006g Hotfix

[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

[Scyn]

It is easy, Riki. The problem there is that if we banned everyone for messing up then we'd be down quite a few players. So we'd rather correct flaws that present themselves as exploits and not have to deal with moderating the game and focus on building it.

[BigDick]

My only problem with ATG not giving XP is that it is the number 1 threat to tanks on the field. Its also the primary target due to that.

If tanks can't get XP from killing ATGs, its only fair that Vehicles give no XP to their natural threats, AT infantry types and ATGs.

That has nothing to do with it. It has to do with people deliberately decrewing their own weapons and blowing them up or blowing up their teammates weapons for XP.

but he is right.... if you drive e.g. a panther (strong armor "low" health compared to armor and price) forward....and you get shoot by AT guns (hurt panther due to its health very much) and keep moving forward that you get behind the gun...the panther keep killing the gun in most cases...
not the crew...and gain what? nothing.....

and blowing up the own stuff or from teammates would make the at guns useless for themself (because they are destroyed).... => enemy tanks bigger danger for own tanks and infantry...

the other case would be destroy stuff to keep enemy away from recrewing

[stumpster]

Killing the gun usually kills the two men manning the gun, meaning that you still will get experience on your Panther.

If it really turns out to be that big an issue, I'm sure that we can do something to offset the change in gun experience (like having the crew give a 1.5 or 2 xp a piece instead of just 1).  Just don't expect it to be reverted.

[Scyn]

Oh. I know he's right. However, if like you said.. a panther is charging an at gun and kills it... Why is the panther concerned about his XP gain?.. he should be killing it to win. That's also another fundamental flaw we're working on.. playing to win instead of XP gain.

[Malevolence]

That has nothing to do with it. It has to do with people deliberately decrewing their own weapons and blowing them up or blowing up their teammates weapons for XP.

If people intentionally kill their own ATGs to vet then they will get rolled by tanks. End of story. I've never seen people roll onto the field, kill their own decrewed ATGs, then try to fight the game without ATGs. Never. Not one single time.

And once warmap is implemented this will just obviously result in a lose, which should theoretically not be worth the meager XP gain from the at guns.

[AmPM]

How to make people care about winning?

Lose XP when you lose a game, it will also keep the poorer players at the lower ranks, and keep the better players at the higher ranks. Remove rank from Doctrine Requirements/Advantages.

Oh look, a working system!

Other than that, the only reason to play is XP on units. Win/lose doesn't matter (winning being worse than losing and getting XP for instance) and will a warmap and a war win/loss really matter enough for people to sacrifice their company for a win?

The only really interesting feature is unit progression, that and doctrines. Guess which one stops at a t4, and which one you get to keep working on due to unit losses in game.

[CrazyWR]

im confused...I was with you the whole time til you said remove rank from doc req/advantages...basically what you will have accomplished is making XP useless.  Cosmetic basically.

[AmPM]

No, what it does is provide ranks. You keep the same bonuses and penalties for ranks as now.

So a low rank (player with high loss ratio) will get the "noob advantages" and you will get "training advantages" for playing with them vs a higher ranked team.

A reason to play with them, and a way for people to find others of similar skill.

[Smokaz]

I would be sad if I lost too many games to ever get my T4 so I think thats a bad idea. People should be able to get what they want for their companies in the end no matter how good they are if they spend and play carefully enough.

Also, another aspect must be considered here: the harsher the lose penalties are, the more stacking and st0mpz will take place.

Imo wins and losses should be tied to a non-important Rank or flashy medal etc, just for show. Like the leaderboard company section. (not the units as anyone can in time get a vetted company, but not everyone can win all games ingame)

[CrazyWR]

AMPM, do you really think the training advantages outweigh the high chances of losing 1-2 or more vet units almost guaranteed?

[AmPM]

Not really, but that could be adjusted.

What it would do is provide a fair playing field for people to know who they can match up against.

Right now the system does nothing to protect new players, they just get stomped by smurfs. It also punishes you for winning and rewards you for losing.

It just makes no sense.

[DasNoob]

This is true to some extent.  There are people light years better in ability then I am who have lower ranks, as well as people who sit here grinding who have crazy high ranks that are terrible.

If I am new and don't know the community, I really cannot rely on the rank to help me find someone in my ability.  Looking at the WIN/LOSS ratio helps.

Ranks could be tied to playing ability, while unlocks, doctrines etc., can be tied to amount played over time.

Sadly I would only ever get to the rank of Major 

[Silverstone]

I'm really amazed how some axis players with amazing stats will jump at any chance to play a game with skill gap, in lack of better phrasing. I myself not even breaking 1.1 ratio. Obviously in a team-game it can be hard to know which player will balance what, and by all means, everyone should be able to play anyone. What strikes me is how it can be any fun at all? This is not only axis problem, but with me being allied player i don't really see much of the flipside.

It seems to me a difficult job to iron out and balance the whole advantage thing and smurfing too.