cRPG
Strategus => Strategus General Discussion => Topic started by: Strudog on July 12, 2013, 05:24:57 pm
-
This is just a suggestion about how i think strat Xp should work from now on.
How does it work at the moment?
At the moment strat XP goes along the lines of the more expensive the armour value of the army the more xp is given in the battle every so often and it is nice gaining that 70k xp per tick. But what this results in at the moment is a pure grind of Tin can vs Tin can where it is whoever has the most tickets wins essentially.
What i suugest:
What i wouyld like to suggest is a reversal ont he Xp system where fighting in Peasant gear gives you the most XP and that Tin can armys wouldnt be so prvelent on the battlefield.
What this would do:
1. Would enable people fighting smaller strat fights in the region of 100 v 100 to be able to sign up more players because of the Xp involved in those peasant fights.
2. Peasant or less armoured fights would be a lot more fun thatn the usual grind on Tin cans.
3. Would make light armour useful in strat
4. Would make people think more tactically in the way they set out their gear, so that thyey would have to balance how much armour with how much Xp they desire.
5. Make battles more interesting as it would come down tonot only better tactics but make strat more skilled base.
Tell me what you think if it is a good or bad idea.
and any other suggestions appreciated
-
someone doesnt like bouncing on tincans with their lolpike
-
Yes, use more light armors please :P
-
I agree but not that way.
You need to normalize it around a specific weight.(IE like 12 weight armors will get you the highest XP while going either way into too light or too heavy yield maluses)
Don't see it changing things though as plate is more effective. Sure you'd get WAY more XP mine and your way, but why do that when like 50 plate guys can dominate 100 peasants easily?
-
Presumably using this system would mean a balance to be struck between battlefield efficacy and XP yields; you'd have to decide what matters to you more, but only slightly, because going middle-of-the-road with medium-tier armor would give decent XP while still allowing decent survivability for players. If anything it could result in a more normalized medium armor set up being prevalent for some factions, but most might still take as strong of gear as they could when they wanted to win.
-
XP should be based on how many people die in the battle, it should never have been dependent on gear used.
Bonus XP: Use siege equipment, cap flags, breaking siege equipment, wall breaking, etc.
-
Came to tell the OP to
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
But I see no-2-2 made a valid suggestion I agree with.
XP shouldn't be dependent on gear used at all...should just go by the amounts of people being killed. I think the reason tin cans give the most XP is because I believe (this is just my gut feeling) that xp is dependent on the amount of damage being dealt, and you have to do a lot more damage to kill a heavily armored foe.
-
Hate all this tincanshit, better eco or reversed xp sounds nice :mrgreen:
-
Oh i got an idea. Will make separate post for it, since I grinded out some numbers to make sure it worked...
-
I think the reason tin cans give the most XP is because I believe (this is just my gut feeling) that xp is dependent on the amount of damage being dealt, and you have to do a lot more damage to kill a heavily armored foe.
It's based on the gold value of items on players who have been killed recently, and it is apparently averaged between the two teams' gold-value-killed. Things like throwing smoke bombs will also count as gear lost and temporarily increase xp ticks the same way.
-
its just a suggestion and thus be modified, but i agree a middle ground could be struck, i just think its a simpler way without people having to relearn the economcs
-
It's based on the gold value of items on players who have been killed recently, and it is apparently averaged between the two teams' gold-value-killed. Things like throwing smoke bombs will also count as gear lost and temporarily increase xp ticks the same way.
:/ Don't tell people my secret xp farming technique.
-
Ok I got mine, with math too.
http://forum.meleegaming.com/strategus-general-discussion/(suggestion)-new-xp-system-details-inside-along-with-math-and-formula/
Made it's own thread so I don't ruin yours strudog.
-
:shock: I still don't understand how to get more XP.
for example:
the siege of New Senuzgda Castle
FIDLGB The Aggregate Alliance
286 survivors 1310 survivors
1514 of 1800 killed 1265 of 2575 killed
commanded by commanded by
Rhalzo PFC_Avion
this siege continued for 80 minutes.
ken456 and I joined this siege in the same side.
I have more kill and more score
but ken456 get about 800,000- XP
and I get only less than 500,000 XP
just because he used tin can gear and I used Ragged Outfit ?
-
:shock: I still don't understand how to get more XP.
for example:
the siege of New Senuzgda Castle
FIDLGB The Aggregate Alliance
286 survivors 1310 survivors
1514 of 1800 killed 1265 of 2575 killed
commanded by commanded by
Rhalzo PFC_Avion
this siege continued for 80 minutes.
ken456 and I joined this siege in the same side.
I have more kill and more score
but ken456 get about 800,000- XP
and I get only less than 500,000 XP
just because he used tin can gear and I used Ragged Outfit ?
Everytime you retire, you get a slight "gen bonus" to every tick of XP you get, including Strat ticks. He is probably a higher generation than you, so his ticks were worth more the entire time.
The way gear/xp works, is for the armies total amount of gear combined, not individuals. As long as you spawn every time you die and stay in server all match, you get same base XP as everyone else in server.