"EiRR System"

[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

[hans]

"EiRR System"
What we have right now:

*The player can get right now PPs and XPs from each battle*
*The player who wins a game get twice as much PP as the player who loses the game*
*The player lots of wins will level up faster then the player that loses more games*

Well, okay that seems to be pretty old and is known. But problems with this system are:

*Winning a game is mostly preferred by many players for leveling up faster*
*Losing is a NO GO and most of the playerbase tries to avoid losing*
*avoid losing also includes not to play with new players against more experienced ones*
*most of the new players lose more games then winning one*
*most of the new players are waiting long for the next level*
*the player that wins has a far greater advantage*
*new players have seldom the chance to play with better players*

What i think about this system is, like its a circle:

You get XPs, PPs, and a Win/Lose ratio. You spend time for a game to earn these points. But the thing that is kinda missing right now, is a addition to the system that gives you an advantage if you lose a game.

Solution: Having an advantage system based on the Win/Lose ratio
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle1: 1Vs1

Allies:
PlayerXY9
Win:100
Lose:70
Ratio: 5,7...

Axis:
PlayerBC9
Win:15
Lose:78
Ratio: 0,19
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You see in the example two players, one has a very good W/L, the other player a bad W/L. Now you
compare the ratio of W/L and generate an advantage for the player with the lower ratio:

*The player with the lower ratio gets +2XP for each killed enemy unit*
*The player with the lower ratio starts with 5 more population*
*The player with the lower ratio gets 1 extra use of one offmap*
*The player with the lower ratio gets for a win 5PP more then for a normal win*

The effect of these changes are huge for the upcoming battle. Although the player is bad, he gets some advantages. Those advantages are first of all examples and can change to smaller effect.
This is not playerspecific but teamspecific:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Battle: 2Vs2

Allies:
PlayerXY9
Win:100
Lose:70
PlayerXZ2
Win:60
Lose:5
TeamRatio: 160/75: 2,3333

Axis:
PlayerBC9
Win:15
Lose:78
PlayerCY3
Win:100
Lose:70
TeamRatio: 115/148: 0,7777
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now the whole team gets the named advantages for each player in the team with the worse W/L.

AllinAll:

Now you would say, that most players will try to lose battles to get these advantages (or might play with new players)! But thats actually the point. This system should make the players lose games or suffer under advantages of the enemy team. The behaviour of trying to stay away from a game that might be sure lose can be changed with some boni you get from the game.

[Ahnungsloser]

Awesome minds for this mod. This would improve the situation for low ranked players and prevent
them from insta-quit-eir-playing.

[Vermillion_Hawk]

As great as this system is I hardly see this being implemented in the near future.

[Spartan_Marine88]

I like this system, but i would recommend if it were done that win/loss ratio would be either hidden or shown only to the player just to prevent avoidance.

[EIRRMod]

I like this system, but i would recommend if it were done that win/loss ratio would be either hidden or shown only to the player just to prevent avoidance.

To prevent avoidance, make the win / loss ratio only affect yourself, and not modify the other player.

It would be a self-sustaining ratio system, due to losing against people better than them, and winning vs. poorer players.
You just wouldnt get the bonus of playing a higher / better player (which, in itself, might form a type of avoidance - so best to remove the possibility.)

[Smokaz]

To prevent avoidance, make the win / loss ratio only affect yourself, and not modify the other player.

It would be a self-sustaining ratio system, due to losing against people better than them, and winning vs. poorer players.
You just wouldnt get the bonus of playing a higher / better player (which, in itself, might form a type of avoidance - so best to remove the possibility.)

Imagine how well prepared you will be EIRRMOD if you ever decided to pursue a commerical gaming project full time. You'd be like the, uh, Da Vinci of RTS.

[EIRRMod]

Imagine how well prepared you will be EIRRMOD if you ever decided to pursue a commerical gaming project full time. You'd be like the, uh, Da Vinci of RTS.

Well the only issue with removing a reward for playing better players - means the LOWER skilled players start to avoid games too....

I cant see a perfect solution to it, but I will find something that WORKS
Not this grind bullshit like now - sorry about that.

[Smokaz]

Oh grind away ye valkyries of freedom i havent played eirr in a month

[aeroblade56]

Oh grind away ye valkyries of freedom i havent played eirr in a month

Dont worry Computer will make a booty call soon.

[Spartan_Marine88]

Not this grind bullshit like now - sorry about that.

Grind is necessary, what you need to find is a reason to grind.


Removal of grind will lead to the loss of attachment to company's and units

[Demon767]

dont remove grind, thats what users play for. Warmap is to finnicky to bave it all attached to that

[Spartan_Marine88]

What I have been trying to say for a long time is levels are more fun, games without a leveling system or form of clear progression are generally bland.

This game had no leveling system




This game did



(and a lot of grind)

[Groundfire]

The problem with the grind as it exists today is that once you reach lvl9, your experience with that company is generally over.

What we are trying to do is to shift the grind onto vet and your company commander/warmap as opposed to your doctrine specialization, because that has a finite end to it, whereas vet and the warmap experience can be customized, recycled and reset after a certain period.

[3rdCondor]

What I have been trying to say for a long time is levels are more fun, games without a leveling system or form of clear progression are generally bland.

This game had no leveling system

lmao Spartan

[hans]

well i also think that grind is important! but it should be a grind that effects both sides (new/older good/not so good players) equally

and well focus on the playin of games. The playing of a game, no matter which side will win has to be benefited to avoid the behaviour most players have right now

[Tymathee]

well at the moment, you get less XP, not PP for losing, which i dont have an issue with.

I find the major problem is in that higher level players can stomp on lower level players without a penalty and all the loser comes away is butthurt.

There used to be a system in where if there was a disparity in levels, the lower level got more XP/PP and the higher got less.

I felt this was better but kinda flawed when you got into the higher levels because then you would grind slower not only in PP but in XP as well so there would be a downside in "training" new players on the opposite side or even playing against smurfs with new accounts that wanted to gain advantages.

My change would be this:
Idea #1- No xp loss for losing but have a boost in PP gain per level.
9 levels (10 v 1) 35 PP
8 levels 30 pp
7 levels 25 pp
6 levels 20 pp
5/4/3/2/1/0 levels 15 pp

Idea #2 - no change in pp or xp in levels but need more xp per level
level
1 to 2 - 100
2 to 3 - 125
3 to 4 - 150
4 to 5 - 175
5 to 6 - 200
7 to 8 - 225
8 to 9 - 250
9 to 10 - 300

10 would be for Prestige purposes.
When you reach level 10 you get a higher PP gain, instead of 15 per, you get 20 per so you can try different stuff

oh and so the grind won't be insane, you gain 25 XP per game.

so thats one more game per level and by the time you reach level 10 that would be
a total of 72 games and about 1,080 PP at current system....maybe this is kinda flawed lmao.

maybe lower the game to +10 xp per level

100,110,120 etc.

something like that, i dont know the number but im sure someone can add on that. most RTS's level up with higher xp levels when you get to higher levels so this would make sense.

[AmPM]

Or, remove levels, allow people to unlock everything, and reward players with more unit unlocks (not reward) units or a more expansive Resource system (each game gains you points to put towards more resources).