2
Colddawg, on 18 February 2013 - 10:37 AM, said:
True but from a game design standpoint it's just not that feasible. It'll take up a lot of resources to track every player using a clan mech in every match all the time. The resources needed to determine "clan engaged IS mech, zellbringen active, IS teammate broke zellbringen-allow unrestricted warfare/opposite statement" is just too high. Also this is not just including the battles of IS vs clan, you need to take into account the everyday battles that will occur.
I'm all for seeing Zellbringen in any BTU setting, but the fact of the matter is that players won't police themselves to follow it no matter what stats are being tracked so PGI will most likely remove that check from the equation.
I'm all for seeing Zellbringen in any BTU setting, but the fact of the matter is that players won't police themselves to follow it no matter what stats are being tracked so PGI will most likely remove that check from the equation.
Hm... well its possible to passively encourage it, but not to enforce it.
When an IS mech gets damaged, store the Clan mech that damaged it if one isn't already set. Any XP awarded against this mech (component destroyed, kill assist, etc) from Clanners that aren't the stored one are only 1/10th what they should be. If that original damaging Clan mech is destroyed, null the stored variable. It would encourage Clan mechs to not shoot each others targets (by hindering their XP advancement), but theres no real way to enforce it, like Colddawg said.
