cRPG

cRPG => General Discussion => Topic started by: Sniger on July 06, 2014, 11:57:15 am

Title: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Sniger on July 06, 2014, 11:57:15 am
Score system: Players score is based on raw output damage as well as some proximity.

Valour: Players achieve "valour" that is a high-score reward. The round score is calculated at end of round and the players who scored the highest (in this round) will be rewarded with multiplier increase. Winning a round and gaining valour will yield +2 multiplier, losing a round but gaining valour will keep you from losing your current multiplier.

One group in this community are proud gamers. They like their name to be displayed at end of round for all to behold how awesome they did; they want valour. Majority are great players with great blocking skills, they will pick a high damage weapon, pole-arm or two-hand.

Then theres another proud group, they are also gamers. They dont care about valour, but they are indeed competitors;they want to kill the enemy. They see majority of players is picking two-hand or pole-arm so this group of players is picking the class that counter the first group of gamers.

These two groups are not the only groups though. We also have a group consisting of a mix of both previous mentioned groups. This is the cav-group. They are players who is fed up with the amount of range, that is due to the amount of pole-arm/two-hand, so they rolled an alt... Cav.

Do you see the evil nasty paradox loop? The only way to fix it: Change or remove valour and the score-system >> rework banner-balance/class-balance.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Osiris on July 06, 2014, 12:00:54 pm
yeah because there was a lack of 2h/polearmers before valour
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Sniger on July 06, 2014, 12:05:38 pm
Example of the cycle:

Player join the server as [polearm].

Player do well with his clan. Most are polearms or twohand.

Then all of a sudden, enemy has a zillion range.

Player gets frustrated.

Player quit and pick his [range] OR [cav] alt.

(repeat)

 :lol:

This will only generate LOADS AND LOADS of unbalance. There is no other outcome!

edit: I kinda waited for someone to ask where the paradox is but i have no patience.

I think that most of us, clan bangers as well as non-clan bangers, can agree that banner balance is far from optimal.

TL;DR
The paradox is that due to the valour/score/multiplier-system, we cannot change the way matchmaker (banner balance) works, because then no one would get any XPEE.

But what if we changed or removed the system so that everyone had the same income despite winning losing? We all spend the same amount of time, we should get the same pay. Winning is a reward in itself. If you give players more than the actual winning, they will start to whore. Old classic truth. With a changed gain-system, we could have all the banner balance in the world and noone would care!

Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Grumbs on July 06, 2014, 12:22:47 pm
For the most part people play the class they enjoy playing. What makes them enjoy it is probably to do with the gameplay rather than the valour. M&B (and cRPG) has a unique melee combat system that attracts a lot of the players. Thats why you see a lot of people playing with melee or cav. Ranged is something you can do better in most other games.

I think a lot of people play ranged because its a very competitive environment and any advantage is worth taking. Melee is pvp (scissors vs scissors), so why not take rock to their scissors, especially when you have scissors of your own when you need it

Ideally we wouldn't have easy options like that, or if you take the easy option there should be a very strong paper to rock. Cav is quite good against ranged, but at the same time they get peppered with projectiles so opt to kill melee instead a lot of the time. I think we just need to maker ranged harder to play, and make it so if you're playing a ranged character you're kind of limited in what else you can do in the round.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Angantyr on July 06, 2014, 12:24:41 pm
Remove the dated multi system and replace it with fixed xp (say the current x3 or some such) - or fixed xp with a very small bonus for your team wining rounds, so that won't be what's keeping players from logging when they're on x5 or what makes them stop when on x1. Lot of the frustration for a lot of players already removed then.

If players invest the same time in the game sure they could be rewarded for personal contribution but basing this on the team balancer is leaving a lot to random chance.

Doesn't seem like most WB players need incentives like multi to play to win at all.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Joseph Porta on July 06, 2014, 12:24:53 pm
 Think its silly that people go to range to get kills, playing as an archer does not feel rewarding at all, unlike besting an enemy with melee.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Sniger on July 06, 2014, 12:29:11 pm
Think its silly that people go to range to get kills, playing as an archer does not feel rewarding at all, unlike besting an enemy with melee.

Eye of the beholder :) I feel same way as you, but people are different. Who knows what goes on in a sick mind of a Bagge ;p
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Angantyr on July 06, 2014, 12:29:49 pm
I know some players choose for example some two-handed swords because they are easier to spam and use in general (long, fast, hard-hitting, quite forgiving animations), but I'm not so sure one-handers overall have less chance for valour as you are implying?
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Sniger on July 06, 2014, 12:32:06 pm
Personally i have really hard time getting valour.

But then again, i never try to get it. I just wanna win :)



edit: What do you prefer? Win or valour...?  :)
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: MountedRhader on July 06, 2014, 12:38:41 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login



I didn't make a cavalry character because ranged was a problem, and I see the valor system as fairly decent overall...

How is crpg a paradox?
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Sniger on July 06, 2014, 12:41:31 pm
you are advertising your lack of brains  :lol:
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Panos_ on July 06, 2014, 12:41:51 pm
Personally i have really hard time getting valour.

But then again, i never try to get it. I just wanna win :)



edit: What do you prefer? Win or valour...?  :)


thats because you`re a bad shielder.

Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Huscarlton_Banks on July 06, 2014, 12:43:03 pm
I get valour at least half the time as 1h/shield or thrower/shield/pole.

My chances seem to increase as cav/archer numbers increase.

It does seem very easy to get valour as 2h/pole at level 28+ if there are few ranged around though.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: MountedRhader on July 06, 2014, 12:45:45 pm
you are advertising your lack of brains  :lol:

You might want to take a look at your own thread before making such accusations, genius.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: //saxon on July 06, 2014, 12:58:12 pm
Sniger: hated banner balance since birth, always expressed how he hated clan stacking, joins kalmarunion..

 :rolleyes:

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Panos_ on July 06, 2014, 01:06:05 pm
Sniger: hated banner balance since birth, always expressed how he hated clan stacking, joins kalmarunion..

 :rolleyes:

(click to show/hide)


Don`t forget to mention he was a nord once
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: jtobiasm on July 06, 2014, 01:12:07 pm
I HATE RANGED AND I'M GUNNA SAY IT'S EASY TO PLAY ON EVERY THREAD I CAN
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Algarn on July 06, 2014, 01:43:21 pm
Honestly, for an archer hero having 2:1 k/d , there are 10 cav/inf heroes with 3:1 k/d. Having a better score with a ranged weapon is much harder than having a good score with a dedicated melee/cav character. Just my two cents. If players would be smart, they'd go agi shielders to hunt archers, or at least, have 1 or 2 shield skill points like Saxon/Atze, which make them extremely hard to shoot.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Angantyr on July 06, 2014, 01:45:46 pm
Sniger: hated banner balance since birth, always expressed how he hated clan stacking, joins kalmarunion..

 :rolleyes:

(click to show/hide)

Isn't 'join a clan' the default reply to anyone who complains about banner balance?  :wink: Far better to get it over with and join a clan instead of becoming embittered on a game you like.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: vipere on July 06, 2014, 01:51:49 pm
Vidar s paradox
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Sniger on July 06, 2014, 01:52:27 pm
You might want to take a look at your own thread before making such accusations, genius.

I have no use for your post.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: matt2507 on July 06, 2014, 03:12:17 pm
My cav is my main and I play cav from the beginning, ie: before the multi system exists.

What about that and your paradox ?  :mrgreen:
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: //saxon on July 06, 2014, 03:32:25 pm

Don`t forget to mention he was a nord once
Panos, he left nords because im pretty sure it was because he hated the idea of clan stacking and banner balance am i rite? im sure i remember this being the reason.

Isn't 'join a clan' the default reply to anyone who complains about banner balance?  :wink: Far better to get it over with and join a clan instead of becoming embittered on a game you like.
ok i might as well just edit my post hahah  :)

Sniger: Left Nordmen because he hated the idea of banner balance, always expressed how he hated clan stacking, joins kalmarunion..

 :mrgreen:
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Gurnisson on July 06, 2014, 04:39:07 pm
Always aim for valour with My Little Pwny :D
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Sniger on July 06, 2014, 04:42:04 pm
Yup, im now playing your game.

Dont hate the player.

Keep banner balance and give us fixed XP income with perhaps some win-bonus.

Oh why do i care, i have x5 majority of my online time now since i joined Kalmar  :lol:
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Osiris on July 06, 2014, 04:50:10 pm
remove Horse ranged, lower the effectiveness of loomed armour = win :D
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: WITCHCRAFT on July 06, 2014, 04:54:16 pm
Example of the cycle:

Player join the server as [polearm].

Player do well with his clan.

Hey, it's me! I'm in the story, guys!
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: _GTX_ on July 06, 2014, 05:00:32 pm
remove Horse ranged
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Tydeus on July 06, 2014, 09:19:05 pm
Score system: Players score is based on raw output damage as well as some proximity.
It's not based on raw, it's based on the amount your opponent actually ends up taking.

Valour: Players achieve "valour" that is a high-score reward. The round score is calculated at end of round and the players who scored the highest (in this round) will be rewarded with multiplier increase. Winning a round and gaining valour will yield +2 multiplier, losing a round but gaining valour will keep you from losing your current multiplier.
To get valour you need to obtain greater than 2.8x the average score gained for each player on your team.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: _GTX_ on July 06, 2014, 10:53:01 pm
P.S: wtf is this, mod is ded is censored too?  :P

It has been for quite a while :P.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Riddaren on July 06, 2014, 11:34:06 pm
Change or remove valour and the score-system

Go back to the old score system or just remove it all together?
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Kutluhan on July 07, 2014, 12:07:00 am
calm down tyrannosaurus still here.


visitors can't see pics , please register or login
 (http://postimg.org/image/6vljch2p3/full/)
resim gönder (http://postimage.org/index.php?lang=turkish)
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Joseph Porta on July 07, 2014, 12:08:49 am
 :shock:
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Sniger on July 07, 2014, 12:33:43 am
To get valour you need to obtain greater than 2.8x the average score gained for each player on your team.

I think thats broken. Players using low damage weapons compeating against players with high damage weapons. Player will pick high damage weapon. Are you phasing out the low damage weapons?  :P

This is part of The Paradox® i mentioned; Due to the valour/score system, alot (too many) choose high damage weapon, polearm or two-hand. The rest will go range. People complain about amount of range. There is high amount of range because there is high amount of non-shielders. And there is high amount of cav because... High amount of range...... Evil loop®

Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Sniger on July 07, 2014, 12:50:55 am
From now on i will only try to get valour. I do no longer care about winning.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: San on July 07, 2014, 01:40:12 am
The lower damage weapons make it easier to kill archers/agi builds. Ranged and cav are the easiest sources of valour.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Tydeus on July 07, 2014, 01:54:06 am
I think thats broken. Players using low damage weapons compeating against players with high damage weapons. Player will pick high damage weapon.
That's precisely why I changed it from raw damage, to effective. Because high damage cut generates higher raw damage values, but often ends in the same or less effective damage than pierce/blunt. The current system rewards whatever it is that allows an individual to do the most effective damage in a single round, which is often not your high base damage weapons.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Sniger on July 07, 2014, 02:01:51 am
which is often not your high base damage weapons.

well... it is :p

edit: lol, are you playing EU?
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Kafein on July 07, 2014, 02:03:20 am
I think people like Sniger are the reason things like Lysenkoism exist.


(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Dark_Blade on July 07, 2014, 02:05:10 am
does anyone really wants to get a valour just to see his nickname displayed at the end of round huh? o_O
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Smoothrich on July 07, 2014, 06:37:36 am
the real cRPG paradox: shit players think they are good, so when they do bad (which they always do) they think everyone else is cheating, tryharding, or game mechanics are imbalanced, then for some reason decide to post about it, assuming somehow that they have profound insight on game design (instead of realizing they are just shit)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect)
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Oberyn on July 07, 2014, 07:26:08 am
I think people like Sniger are the reason things like Lysenkoism exist.


(click to show/hide)

Dat confirmation bias. Start with a conclusion, pick and choose evidence that confirms it and ignore evidence which contradicts it. Magically your theory will be "proven" correct.
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Sniger on July 07, 2014, 02:59:41 pm
the real cRPG paradox: shit players think they are good, so when they do bad (which they always do) they think everyone else is cheating, tryharding, or game mechanics are imbalanced, then for some reason decide to post about it, assuming somehow that they have profound insight on game design (instead of realizing they are just shit)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect)

80% of this community
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Grumbs on July 07, 2014, 04:33:09 pm
From now on i will only try to get valour. I do no longer care about winning.

Why not both? Win the round and get valour for +2 multi

Pretty counter productive to just go for valour anyway (unless you play HA :D). Winning the round guarantees that you get more gold/xp, and if your team is losing the round you could get outnumbered and killed before you can do enough damage.

Lower damage weapons will still get valour because they have trade offs that increase the chance that you score a hit btw
Title: Re: The cRPG paradox (lots of bold unsupported claims, pls correct me if i fail)
Post by: Sniger on July 07, 2014, 05:39:33 pm
The final calculated output damage is pretty much twice the amount of 1h, but 1h speed is far from twice the speed of polearms and/or two-hands, actually, polearms and two-hands are faster  :lol: