doctrine stats

[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

[tank130]

TBH 90% of the QQ about balance in this community would be resolved with a big dose of learn to play.

Here's just two examples:

Axis QQ about fire-up. We change it and it fucks the meta game
Allies QQ about Shrek storms. We change it and it fucks the meta game.

I could go on and on ....but I really cba

[Hicks58]

I take what exists, I tune the numbers or pull things out as necessary if it's too skewed to be adjusted in it's form. In very rare cases I'll change the mechanics of how a unit or ability works but only to make it fit in with the current environment.

It's down to the SDT if they want new shit being thrown in.

You saw what happened with the Pershing, Tiger, Engineers and Pioneers. Me and creativity do not mix, I stick to what I do best and that's adjusting what is already there.

If you're not satisfied with the rate of full new content coming out, then the two options are to take it up with the main SDT or find somebody who is both creative and competent enough to contribute.

[Shabtajus]

thats what i am saying tank, u will never find that golden center in balance where every1 will be happy. Any changes ya made over all these years were led by river of QQ. So fuck it, make game fun again, let all QQ flow. Ya will win in this situation by bringing back players in launcher

[tank130]

than tell me who's job it is? Than i gotta ask also what BT does? How can you balance system if u cant re-create it? How can you say ''i fight for balance in eirr'' if ya cant work on thing that causes main balance problems - doctrines. So i dont get it hicks ya comment saying ''Not one point anywhere says that I make new shit''  isn't that you who created new meta for game? Its so different from what we had before

Shab, don't be a complete idiot, try thinking for a few minutes before you post........

Hicks is not going to redesign an entirely new doctrine system, it's not his job.
His job is to take the in place game design and make changes to help balance it. What looks good on paper is not always good in play.

Theoretically a moron could say he needs to build a whole new doctrine system for it to be balanced, but that would be the words of a moron.........

Absolutely no one on the dev team is interested in building an entirely new doctrine system. However, if someone in this community would like to redesign all factions, all tiers, equally balanced, then we would support you 100% in that.

[Shabtajus]

we had so much cool shit back in the days like epic 88s, hordes of volks, crazy assault spam AB, old assault nades and list goes on and on. Ya have all codes dont ya? Take a look at past decisions maybe some of em shoulda come back to game?

[aeroblade56]

skafa for design.

[XIIcorps]

we had so much cool shit back in the days like epic 88s, hordes of volks, crazy assault spam AB, old assault nades and list goes on and on. Ya have all codes dont ya? Take a look at past decisions maybe some of em shoulda come back to game?

miss that 88mm 3 round arty

[EIRRMod]

I actually agree, we have watered down the experience a bit too much, and balanced on sensible things (thats not a dig) rather than balance by batshit vs batshit crazy abilities (which, I have to admit, was fun - but hard as fuck to balance).

You will be seeing quite a few drastic changes in a while - but we really need our normal player-base to get up to scratch tbh.

[ick312]

I actually agree, we have watered down the experience a bit too much, and balanced on sensible things (thats not a dig) rather than balance by batshit vs batshit crazy abilities (which, I have to admit, was fun - but hard as fuck to balance).

You will be seeing quite a few drastic changes in a while - but we really need our normal player-base to get up to scratch tbh.

most honest selfrefelection i have ever read in this forum.

community will give you thousands of crazy ideas, what could be in for the docs. it neither means that u have to take the suggested stats nor that you have to add the idea. the final design stays in your hand! its just brainstorming with the community and you pick the best ideas out! BUT this requires a certain open mindness of certain dev members and professnional manners. (also a certain tolerance to idea givers and NOT to trolls)

ps: it seems that i was wrong. Devs have changed. You guys care now about the mood in the community. ah and unlocking the t2s is only for few docs relevant (and many of those good t2 are actually t3s)

[GrayWolf]

(and many of those good t3 are actually t2s)

Fxd

[XIIcorps]

No, it isn't.

My job is balance. Not one point anywhere says that I make new shit.

With the current doctrine layout, I wouldn't even want to try even if it WAS my job. 36 Different T4's and 36 different combinations of dual T3's? You'd want me to make new doctrines for that clusterfuck?

Yeah. I'll get right on that.

Id say Developer or the title Dev is open to interpretation.

[NightRain]

If certain devs wash their hands from redesigning all the doctrines, I'd say let the community do a mesh with their own desires and designs and throw them out for people to oogle at. One can pick good ideas from those doctrines like berries from a berry bush to build and balance new doctrines.

Motivation? Give out simple rewards. It is free either way and costs nothing.

[Hicks58]

I've never stopped anybody from putting forward their own suggestions for doctrines.

The only "Condition" I've put to it, is that people need to be looking at tuning what is there, or need to be prepared to redesign ALL 12 doctrines at once. This is because staggered design, doing a couple of doctrines at once always ends nothing short of horrible due to the inevitable changes in design style that comes about from lessons learned along the way.

That then leads to "Catching up" the ones that didn't get the lessons learned, then those get a bit too far ahead of the newer ones... Yeah, turns into a cluster fuck real fast.

With the ridiculous amount of content present in the current doctrines, you'd need a solid ground work for ALL of it to get anywhere. Maybe they DID have a solid framework at the beginning, but god knows how many staff changes later and who knows what the original plan was.

If the entire community wants to pool together to put together the doctrines framework, be my guest. You don't even need to be too specific on the numbers involved because I can crunch those all day. It's creativity that I lack and I'll not deny it.

Oh, and there'd only be two real restrictions for the doctrines. First is range buffs because they fuck over all manner of balance, and second are unit damage buffs. Unit damage buffs are something that should be applied very, VERY sparingly and only really show up at vet 3 for good reason. For example, +1 damage on the Bren was the difference between it being shit and being alright.

[tank130]

If certain devs wash their hands from redesigning all the doctrines, I'd say let the community do a mesh with their own desires and designs and throw them out for people to oogle at.

We have done this on 3 occasions in the past 4 years. Each time community members would post 1 or 2 doctrine designs each and that was it. None of them balanced to each other because they were all designed individually and not collectively.

The other thing that happens is we get ideas for T3 & t4, but nothing for T1 & T2, so once again the information is pretty much useless with out someone designing it all together.

Hicks is 100% correct. You must either tweak the existing doctrines, or redesign all 12 doctrines at once.
The whole reason we have shitty doctrines now is because they have been redesigned in pieces and bit & bobs.

We have always been 100% open to community input for doctrine design. But if you just hand us one that is not designed to work with the others, then it is pretty much useless.

[aeroblade56]

what is balanced though?.

Ive heard a mixed input of "we would like to see doctrines buff specific units well"

and "Little buffs across the board"

So which of these doctrines we currently have is the closest thing to being balanced?. and then there is that while think which niko suggested where you pick and choose your Unlocks and buffs. do we balance off that or the current system?.

also knowing what the dev team can and cannot do in a timely manor is another thing. niko says as long as there isn't anyscar involved it would be fairly simple.

[Hicks58]

Balanced is where everything is as viable or cost effective as the alternatives presented.

It doesn't matter how powerful or subtle they are. It matters that taking HVAP is just as worthwhile as taking USK or Mobile Warfare.

That's where the massive problem with balance comes from. How the fuck do you make 72 different end game options all equally viable and worth taking?

Typically speaking, to get something that complex to be balanced, it has to be done from the ground up with a solid structure. With a plan.

[nikomas]

I don't think I've said that it's simple as long as there is no scar.

[PonySlaystation]

I think that you should look into the possibility of extending unlocks to have more abilities and upgrades and reducing the amount of permanent buffs. Permanent buffs are a hassle to balance and offer little gameplay ingenuity other than x units are stronger than y units.

[tank130]

Alrighty....... lets clear up some misinformation and misunderstandings.


First of all, any changes to doctrines must be done with the exact same tree system we currently have. Any change to the current format would require massive work to the launcher - that is not happening. We have already decided we are NOT spending resources on the current launcher.

The next patch will have some minor admin changes to the launcher and some SP changes, but that's it.

It doesn't matter how powerful or subtle they are. It matters that taking HVAP is just as worthwhile as taking USK or Mobile Warfare.

Hicks is 90% correct with this statement. However, you must keep in mind that doctrines are free. They have no associated resource costs, so the strength of that ability needs to take that into account.

niko says as long as there isn't any scar involved it would be fairly simple.

Not really correct.
It would be very difficult for us to give you a complete list of shit we can't do. Sometimes Nikomas doesn't know until he tries. For example, we still have no idea why the defensive stukka is buggy.
We have Xeonix on board and he is very experienced with scar, so that opens up some other options as well.

Basically speaking: if you create 12 new doctrines, a few things are going to stump us. If it is just a few things you just need to creat something else that works.




In the very distant future we will have a completely different launcher and a completely different doctrine system. What we do now in regards to doctrines will have absolutely no relation to what we are doing in the future. It will essentially be a different game.

[XIIcorps]

Personally my only gripe with current docs is the numerous "not yet implimented" abilities or buffs.

In the 6 years ive been here, how have we as a community not found alternatives to these?

Surely we could easily impliment alternatives to these not yet implimented items.