Vet Gain Modifiers

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[acker]

Vet gain should be modified by the level discrepancy between two teams.

0-1 level difference: 100% EXP to both teams.
2 level difference: 90% EXP to higher team, 120% to lower team.
3 level difference: 70% to higher team, 140% to lower team.
4 level difference: 50% to higher team, 160% to lower team.
5-level difference: 30%/200%.
6-level difference: 10%/230%.
7-level difference: 10%/300% (the chance of this happening is just not likely)

Numbers can, of course, be modified. One can enjoy playing on one's friend's team all you want, one can enjoy playing against skilled players as well. Just don't expect to get much out of utterly owning newbs besides gaming satisfaction.

And, since rank isn't related to skill level (just look at me, 1:2 win:loss), you'll still get to own bad players now and then. Those that didn't learn to stay out of stacked games, of course.

[Piotrskivich]

Maybe getting less vet for fighting noobs would be cool but don't make it so noobs get MORE than normal. People would make new accounts, fight high levels and get vets instantly.

[acker]

Maybe getting less vet for fighting noobs would be cool but don't make it so noobs get MORE than normal. People would make new accounts, fight high levels and get vets instantly.

I put that in to counteract the massive vet loss most experienced players get when fighting with newbs in stacked games. I know for one that Pak88 absolutely refuses to fight with newbs in stacked games for fear of feeding his enemy vet, and for losing vetted units. And, currently, his actions are completely understandable, the unit loss avoidance thing isn't foolproof at all.

It's just there to encourage vets to play more openly with newbs. Though I suppose the vet gain could be moved down.

[31stPzGren]

Maybe getting less vet for fighting noobs would be cool but don't make it so noobs get MORE than normal. People would make new accounts, fight high levels and get vets instantly.

As Piotr said, this would benefit smurfing significantly.

What is to prevent people from setting up gimmick companies and semi-suiciding everything at high ranked players (not necessarily pro players) to get veterancy fast?

The fact that you don't lose veterancy is pretty good already and veterancy is only gained from actually killing units.

Perhaps a better way, is to provide an advantage as a modifier that the newbie's troops will gain more experience like a 1.5x or 2x modifier. This can be similar to how you purchase recon run/smoke/supply drop.

[31stPzGren]

I put that in to counteract the massive vet loss most experienced players get when fighting with newbs in stacked games. I know for one that Pak88 absolutely refuses to fight with newbs in stacked games for fear of feeding his enemy vet, and for losing vetted units. And, currently, his actions are completely understandable, the unit loss avoidance thing isn't foolproof at all.

Quite unjustifiable. I've advocated for a long time about making vet easier to obtain to reduce stacking and promote game playing. Part of the issue is that, imagine you take 10-20+ games to get your vet 2 unit (nearly vet 3)... which died in a stacked game.

That would be highly unpleasant. Of course the mechanics now has changed from back then, where winning battles will net you extra experience as well as certain doctrine benefits, which could contribute to making a vet army much easier.

All-in-all, discouraging stacked games or rather, promoting amount of games played is about introducing "soft" policies which are beneficial to both sides.

[acker]

What is to prevent people from setting up gimmick companies and semi-suiciding everything at high ranked players (not necessarily pro players) to get veterancy fast?

I've been thinking about this. The devs definitely have ways to separate smurfs and IP addresses, and my idea revolves around that.

But, failing that, semi-smurf account would still rank up really, really quickly. They could get a crapload of vet quickly, but they'd end up at high levels quickly as well...which is kinda self-defeating. And most of the people who would bother doing crap like this really, really hate to lose; they'd rank up even faster.


A better method would probably involve more modest EXP boosts, but drastically increase the chances of a unit surviving the game as rank discrepancies increase. Right now, vet survival caps out at around 30% or so, it should go up by a ton as ranks get further and further apart. Maybe even complete immunity at 4/5-rank discrepancy (dead units still don't keep the vet they earned that game, though).

[AmPM]

So wouldn't this just encourage smurfing to vet hunt?

[31stPzGren]

A better method would probably involve more modest EXP boosts, but drastically increase the chances of a unit surviving the game as rank discrepancies increase. Right now, vet survival caps out at around 30% or so, it should go up by a ton as ranks get further and further apart. Maybe even complete immunity at 4/5-rank discrepancy (dead units still don't keep the vet they earned that game, though).

Thats a much better suggestion. You should flesh out the idea more.

So wouldn't this just encourage smurfing to vet hunt?

Unjustifiable. Vet is already quite easy to obtain and as also mentioned in the other thread, there are a certain bunch of players out to vet farm exclusively anyway.

Vet is no longer that much of a "treasured" commodity in its rarity but it still gives a large advantage to those who possess it.

[acker]

I put that in to counteract the massive vet loss most experienced players get when fighting with newbs in stacked games. I know for one that Pak88 absolutely refuses to fight with newbs in stacked games for fear of feeding his enemy vet, and for losing vetted units. And, currently, his actions are completely understandable, the unit loss avoidance thing isn't foolproof at all.

Quite unjustifiable. I've advocated for a long time about making vet easier to obtain to reduce stacking and promote game playing. Part of the issue is that, imagine you take 10-20+ games to get your vet 2 unit (nearly vet 3)... which died in a stacked game.

That would be highly unpleasant. Of course the mechanics now has changed from back then, where winning battles will net you extra experience as well as certain doctrine benefits, which could contribute to making a vet army much easier.

All-in-all, discouraging stacked games or rather, promoting amount of games played is about introducing "soft" policies which are beneficial to both sides.

Where did I say it was justifiable? No, I said it was understandable. Pak still went further than quite a few skilled players do, I've actually seen him play in completely stacked games (I haven't seen him do so in the last few days, though). His allied account has a win:loss ratio of 1:(.9-.75) or so because of it.

He might be bad-mannered, but at least he tried.

[AmPM]

What I am saying, is that wouldn't it then be even more profitable to vet hunt with a new company vs experienced players? They already gain almost nothing for playing you, then they get less vet for killing your men. All you have to do is focus on killing vet and risk noting while gaining more.

Vet units should be encouraged to be used, not made into a penalty.

People seem to think a new player should be on par with an older account, without skill having to factor in.

Guess what, its a level based system, your green units SHOULD get wiped by a group of veterans who have seen many many battles.

Stop being a carebear, and learn to play.

Vet does not win games, take Acker for instance, even with vet he isn't going to be as good as some others. Hell I'd give Smokaz a good chance of killing anyone with a brand new company vs vets.

You want to win games consistently? Get better, and don't play with idiots.

[acker]

What I am saying, is that wouldn't it then be even more profitable to vet hunt with a new company vs experienced players? They already gain almost nothing for playing you, then they get less vet for killing your men. All you have to do is focus on killing vet and risk noting while gaining more.

...


Vet does not win games, take Acker for instance, even with vet he isn't going to be as good as some others. Hell I'd give Smokaz a good chance of killing anyone with a brand new company vs vets.

...In which case, the burden of dodging lies on the more-experienced player. Which is still a better system than right now, where the newb must dodge. PzGren probably has a better idea of what he wants to say, though.

Vet does not win games, take Acker for instance, even with vet he isn't going to be as good as some others. Hell I'd give Smokaz a good chance of killing anyone with a brand new company vs vets.

An excellent idea, to look at me. I play the majority of my games with newb/unskilled companions, I lose two games for every one I win, and I still manage to vet up my units. If I can retain vets with newb companions against skilled rank7/8s (who, incidentally, routinely hunt down my vets), than skilled players can retain vets against rank 1 vet hunting companies.


Go ahead and play, you already know how. Just don't assume you'll be able to get stuff out of annihilating newb companies.

[AmPM]

What they need is a penalty to vet for losing games.

[salan]

Vet gain should be modified by the level discrepancy between two teams.

0-1 level difference: 100% EXP to both teams.
2 level difference: 90% EXP to higher team, 120% to lower team.
3 level difference: 70% to higher team, 140% to lower team.
4 level difference: 50% to higher team, 160% to lower team.
5-level difference: 30%/200%.
6-level difference: 10%/230%.
7-level difference: 10%/300% (the chance of this happening is just not likely)

Numbers can, of course, be modified. One can enjoy playing on one's friend's team all you want, one can enjoy playing against skilled players as well. Just don't expect to get much out of utterly owning newbs besides gaming satisfaction.

And, since rank isn't related to skill level (just look at me, 1:2 win:loss), you'll still get to own bad players now and then. Those that didn't learn to stay out of stacked games, of course.

when we first were designing the system this is something we talked about, it kinda went to the wayside as we wanted to see the rest fullfilled, who knows if it will come back or not now though. mmm

[acker]

Vet gain should be modified by the level discrepancy between two teams.

0-1 level difference: 100% EXP to both teams.
2 level difference: 90% EXP to higher team, 120% to lower team.
3 level difference: 70% to higher team, 140% to lower team.
4 level difference: 50% to higher team, 160% to lower team.
5-level difference: 30%/200%.
6-level difference: 10%/230%.
7-level difference: 10%/300% (the chance of this happening is just not likely)

Numbers can, of course, be modified. One can enjoy playing on one's friend's team all you want, one can enjoy playing against skilled players as well. Just don't expect to get much out of utterly owning newbs besides gaming satisfaction.

And, since rank isn't related to skill level (just look at me, 1:2 win:loss), you'll still get to own bad players now and then. Those that didn't learn to stay out of stacked games, of course.

when we first were designing the system this is something we talked about, it kinda went to the wayside as we wanted to see the rest fullfilled, who knows if it will come back or not now though. mmm

Thanks. I just wanted to know if the devs were considering this. If they are, then that's that. Though I now think that vet protection is probably better than vet modifiers.

I'm having a hard time thinking of a good system that doesn't involve IP tracking, though.

[Groundfire]

Why is it not possible to implement the relic automatch type ladder system?

Levels 1-20, and the highest level profile that you have is locked into place, cant be removed/deleted/ etc., and all the experience modifiers are judged from that base profile.

You can smurf all you want, but the exp will still be adjested accordingly unless your fighting someone who also has a base profile that level.

The only way you get around a system like this to buy a whole new CD key. We wouldnt introduce any new problem that we already have from good players wiping accounts/farming vet/ etc.

PP system wouldnt be touched of course, so if you did want to restart, you can still unlock your doctrines the same.

[CrazyWR]

What they need is a penalty to vet for losing games.

...wait, what?  Wouldn't this encourage stomping EVEN MORE?

[AmPM]

Because to do that, they would have to track IPs, and even that wont work.