cRPG
cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Game Balance Discussion => Topic started by: Neil_Patrick_Harris on December 11, 2013, 01:25:46 am
-
Dear cRPG,
The forum is being made for the support of the idea of being rewarded experience points for kills. The idea of earning multipliers for winning as a team is ideal to balance the game out and giving less experienced players the chance to earn some experience points. With the multipliers for earning a team victory teaches players to work as a team, and lets face it, Not to be kill desperate blood hounds. However, there was always one question that always eluded me, why are player not rewarded for kills? It's become iconic for any role playing game out there to reward player for their noble efforts in slaying their foe's. This is the case in almost any game, from the more mainstream Call of Duty, to more up-incoming games like War frame. It's the creators way of saying "Nice job killing that guy, why don't ya take some experience for it, eh!" but this isn't the case for Mount and Blade: War-band, cRPG mod. Not to mention it's realistic, if you kill some one, essentially you're being exposed to the experience of killing some one. I believe that these games like Call of Duty and War frame are being popularized for the experience points per kill idea. I could be wrong though, because there are many variables that go into account for making a game what it is. Every game has it's ups and downs. I had though about money and experience per kill and having multipliers but that seemed a bit greedy, don't ya think? So instead if cRPG could invoke an experience reward of a significant variable to the player that has killed another player and still maintain the multiplier conduct, i believe this solve a couple issues.
Leechers as they are called, are players who merely join games to sit by and watch his team risk their kill/death ratios and money, fight, as they sit back and enjoy the view (They are usually found without a weapon in hand).
I'm not justifying that my idea would fix the problem but it might, it just might.
Please comment other problems that you are encountering that my proposal might possibly fix.
-
Short answer: No
Long answer: Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
It used to be that players would get experience for their kills. It was changed because it made the mod comparable to a medieval CoD. You know that it would just make the game a competition for kills and then as a result everyone would bitch about killstealers until it finally gets reformed into the system we have now. Sure, it would solve the leecher problem, but leechers are hardly problem. They get caught and banned and there are usually no more than 3 leechers in a 90+ player game. We already have valour which is nearly the same concept as XP for kills, except you don't have to get kills to earn it.
-
The radius system was nice in the way that it concentrated the fights, though. We wouldn't have to deal with endemic delaying if it was still in.
-
Don't see a problem in giving an xp boost for players under a certain level based on their score. But keep the multi system, it is a great way to encourage team play imo
-
Didn't even read, the title was more than enough to give you a minus, sorry.
-
It would have been pretty bad to earn XP for kills at the beginning of the game, when you had 1% of the players getting 99% of the kills.
Now most of the players are good (good, not beast), turn-nerf and other patches nerfed heroes to the point where you cant kill whole groups of people anymore (Q_Q old times), so why not add XP per kill in the current state of the game?
The score system + the tick system has some "weak points" that a minor XP boost per kill would solve. Even re-implementing the XP aoe on top would not be completely idiotic. Worth a try to change the current metagame.
-
Current point system largely awards those who are near the fight and are fighting themselves. What that means?
Imagine the situation where you're fighting five enemies on your own. If you somehow manage to hit each of them and have enough armor/hp to survive plenty of their hits, that way prolonging the fight, you'll get shitload of points. You don't have to kill anyone.
Obviously, such system works best for shielders and strength builds. Which is kinda lame.
-
Obviously, such system works best for shielders and strength builds. Which is kinda lame.
People with a lot of strength (and usually IF to go with it) are worth more points to the enemy team than someone who dies in 1 hit. Its really funny to use an extremely fast cut weapon (cleaver, khyber knife, wakizashi) and just spam an enemy who is wearing plate armor. With 5-7 PS you will kill him in 12 or so hits, and end up with a TON of points.
-
It's odd that you get less points for killing someone with a few powerful hits (generally stabs, or high ps with pierce/blunt) instead of 8+ weak hits.
It's also odd that someone can pretty much "leech" in large player count battles without any consequence if they charge in and die immediately (esp. melee cav), as long as it looks like they put up a credible fight by swinging/blocking a few times.
Hard to put in a system based on kills without repercussions though, whether it be increased twing to killsteal, or abusive "farming".
Plus there'd be all sorts of annoying balancing to be done between siege/battle.