a defender stands in the LZ twice, the attackers lose. Because the second timer is removed, if the defenders are not on the ball, the attackers can extract more easily. But if the defenders are spread out and appropriately mobile, smoke diving will be prevented. Fighting it out remains a valid option.

(b ) Skirmish and assault: Add early win condition: Get 20 kill lead. When the early win condition is met, the match ends. Give the winning team bonus C-bills and RP/LP.

(c) Incursion: Double base structure health for the non-functional buildings. (i.e. radar, ACT, jam build health remains the same)

(d) Siege: Add a large bonus to attackers for winning early based on time, on the order of 1,000,000 C-bills and 1,000 LP/RP for finishing in 5 minutes, decreasing to 0 bonus at 25 minutes (out of the 30min match time). In other words, if finishing at the 15 minute mark, the attackers get 500k cbills and 500 LP bonus). Add an early win condition for the defenders: Get a 20 kill lead, and the match ends, with a bonus. Basically gen rushing becomes more rewarding, but you have no leeway if you don't attempt to shoot the defenders as a match would finish in the defender's favor in 2 waves.

(e) Conquest: increase limit to 1500 resources (from 1250)

(f) Domination: Add a large bonus for winning early based on time, on the order of 750,000 C-bills and 750 LP/RP for finishing in 5 minutes, decreasing to 0 bonus at 15 minutes.


Those are some great ideas. Pity they will be ignored.

#19 Nightbird

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 24 May 2019 - 03:48 PM

Yep, just like how they ignored it when during the first day they proposed a new MM, I pointed out that FP doesn't have enough pop to actually launch more than 1 game at a time, and also because the pops are always imbalanced, the under-pop side will always get the strongest opponent with this MM.

#20 TheBob

    Rookie

  • Heishi
  • Heishi
  • 1 posts

Posted 26 May 2019 - 10:25 PM

PREMADES AND SPAWN CAMPS!!!!!!!!!!! its like the worst parts wow and duty's multiplayer modes mixed together





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users