I think the multiplier promotes a certain mentality which is not desirable.
I doubt people will be able to value my argument without considering that banner balance might benefit me, but I think banner balance is vital for the clan scene. What is the point of being in a clan if you do not get to play together? Banner balance allows you to practice some good teamplay with your clanmates, which is most of my enjoyment in the game. Now this goes for large clans, but especially for smaller clans. Take DenBitre for example, haven't seen them around much lately, but they were there for a long time, with 3-5 guys, sticking together, making an impact. If you would split those over two teams, there is nothing left for them.
Valour however is a great feature, again, I personally benefit from it. Regardless I think rewarding people who did exceptionally well is excellent. It is extremely frustrating to see your team spread out and die and get no xp for an entire map because of it. With valour, if you do in fact try hard and do well yourself, you get rewarded. What is not to like? I do think though that expanding the valour system to the winning team is rather ridiculous and unnecessary.
So yes, please explain how valour is gamebreaking.
Well, those are solid arguments no doubt if only our clan scene didn't exist of only two or three, afaik, major clans who show up in great numbers, but it would indeed be extremely hurtfull for the "clan scene"(sounds gay lol), not good!(click to show/hide)
you have banner balance in strat as well.
as for the valour... well I think (or maybe rather know) that some/many players intentionally stay back and hide cus they know (its not like they are noobs they very well know this game and how to cope) it will be a round where they will lose. so they run and hide, hope to get enough points from straggler-kills to gain valour. 2-3 players can easily gain valour by doing this. the problem is just that I cant help thinking WHAT IF those players tried to help the rest of the team, getting a ton of kills before they die, resulting in a win? this is just a scenario I see on a daily basis almost once every single map
~Removing banner balance
A good idea, would keep the teams interesting and more or less fair. However it completely removes "Clans" and playing with friends if you cannot play together and are forced to be randomly sided with one team of the other and makes teamplay near impossible.
as for the valour... well I think (or maybe rather know) that some/many players intentionally stay back and hide cus they know (its not like they are noobs they very well know this game and how to cope) it will be a round where they will lose. so they run and hide, hope to get enough points from straggler-kills to gain valour.Actually, the best way to get valour is being in the center of clusterfuck and contributing a lot to your team's victory.
Well, those are solid arguments no doubt if only our clan scene didn't exist of only two or three, afaik, major clans
Well, those are solid arguments no doubt if only our clan scene didn't exist of only two or three, afaik, major clans who show up in great numbers, but it would indeed be extremely hurtfull for the "clan scene"(sounds gay lol), not good!I think you are not giving SB and Druzhina the credit they deserve. It is especially those clans that show in smaller numbers that really need banner balance to be able to do any mentionable teamplay at all.
problem is you can ALSO get it without contributing, just by good teamwork amongst 2-3 players. I know this cus Ive seen it happen on my screen loads of times, you have too be honest :)How is this not contributing? Kills don't mean shit, get it through your head. Score might not be perfect, but it is a whole lot better than kills.
How is this not contributing? Kills don't mean shit, get it through your head. Score might not be perfect, but it is a whole lot better than kills.
You need to introduce a nice xp system though if you intend to remove multi system, + I want more xp due to gen bonus. That's why I retired and many other people did!
I don't like the current xp/gold system (as it encourages unbalanced teams), and I don't like the banner balance because we're playing in public servers, clans shouldn't be able to pubstomp a server with the help from the balance system.
That being said, you can't have a fixed xp/gold (IMO) because what would be the incentive for people to put forth an effort into winning?
Valour: The two sources of points (thus valour) are dealing damage and proximity bonus. Thus staying alive while still fighting is the most important thing imo.
If you do what you mention, and hide and only come out in the end, you do not get the proximity, and the enemies you will find will be low hp, so you will get very little points and it is very very hard to get valour.
The reason you may find that some people get it and are last alive is probably because they have been fighting and surviving, and getting points most of the round.
I would love to see heirlooms removed as I barely play with them, I personally find them game breaking, but I see the necesity(or how you spell it) of them, if you'd like to call it that, it offers a goal, rather then only grinding for xp and gold, what else to spend the gold gained in-game?
~Heirloom removal
I can see what you mean, it can be a real pain to fight full loomed players and it can be unfair.
However most of us do have atleast a few looms, but still looms are the only way to upgrade and "customize" weaponry and equipment which makes you feel a little more powerful and lets us all play with our favorite gear.
(It also makes sense, such as older wealthier and more experienced knights have tempered and upgraded equipment)
In addition I'd like to mention that for some time, there was a second siege server with banner balance off (it was EU_5 IIRC), and it was always empty. It seems most people are okay with clan stacking (I'm not in a clan, and I was also of the opinion that there should be a server with BB off, before I saw that only very few really care).The answer to this is simple.. Rather bb then the population more split up. :|
The answer to this is simple.. Rather bb then the population more split up. :|
I think you are not giving SB and Druzhina the credit they deserve. It is especially those clans that show in smaller numbers that really need banner balance to be able to do any mentionable teamplay at all.I didn't think of it myself but I think that it would indeed destroy the clan scene, afterall why gather together in great numbers if you will not actually be playing together, which is essentially what its all about.
+1!!! BUT however I think many new players and casual players cba playing due to the stomping sponsored by BB® = population decrease (this may sound like im blaming clans/players but I don't they simply use the features the game offers)
I used to play EU1 then I got an arrow and banner balance to the knee. :P
well...I wish I was there but I dont know how it was like :( I dont know what the touchto the succes back then was but for that I need to experience it myself.
I know theres both pros and cons and tbh I don't know how to fix it. I just think this should at least be looked at on occasion cus when majority of maps is won 4-1 or 4-0, something is wrong in the land of crpg as I see it
all I want is just the epic massive fights like back in the day and I just think that mainly BB is to blame for the population decrease ;/
FFS Vidar, now again?
are your tears not dried yet?
I was testing this theory about banner balance of Vidar, I, Phase, tried with a few days without Merc banner, which are the most banner stacking clan. And my conclusion is, if you are good enough banner balance doesn't matter. I played without mercs and still i achived multiplier like normal.
When you say "i want challenge" because you didn't like banner balance in nord anyway, im just saying. You vs banner stacking mercs = alot of challenge. So your wish ave been fulfill, the fact that you want to remove banner balance is because you dont have anyone you want to play with, and since nord is inactive you even more want the banner balance to get removed
And about the looms if you say everyone got them, why remove? why not let them stay.
Fuck you Vidar! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
You are implying that the entire playerbase must play atleast 5 hrs a day and have the skills of a seasoned (over say 2k hrs) player? ^^
Also, theres only a limited amount of valour :P
FFS Vidar, now again?
are your tears not dried yet?
I was testing this theory about banner balance of Vidar, I, Phase, tried with a few days without Merc banner, which are the most banner stacking clan. And my conclusion is, if you are good enough banner balance doesn't matter. I played without mercs and still i achived multiplier like normal.
When you say "i want challenge" because you didn't like banner balance in nord anyway, im just saying. You vs banner stacking mercs = alot of challenge. So your wish ave been fulfill, the fact that you want to remove banner balance is because you dont have anyone you want to play with, and since nord is inactive you even more want the banner balance to get removed
And about the looms if you say everyone got them, why remove? why not let them stay.
Fuck you Vidar! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
so you say its a challenge to be raped by 10 mercs cus they primary you on their TS? lol my friend :)
so you say its a challenge to be raped by 10 mercs cus they primary you on their TS? lol my friend :)
I don't think you understand how big advantage it is to be 10-20 ppl on the same TS, working as a team. I know the advantage, ive played eve for 10 years haha :D
you just gave me a perfect reason NOT to drop on the TS :lol:
Afaik mercs usually team up on the weekends, which alot of clans do, I personally rarely see them team up on workdays, allthough I only play in the evening, and we are not pointing fingers Phase, you act like we insulted mercs or something. :lol:
Thats because me and Vidar is facerolling eu1 with our danish, and we mostly refer to mercs. Insult mercs if you want. I do it myself most of the times, beside look at my other replies "mercs have no teamplay, bullshitting teamspeak" do i sound like one which are mad at people insultining mercs? im gonna cut u jbo!
Isn't Vidar a shielder? :P and lol, misunderstood. :lol:
Vidar is like the angry bully at school who starts to complain about homework getting too difficult. :-*
You make one major mistake, you assume that we do tactics and stuff when we sit together in ts, we leave this part to byzants, we are just an angry mob when we play with many ppl online ^^Needs more pitchforks tho ashwood pikes too OP
The problems with the multiplier system are countless and widely accepted, I won't cover that.
Banner balance only doesn't work because it makes the existing weaknesses of the autobalancer more apparent. The concept of banner balance isn't a problem, it's just that the current autobalancer isn't working very well and people attribute that to clan stacking while a better balancer would put more people in the other team to make up for a clanstack.
The problems with the multiplier system are countless and widely accepted, I won't cover that.
Banner balance only doesn't work because it makes the existing weaknesses of the autobalancer more apparent. The concept of banner balance isn't a problem, it's just that the current autobalancer isn't working very well and people attribute that to clan stacking while a better balancer would put more people in the other team to make up for a clanstack.
oh my oh my if it isn't the infamous Bjord what have you been doing I haven't seen you online for quite a while?
edit: oh you refuse to answer my question, sadface :C but pls quit the trolling too then. tnx
The problems with the multiplier system are countless and widely accepted, I won't cover that.This, maybe the fact that there are multiple people from one clan can be taken into account by the balancer. If a banner stack is rolling a server, the balance should be able to go as far as putting 40 people on one team and 50 on the other. A banner stack can be balanced out perfectly. I think balance by win/loss ratio of individual players creates the best balance. Win/loss ratio takes everything into account and evening this out should provide good opportunities to both teams.
Banner balance only doesn't work because it makes the existing weaknesses of the autobalancer more apparent. The concept of banner balance isn't a problem, it's just that the current autobalancer isn't working very well and people attribute that to clan stacking while a better balancer would put more people in the other team to make up for a clanstack.
Hmm
If only it could be changed to something, maybe similar to this?
First round: No balances
Second round: Banner balance and random balancing
Third round and up: Analyze last round and swap players to balance teams by using instead of score (since we all have good and bad moments) using class statistics.
E.g. One team has a lot of players with high powerstrike and many players with high crossbow wpf, second team has many players with agility builds and throwing. Teams are then switched so that there will be a fairly even balance of character builds on each team.
next time im going to do a post, ill tell joker and he will do it for me. :D great post.
Banner Balance:
- Its needed so that clans can play together. Strat is not a valid alternative for everybody as it requires far more effort than a lot of players can manage. just look at how many clans don't play strat at all.
- It does not need to be so high. I think its capped at 40% of your teams levels atm and that is just too much. 30% or even 25% would be much better and leave more room for multiple clans on each team.
Multipliers:
- Are needed to focus the team on an objective. Conquest mode is merely changing the objective, it doesn't give any incentive to go for the objective on its own
- However there are better systems that need investigating and testing in cRPG so that the best can be picked for M:BG
- Personally I would like to test multipliers only effecting XP gain with gold a static time based gain (and possibly a smaller win bonus)
- Another alternatice would be to cap the multiplier at x2 but double the base gain. The average multiplier would go up slightly whilst the max multiplier would decrease
Valour:
- Is a massive pile of crap. It rewards the best players by allowing them to use more expensive gear on average thereby increasing the gap between them and everybody else even further.
- Valour should at least be changed to effect XP only or even better it should be removed. Good players do not need a reward.
Looms:
- Are nice but i'm glad M:BG will be using a trade off system rather than the current improvement system.
- Would be interesting to test such a system in cRPG. We already have 6+ extra versions of every weapon so why not turn that into a simple speed vs damage trade off system
Upkeep:
- needs changing as it encourages leeching too much. People want to make money so use peasant gear but why even bother fighting if you are stuck with peasant gear.
- the simple change would be to reduce upkeep on all items by ~250 gold. Then low tier and some mid tier items become free to use whilst only the higher tier gear has upkeep.
Characters (whilst i'm at it):
- need adjusting to reduce the gap between low and high level players
- starting all chars at 18/18 and then halving all the passive stat gains would work best for me. So an 21/21 char (gaining 21HP) becomes a 36/36 char (gaining 18HP) staying roughly the same. Skills would require 6 attribute points per level not 3 to again re-balance. So 21/21 with 7 points in IF becomes 36/36 with 6 points in IF also staying roughly the same. The main difference is that half the passive attribute gain is present at level 1.
- This also reduces the impact of extreme builds and high level chars on the game slightly. 33/3 with 30HP gained becomes 48/18 with 24HP gained
I think a fixed percentage is too unflexible. If there is only one clan with several players on, the banner balance should be 0%. In any other case the smallest group of clan players decides. The "team balance value" for clan groups should be exponential, and if it already is, the value growth has to be raised. Five clan players can very well equal twelve random players. You want to play together? Fine. But single players also have a right on fun. So deal with a huge crowd as enemies if you think you need teamspeak to beat a few pubs.
1st: Conquest mode is merely changing the objective and doesn't give any incentive to go for the objective? What the heck? How can you state something like that without even bothering to explain it? Because, you know, the invention of the car did not raise the mobility of the people. World war 2 never happened. I can fly.
The trade off system would require the double amount of looms, as you would have two directions to go, either the "raise speed" or "raise dmg" direction. And for every additional trade off pair added you have six more weapons added. So I doubt they will implement it, although I basically agree. P.S.: You probably broke the rules of NDA with your loom statement :P
I think a simple reduction won't help much, as it will only raise the people's expectations towards the gear they will be able to afford, and they will leech the same way, just to be able to wear slightly better equipment than before. That fucking, incredibly idiotic upkeep system has simply to go. Replace it with a system where the soft level cap is raised a bit, but you must spend skill points to be able to wear more expensive gear. Either have a good character with poor gear, a character with great gear but poor skills, or a character with decent skills and decent gear. No time limit on your favourite expensive gear, no "losing" something in a game (games ALWAYS work with rewards as motivation, and not with missing punishment :rolleyes: ), and no effectivity difference between different characters of the same level but with different gold budgets. And finally the value of some items will REALLY work as a restriction, in difference to now where you need to sell a loom point on the market and be able to wear the most expensive gear for a really long time. The system is so flawed, I could go on for hours about it.
I never experienced the level cap as a problem. You can get level 20+ quickly, and then you can already contribute something. The whole motivation to level your character up comes from the level differences and the advantages they bring. Reducing it would lower the incentive to work towards a certain goal. For some people, who also enjoy "Counter Strike" like games, this sounds nice. But I think most people here on cRPG prefer a certain extend of grind, and nothing is more motivating than grind with a noticeable purpose.
If anything, I would be for a slight increase of the level cap, to something between 33 and 36.
Multipliers:
- Are needed to focus the team on an objective. Conquest mode is merely changing the objective, it doesn't give any incentive to go for the objective on its own
- However there are better systems that need investigating and testing in cRPG so that the best can be picked for :wink:
- Personally I would like to test multipliers only effecting XP gain with gold a static time based gain (and possibly a smaller win bonus)
- Another alternatice would be to cap the multiplier at x2 but double the base gain. The average multiplier would go up slightly whilst the max multiplier would decrease
Valour:
- Is a massive pile of crap. It rewards the best players by allowing them to use more expensive gear on average thereby increasing the gap between them and everybody else even further.
- Valour should at least be changed to effect XP only or even better it should be removed. Good players do not need a reward.
Sorry but that sounds crap. I and many others specifically play or continue to play cRPG because it is geared so much towards team play. I come online, see a friend and can immediately play along side them with the exception of the odd round.
A potential system I would be interested to test is banner balance set equal to however many players/levels the 4th largest clan on the server has (with a min of say 10%). So a typical 40vs40 on EU1 would only balance 4ish players together per clan, but if the 4th largest clan has 8 players online then banner balance will increase. This means clans can casually play together all the time in small numbers but they can only seriously stack 1 team on a server if they have other clans to fight against.
Ok, Conquest Mode with no multiplier. What exactly is it that causes me to want to actually go to the flag (or whatever) when I can have just as much fun running around simply killing things?
It is the multiplier that rewards people for pursuing the objective. An objective without an incentive would just not work.
Actually you are wrong.
- Right now we have -3,-2,-1,0,+1,+2,+3 loom levels for most items. So 7 in total
- Under the trade off system you would need the base item (0) plus the speed looms (+1,+2+3) and the damage looms (+1,+2,+3). So 7 in total
- Applying +1 Damage to a +1 speed loom would just result in a 0 loom state since its a trade off.
I edited my post for you though :D
The grind is still there. A level 30 char is still better than a level 1 char. So what's the issue?
Not sure what you mean by this as we already have level 36 players and as far as i understand 37 is perfectly possible for people if they grind long enough
This is basically very similar to my proposal with the smallest possible clan stack. And I don't see where my idea with increasing the value of a clan group does not go along with your ideas.
Why do you think I would seriously propose... well... implementing conquest mode, then removing the multiplier system and replacing it with... nothing? Of course there should be a new reward system, and it could very well be connected to the flag. Actually I already suggested to make the reward system based on your class. So that infantry for example get most rewards for capping the flag, while archers and cavalry get most points for kills in the flag area. You know, something like that.
Okay, I was wrong. But this time you are as well, unless you proposal is already for a system without upkeep and degrading weapons.
During all the time cRPG is running now (with the new system) nobody has reached lvl 36 yet. I meant raising the soft cap from 30/31 to 33/34 or 36/37 (the second number being the level to retire). To raise the differences between the players. So basically the opposite of what you want. :wink:
I understood your idea to have no banner balance at all below a certain point. Mine always has at least a small amount of banner balance.
And what about infantry that protect their own ranged or take out 5 enemies not near the flag which allows the rest of the team to cap the flag more easily. There are many ways to help the team and rewarding them all would get complicated. Also what about new players? If xp/gold gain reverts to being performance based then it will be even harder for new players to get into the game. Bonuses need to be team performance based not individual. For individuals i would prefer to see more e-peen stats. Rankings for most head shots, best K:D, most melee kills with a 2H sword, etc. The top of each ranking can get an automatic title. Obviously "Hero" would have to be reserved for the most kills with a 2H sword :D
I'm pretty sure someone has hit 36 by now. Can't remember where i saw it but possibly Canary
Doesn't the Hall of Fame (http://c-rpg.net/index.php?page=tavernhof) say that El_Supreme is the highest level character with level 35.28?
WoT/Wall of text/War of Text 8-)
Turn off banner balance till a servers "playing not spectating" population is more than 40 players. Thanks in adavance.i like that
Turn off banner balance till a servers "playing not spectating" population is more than 40 players. Thanks in adavance.
That makes it even more unfair for small clans.
That makes it even more unfair for small clans.
I think the whole reward matter is incredibly complicated. Next to balancing throwing weapons it's the game design question in cRPG I am most afraid of. To be honest, I don't really dare to touch it. I just want to say that conquering/protecting the flag should definitely matter. In whatever way you do it.
tl;dr-version: tl;dr
Then please stop participating in a forum and do something more appropriate to your intellect, like... throwing stones in a lake... picking your nose... etc... you get the idea? :P