Who actually grinds out accounts?

[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

[DeutscherStahl]

Your only example is WoW - a game in a completely different genre, an entire genre that is built from the ground up to be a grind type of game.

In RTS games the reason you keep playing is for the strategy. In MMORPGs the reason you keep playing is for the grinding. Mingling the two is a very bad idea, IMO. By doing so you dilute the RTS aspect - for the vast majority of players there is no strategy, just get killed by anyone with more über doctrine abilities + vet + resource bonuses than you and kill anyone with less. It's only a strategy game if you manage to get two fully leveled teams against each other.

Without a grind and goal, players wouldn't have the same desire as they would otherwise.

Again, this only applies to mmorpgs. No RTS game ever, so far as I know, has grinding in any form that affects gameplay, and especially, gives gameplay advantages. The goal is to win by strategy. That's the whole point of the RTS genre.

So I think your argument of 'mmorpgs use grinding so it must be a good idea in another genre' fails. F.X. most people I know hate the leveling system in games like the more recent Call of Duty, and BFBC2 - it just denies them game content for a period of time, and grinding is not why you play FPS games.

My question of, would anyone actually quit the mod over grind being removed, hasn't been answered though...

And also, if you are still not convinced, why not go for appealing both crowds?
Give players the option, to grind, or to have a full level account. This way, MMORPG guys can grind their ass off, and people who hate playing MMORPGs because their entire concept is based around more time = better character, can avoid that here.
And if you say, that would give an unfair advantage against people who grind - the system already in place gives an unfair advantage against people who do not spend most of their time playing EiRR, especially with resets preventing a full level company over a long period of time.

[UnderHeavyFire]

I realise MMORPGs and RTS are two different genres - I was merely pointing out the similarities of level advancing, the unlocking of abilities and the rising with power as you rise in level, and the connection of grinding to a goal.

Grinding to a goal is not only limited to MMORPGS.  FPS have levels. RTS do have tiers - as you collect more resources (grind) you have the option of moving to the next tier, unlocking new units and abilities.  Even regular CoH has this, just that it is limited to short time period (one game).  You don't automatically start off with all your Doctrine unlocks in CoH, and you don't start at the highest Teir.  It adds another metagame that players work with and strive to get to.  It is the same in EIR, but in much larger scale.  EIR is all about online persistancy, something that sweeps across most aspects of the game.  You're Doctrine unlocks are part of the persistancy, and is something you must work to obtain. 

It is all part of a game system - one that players must work on.  It was designed this way for a reason.  We have tried the alternative and it didn't work, so this is what we have on offer no

[nugnugx]

IMO the grind should be lessend when warmap comes and we can have a real war.

Fighting in war will occupy the people enough.

Hell , in old EIR we had a war w/o warmap , and even when everyone had all doctrines and t4 , people were still playing to win the war


i remember threads like "last stand at berlin"  "reich war machine falls"  "germans landing on british land"  when it was close to the end and one side was winning/loosing , was fun.

[DisposableHero]

If you, personally, don't like persisitency or the levelling of abilities, shouldn't the question be 'why am I playing EiR?' rather than 'why would anyone quit over those things being removed'?

I remember when everyone was given max accounts. Not only was there nothing to work towards (thus removing the very persistency aspect of EiR which is so attractive in the first place), but you end up fighting a constant stream of cheesed up wtflol companies designed to push everything to the max and exploiting whatever gimmicks/imbalanced options are available in the name of 'testing.' And because everyone is doing this, you are constantly bombarded with it in every game. With nothing to work towards or gain from each match other than the satisfaction of playing a strategy RTS - which, if that's what you want, you may as well go back to vCoH. Or compstomp - theres no reason to play (or rather, suffer the gimmick spam).

Whatever balancing advantages might come of it, simply put it is not fun. Sure, I think the grind is a little too much (I had to play 5-6 games on my commando account just to get to level 2), but I'd much rather have a company that I can work at and slowly customise over time as more options become available whilst knowing that everyone else is hampered by the same restrictions sooner or later, than be thrown into the deep end where everyone has everything.

[Two]

When i joined EiR it was to win the war and play this style of gameplay, calling units in.

[Unkn0wn]

Style of gameplay is one thing but the persistent environment and overall company progression is what keeps a lot of people around no doubt.

We have already stated several times we will be adjusting the current system, we want to lessen the grind for the casual players but at the same time it's important we cater to the needs of our hardcore playerbase and give them something to fight for.

Hell , in old EIR we had a war w/o warmap , and even when everyone had all doctrines and t4 , people were still playing to win the war

You're exaggerating this effect, in the old EIR the war was hardly any more 'complex' than it is currently. It did feel a little more persistent, thanks to the way it worked and constant 'news' updates. (Those will also be coming back by the way)

[skaffa]

OK then, since most of you dont want it, just give me free accounts I only ever play a profile for 5 games anyway before i get bored and play something else.

Thats just cuz you want the noob advantages. 

[Two]

Style of gameplay is one thing but the persistent environment and overall company progression is what keeps a lot of people around no doubt.

We have already stated several times we will be adjusting the current system, we want to lessen the grind for the casual players but at the same time it's important we cater to the needs of our hardcore playerbase and give them something to fight for.

Hell , in old EIR we had a war w/o warmap , and even when everyone had all doctrines and t4 , people were still playing to win the war

You're exaggerating this effect, in the old EIR the war was hardly any more 'complex' than it is currently. It did feel a little more persistent, thanks to the way it worked and constant 'news' updates. (Those will also be coming back by the way)

It wasnt more complex, it was simple which is why it was great, the news thing was nice but just seeing the numbers was good.

[Dragon2008]

OK then, since most of you dont want it, just give me free accounts I only ever play a profile for 5 games anyway before i get bored and play something else.

real men play 15 games per day and/or spend 10 hours in launcher

People who play 15 games per day/or spend 10 hours in launcher must not av anything better to do. Im jus hoping that was a joke lol

Some people like to grind and some don't thats the issue with trying to get it right. I don't play that often but when I do I keep switching between my 4 accounts. It gets too boring doing the same thing and playing the same faction all the time.

[tank130]

I remember when everyone was given max accounts. Not only was there nothing to work towards (thus removing the very persistency aspect of EiR which is so attractive in the first place), but you end up fighting a constant stream of cheesed up wtflol companies designed to push everything to the max and exploiting whatever gimmicks/imbalanced options are available in the name of 'testing.' And because everyone is doing this, you are constantly bombarded with it in every game. With nothing to work towards or gain from each match other than the satisfaction of playing a strategy RTS - which, if that's what you want, you may as well go back to vCoH. Or compstomp - theres no reason to play (or rather, suffer the gimmick spam).

I remember when everyone was given max accounts as well. It quickly showed us how fucked up and over powered the docs were. It became a game of gimmicks and no skill. The devs took note and that is why we have a total rework of the Docs.
The problem I see with "The Grind" is it separates new accounts from  old accounts by too wide of a margin.

For example:
You have two high level players with equal skills. One has a maxed account, the other a new account. More than likely the maxed account is going to win because of powerful doctrines. Now keeping in mind we are using an example of EQUALLY SKILLED players. So the game becomes about goofy add ons instead of Strategy and skills.

Player Base:
I am going to assume the Devs & especially EiRMoD would love to see our player base expanded. The more casual and inviting this game becomes, the more people will probably join ( IMHO ). I am not saying make it so easy it just becomes VCoH, but not an Elitist environment either. If the only way you can get a fairly decent equal match is by playing 30 games a week to get your docs, then most people will loose interest.
Just trying to get 2 games a day is a challenge for most because it takes for ever to get a game most nights. But that would change if the player base was increased.

The other option would be to continue the way it is. There are a number of players here who play this game like their lives depend on it. They max out accounts quickly and then just pretty much stomp everybody because.....well what else are ya going to do now that you are maxed. So as time goes by and everybody has a maxed acct. we  will need to reset or it just gets boring and people leave. ( As has happened with the last max acct period )

I think the devs are on the right track by trying to have the docs give some abilities, but not so freaken over fantasy powered. There should be a slight balance difference between a new acct and a maxed acct, but it should still be a battle of strategy and skills versus equal opponents, rather than who has the most Doc gimmicks.

I have been with this Mod for a long time now. Not from day one, but longer than most and less than some. I have never claimed to be a great player. Some days I am average, most days I suck. But to be honest, I am starting to get bored with the game. I have a life, therefore I can not play this game everyday for 8 hours like some do here. I get tired of having to play sooooo many games just to get my docs so I can have a remote chance of an equal game. I like the persistence, I like trying to save my core units; but the endless bullshit of over powered docs, smurf accts, and gimmick companies just gets to be.....well.. childish and simple.
I would love to see this mod take a direction centered more around skill and strategy and less about docs. I would like to see veterancy become more important than docs. To me, that gives more of a persistence feel. Play wisely and your troops live and gain experience. But it must be balanced verterancy, not massive unbalance between new accts and older acct. Just enough to say "Hey, these guys have been around for awhile. Be careful".

A game that has less of a power difference between new and old players will draw more people. A game with a large player base is a game I would invest $ in.

[Mgallun74]

I remember when everyone was given max accounts. Not only was there nothing to work towards (thus removing the very persistency aspect of EiR which is so attractive in the first place), but you end up fighting a constant stream of cheesed up wtflol companies designed to push everything to the max and exploiting whatever gimmicks/imbalanced options are available in the name of 'testing.' And because everyone is doing this, you are constantly bombarded with it in every game. With nothing to work towards or gain from each match other than the satisfaction of playing a strategy RTS - which, if that's what you want, you may as well go back to vCoH. Or compstomp - theres no reason to play (or rather, suffer the gimmick spam).

I remember when everyone was given max accounts as well. It quickly showed us how fucked up and over powered the docs were. It became a game of gimmicks and no skill. The devs took note and that is why we have a total rework of the Docs.
The problem I see with "The Grind" is it separates new accounts from  old accounts by too wide of a margin.

For example:
You have two high level players with equal skills. One has a maxed account, the other a new account. More than likely the maxed account is going to win because of powerful doctrines. Now keeping in mind we are using an example of EQUALLY SKILLED players. So the game becomes about goofy add ons instead of Strategy and skills.

Player Base:
I am going to assume the Devs & especially EiRMoD would love to see our player base expanded. The more casual and inviting this game becomes, the more people will probably join ( IMHO ). I am not saying make it so easy it just becomes VCoH, but not an Elitist environment either. If the only way you can get a fairly decent equal match is by playing 30 games a week to get your docs, then most people will loose interest.
Just trying to get 2 games a day is a challenge for most because it takes for ever to get a game most nights. But that would change if the player base was increased.

The other option would be to continue the way it is. There are a number of players here who play this game like their lives depend on it. They max out accounts quickly and then just pretty much stomp everybody because.....well what else are ya going to do now that you are maxed. So as time goes by and everybody has a maxed acct. we  will need to reset or it just gets boring and people leave. ( As has happened with the last max acct period )

I think the devs are on the right track by trying to have the docs give some abilities, but not so freaken over fantasy powered. There should be a slight balance difference between a new acct and a maxed acct, but it should still be a battle of strategy and skills versus equal opponents, rather than who has the most Doc gimmicks.

I have been with this Mod for a long time now. Not from day one, but longer than most and less than some. I have never claimed to be a great player. Some days I am average, most days I suck. But to be honest, I am starting to get bored with the game. I have a life, therefore I can not play this game everyday for 8 hours like some do here. I get tired of having to play sooooo many games just to get my docs so I can have a remote chance of an equal game. I like the persistence, I like trying to save my core units; but the endless bullshit of over powered docs, smurf accts, and gimmick companies just gets to be.....well.. childish and simple.
I would love to see this mod take a direction centered more around skill and strategy and less about docs. I would like to see veterancy become more important than docs. To me, that gives more of a persistence feel. Play wisely and your troops live and gain experience. But it must be balanced verterancy, not massive unbalance between new accts and older acct. Just enough to say "Hey, these guys have been around for awhile. Be careful".

A game that has less of a power difference between new and old players will draw more people. A game with a large player base is a game I would invest $ in.

kinda sounds like OMG maybe?

[Groundfire]

Hang on, lets back track tank, for you make a valid point and I wish to discuss this with you sir.

first off, just want to state something about your example. Out of 2 equally skilled players, the one with the developed company is the one that's going to win. This is the framework we have to work in. No game design change or implementation will make players play to your definition of "strategy and skill", and this is mainly because strategy and skill extend their reach far beyond the actual game and is completely integrated into the launcher and the doctrines and the metagame of Europe in Ruins.

The BEST players master this outside of the game and I feel that you do not take this into account into your analysis.

If we are to re-examine your example, of the 2 players of equal skill "in game", were they to have equal level companies, the one who recognizes the trend of the meta game and properly makes his company to counter such meta game and doctrine abilities is gonna win.

When you see spam and "gimmicky shit" that may not conform to your standards of what balanced companies consist of, I look at the same thing and see "well someone's trying to get innovative by focusing their company in a specific way".

Is this not just a case of of one player applying more aspects of EIR strategy to give himself an advantage? Adapting a particular company build to fit within the confines of the metagame as it exists at that moment?

Ex. Everyone is spamming volks with assault. They blow apart your MGs. To adapt, you lose the MGs, and load up on light vehicles, and in particular Quads because they preform the same role as a stationary machinegun would, but it's immune to assault.

In game strategy and skill only amplifies/mitigates the effectiveness of meta game strategy, which is what you would like to see, but no game design change will never give us.

I now move to the gap you describe between high level companies and new companies. Doctrines are so reduced in power now that they essentially do not provide the overwhelming advantage you think they do until you reach your T4. High level companies have these doctrines and newer ones dont. Until that "player that has no life" gets his T3s and t4s, doctrines do not give him the edge that you think it does, and this concept of what seems to be "unfair company disparity" can be mostly attributed to that player understanding what comprises of the EIR metagame, and a little bit attributed to accumulated vet/doctrines. At which point, it's player's discretion on who they play and who they dodge. (Which we all know quite a few that will take the easy stomp for vet) This is not company disparity through doctrines, but skill disparity through players and a small player base we have.

There is no way to change this through game design until everyone has to run off Europe in Ruins off of 1 relic profile or 1 IP and we can completely distinguish who is truly a noob, who is smurfing, and who are the stompers/vets.

Instead of suggesting to get rid of doctrines or to nerf them till they hold no significance, you should be putting forth launcher ideas like noob segregation or something. Because we all know those jerks who curb stomp 1st game noobs b/c it's easy vet. If everyone had to use 1 IP or Relic profile, we could have a fenced off area of the launcher for noobs to stay and play and get used to everything before they jump into the real war and the big dogs. IPs that have been here forever on the fourm will immediatly put into the real war.

Removing doctrines would not premote better strategy and skill at the level you intend at all but instead, completely bork our availablity system and PP system. Then you have what we have when they gave everyone lvl8 companies. Stable Metagame was completely thrown out of wack, and everyone tried everything and changed their strategies every game because they could, so you had those unprepared players getting railroaded by a company build that they were not ready for. Unskilled players vs. skilled players only added to this fuck up; as such, doctrines are a good thing because it's just another spam barrier.

Now, you must also take into account that EIRR is not a finished product. Im sure when everything is finalized, the war is supposed to end every 4 weeks, then we get that reset to equalize the companies again, thus equalizing the matches for a set time in terms of company level.

Gah, ive rambled so long i forgot the direction I was taking this post. Basically, what you want cannot be done until we get a larger player base to minimized what is essentially skilled player dominance. No changing to the system is going to change that. Doctrine or no doctrine, vet or no vet, your going to have players who understand all aspects of this game better and they will exploit the weakness in your own company by maximizing the effectiveness of their own. (gimmick builds and a little foresight coupled with innate knowledge of the metagame)

Getting rid of doctrines will only make things worse, tbh.

[skaffa]

Before doctrines were put in the game was also great to play, and there was no problems with lvl differences other than resource advantages. (and possibly some unlocks of the lower area doctrine stuff)

Perhaps have in some way, in a gamemode maybe, that the lower unlocks (where you can spend 8 points on, the T1T2T3's) are still available, and remove the entire upper Doctrine abilities (T1T2T3T4's). Basically like it was before the first doctrine got put in not so long ago.

Then you can just play with your Howtizer, Jagd, Storms, Churchills, Rangers etc. and without the powerfull T4's.

[Unkn0wn]

We are reworking the doctrines with the intention of making their impact a lot less powerful on the game overall. While we've partly met that goal with the ongoing rework it's not unlikely that there will still be some toning down of %s on some abilities in the future. That's only half of the job though.

The difficulty with doctrines really is that, especially at the highest tiers, their effects have to be noticeable, else people won't bother, but they can't be too powerful either because then it ends up giving the player too big of an advantage. (In comparison to other T4s, etc)

There's two real solutions to the problem at hand in this discussion, either you eliminate the games played disparity or you eliminate powerful doctrine abilities. Currently we're in a situation where neither has really been done, a new player has a major disadvantage when facing off against an experienced player because of doctrines and he still has significant amounts of games (even with the current faster XP & higher pps for newbs) to  go before he gets enough doctrine abilities to put him on-level with his opponents.

Just remember that this is a project in development, we intend on getting somewhere but it's not easy getting there. The current system is lackluster in many ways because it was never our 'end goal'. The only thing that I can ask here is that you bear with us while we work towards that goal.

For now, we could probably look into bringing back an XP/PP bonus based on how long the war has been running for like in the old EIR.

[Hasek10]

I would like to throw my vote in for Tier 4 abilities to be chosen off the bat as a sort of further company specialization, as unlike any other tier, they affect the way your company is built moreso than anything in the prior tiers. I don't see any reason to reverse the unlock order of any other tiers though, as people who pick t4s that improve units they haven't unlocked yet should realize they are making a slightly longer-term investment in there company. Also, this could lead to a classification of T4s and Companies in general as "Early Game" and "Late Game" companies. That is, where certain companies have T4s that give blanket bonuses and are effective at all stages of the war (Defensive Wehr springs to mind immediately), while others will mature to full potency later on in the war. (Terror, Armor, Tank Hunters, Engineers for instance).

While people might say that there is still some potential imbalance in the case of T1,T2, T3 abilities being unfair, I believe that with the duration of wars as they are now and are planned to be, Unlocking up to T3 abilities still provides an incentive to play more, while leveling the field due to giving noobs what are now considered to be "WTFBBQ 1337 Hax".

I know I've seen a post somewhat like this before that suggested a complete reversal of unlock orders, but I think my suggestion is far more modest, and I would say logical as well.

[tank130]

We are reworking the doctrines with the intention of making their impact a lot less powerful on the game overall. While we've partly met that goal with the ongoing rework it's not unlikely that there will still be some toning down of %s on some abilities in the future. That's only half of the job though.

The difficulty with doctrines really is that, especially at the highest tiers, their effects have to be noticeable, else people won't bother, but they can't be too powerful either because then it ends up giving the player too big of an advantage. (In comparison to other T4s, etc)

There's two real solutions to the problem at hand in this discussion, either you eliminate the games played disparity or you eliminate powerful doctrine abilities. Currently we're in a situation where neither has really been done, a new player has a major disadvantage when facing off against an experienced player because of doctrines and he still has significant amounts of games (even with the current faster XP & higher pps for newbs) to  go before he gets enough doctrine abilities to put him on-level with his opponents.

Just remember that this is a project in development, we intend on getting somewhere but it's not easy getting there. The current system is lackluster in many ways because it was never our 'end goal'. The only thing that I can ask here is that you bear with us while we work towards that goal.

For now, we could probably look into bringing back an XP/PP bonus based on how long the war has been running for like in the old EIR.

Now this is exactly the kind of response I had hoped for. In my previous comments I had mentioned "the Devs have taken note and changed the doctrines" Sounds like you really have taken note and are making even more changes. I applaud the direction you guys are taking.

Groundfire: with respect, I disagree with your comments.

This game was more enjoyable and balanced when there were no Doctrines; just before the doctrines came back. There was very little bitching in the forums and almost no balance threads. When max accounts came in, there was an influx of games, then it died. Doctrines were removed and it stayed pretty quiet until the docs came back. There was a large influx when docs came back, but now it has tapered off again.
Now we have thread after thread of balance complaints and bugged units. I realize this will be corrected with time, but it needs to be corrected the way unknown has stated above. A boost to make it worth while, but not unbalanced and over powering of newer acct.

If we are to re-examine your example, of the 2 players of equal skill "in game", were they to have equal level companies, the one who recognizes the trend of the meta game and properly makes his company to counter such meta game and doctrine abilities is gonna win.

When you see spam and "gimmicky shit" that may not conform to your standards of what balanced companies consist of, I look at the same thing and see "well someone's trying to get innovative by focusing their company in a specific way".

Is this not just a case of of one player applying more aspects of EIR strategy to give himself an advantage? Adapting a particular company build to fit within the confines of the metagame as it exists at that moment?

I think you have a valid point here in regards to strategy. Neither player needs doctrine abilities to do this or to create a counter. This is just part of the game and the strategy needed to prevail. Doctrines do not need to be part of this equation to make it fun or challenging.
Some may argue that it makes it more fun or challenging. Perhaps, but then when everybody has all the docs, are we going to add even more docs to make it even more fun...and on and on...etc?

I now move to the gap you describe between high level companies and new companies. Doctrines are so reduced in power now that they essentially do not provide the overwhelming advantage you think they do until you reach your T4. High level companies have these doctrines and newer ones dont. Until that "player that has no life" gets his T3s and t4s, doctrines do not give him the edge that you think it does, and this concept of what seems to be "unfair company disparity" can be mostly attributed to that player understanding what comprises of the EIR metagame, and a little bit attributed to accumulated vet/doctrines. At which point, it's player's discretion on who they play and who they dodge. (Which we all know quite a few that will take the easy stomp for vet) This is not company disparity through doctrines, but skill disparity through players and a small player base we have.

I agree that most of the current doc abilities do not give a big advantage. This is why I applaud the direction Unkown says they are trying to take the docs. It's a little bit of a buff, but does not create a big gap between new and old accounts.

However, as you have stated, not much changes until the T4. This IMHO is what will, and is, creating the biggest Gap. It takes a shit load of games to get your T4.  An advantage that EJ'S (EiRR Junkies ) gain at an incredible rate. In most cases, it is a BIG buff and gives a definite advantage to EJ accounts quickly. But what I am really trying to say is, why do we need suck a big gap. It just alienates newer players and reduces the rate at which the player base grows.

There were no docs when I came here, but there were resource advantages. There was a steep learning curve, but I just needed to L2P to win, I didn't need to have "X" amount of games to get special fantasy abilities. I did get out attritioned because of resource bonuses, but it didn't take very long to get those.

My point: I do not want to get rid of doctrines. I think it's cool and something to work towards. I think it is even more important to ensure they are kept to a minimum bonus. It should be a way of defining your company, giving you freedom of expression let's say, but should not create a big gap between a newer account and an old account.
Vet on the other hand is a little different. You gain vet mostly by playing smartly. The more games you play will definitely help, but your skill is more important. But like doctrines, it needs to be moderate enough not to create a giant gap between new and old accounts.

Mgallun74:

I played about 4 games at OMG. At the time they had no Docs and some really big balance issues. I have no idea what it's like there now, so I really can't say if your statement is true or not.

[shockcoil]

How come no one ever complained about this in old EIR? Heck doctrines were WAY more powerful back then too. Because we didn't have to rank up at all, just save up CPs. That and everyone started with enough CPs to get a T4 by the end of the war. IMO its the whole ranking up thing that is just stupid and unnecessary.

EDIT: So yeah bring back free CPs for every day of the war at the very least. No need to make doctrines weaker, that just makes the game boring. The better solution would be to make doctrines more readily available.

[NightRain]

How come no one every complained about this in old EIR? Because we didn't have to rank up at all, just save up CPs. That and everyone started with enough CPs to get a T4 by the end of the war. IMO its the whole ranking up thing that is just stupid and unnecessary.

The whole ranking thing doesn't bother stackers and players who constantly win as they rank up very fast. 44 XP with a account that has few games under its belt. Nearly 2 of those and you are one level higher...

[Unkn0wn]

Great post tank.

[Phil]

My system was waaaaaay cooler, but it got laughed at =(