How to implement multi in conquest?

[Macropus]

no multi. fixed xp/gold income for everyone with perhaps a one-time xp and/or gold bonus for winners (of map) as a price or reward.

people should try to win because, win. not because multi. its a FPS game.

IMO.

Leecher paradise. 

[KingBread]

Flag capping giving a bonus could work, but not the way conquest is currently set up with the attacker-defender dynamic. Whenever you see a conquest game mode in any other game, BOTH sides are attacking and BOTH sides are defending. Each team starts with maybe 2 spawn points, and then in the middle are 2 neutral ones to fight over. This way each side goes on the offensive at the start to grab those neutral flags, which would in turn not only give you the advantage in the game, but also provide your team with more xp (ideally). I don't see why you can't gain xp for each flag your team owns. Each team starts with 2 flags, so that is an x2. Once they each capture one of the middle 2 neutral flags they are each on an x3. This artificially can make an x3 the average tick, which would be pretty good imo. The form there if one side gets the upper hand they capture another spawn point and then it is x4 vs. x2. Once they keep pushing and get to the other teams main base, they can get an x5 going against the losing team's x1. Once they cap the last remaining flag, round ends. Or perhaps there should only be 1 neutral flag in the center so that you must win a round to get an x5.

In most other games conquest mode provides each side with a set number of troops, and if one side has less spawns than the other, they are penalized by losing a certain number of troops per minute automatically, or something like that. In crpg conquest we can penalize the losing side while rewarding the winning side by simply changing the xp/gold income of each side. And the best thing about conquest modes is that usually spawn points go back and forth all the time... if your entire team is very aggressive you may push forwards and take all the enemy's spawns, but you leave you rear flags ripe for the picking. Countless conquest matches result in a starting-side swap due to one team being overly aggressive and the other side countering that with some ninja tactics. The reason crpg conquest was pretty dull when it was first implemented is that one side and only one side was attacking/defending. The worst thing about conquest mode in any other game is when one side just camps their bases and you fight a war of attrition. That is what crpg's version of conquest is ultimately forcing, and it's not something that should be encourages. Each player has their own style, some prefer to be aggressive and attack, others might be more defensive and want to hold onto what they have. Allowing that in conquest is what we need. Forcing a player to play defensively or aggressively for an entire 30 minutes straight can be completely unbearable if it is not their style of play. Currently in the battle server, everyone picks their own path to victory... this is what we need for conquest. It can very well unite the siege and battle servers so that this shrinking community can still pull off 50v50 (if not more) fights every now and again.

Yea why exaclty we have to divide attackers and defenders ?

[Sniger]

Leecher paradise. 

if no multi id be doing like in the old days where i had more fun with the game: play when my eyes was open, so gief mod and dw about leechers, hammer will be swift.

dont think it will be problem though, currently leechers only leech because they want XP but cba to fight; they very well know that they are on the loosing team. why even try? i tend to agree with them.

with no multi, i think far majority will be online because they want to fight and not because they need XP.

no multi but a price for EVERYONE on the winning team of the map. just think about it. what if the price was really high?

[Angantyr]

no multi. fixed xp/gold income for everyone with perhaps a one-time xp and/or gold bonus for winners (of map) as a price or reward.

people should try to win because, win. not because multi. its a FPS game.

IMO.

A bonus for winning map is as much incentive to fight as round multi bonus, but the current upkeep, gold and xp system is pretty horrendous, and I'd welcome near any change now, and having it change from round to round with this poor team balance is not particularly exciting. I miss when teams were fixed and weren't remixed after each round in a usually futile attempt at balance, when a losing team could get its act together to win on its own (still happens occasionally), and you knew the team you were on were your team also next round. Or maybe that would make it even more boring, I don't know.

[tkn123]

What if you reward multi depending on the location of the flag.

The first flags are worth x2 and then the next are x3 and so on with the last flag of the castle worth x5 if captured/defended. This multi doesn't build up, so if you have x1 and capture the last flag you get instantly x5. This way if defenders capture/defend a flag they gain multi and the attackers lose theirs but they just have to cap the next flag and multi will be back, depending on the flag it could be from x2 - x5.

Attackers could gain multi from only capping while defenders gain multi by recapture and defending within a timer.

[Fips]

Bump, gieb ideas!

[Mr.K.]

Jona brought up some interesting ideas. I would fully support making battle server work like that and have the siege server work a bit differently where the other team has a better defensive position, but lack something. In most games they have worse equipment and so on, but in cRPG that wouldn't work so I'm not sure how exactly balance it out.

There's a problem with the balance though. Stacking could be a huuuge issue if there's no autobalance. This would drive the server populations down in 30-60 min rounds, so there has to be a way to balance mid-round. Dunno if it's possible to balance players that are alive to the other team.

The XP system in the battle type server would be easy to set up as Jona pointed out. Combined with a decent auto-balancer it could be great.

On Siege type game, it would have to be the flag caps that matter. Imo this would require the map makers to be extremely careful not to make some flags too hard to cap and some flags too easy. It could be set up with a constant XP for defenders of around x2 and then bonuses for team having a good KD. These could go up all the way to x3 or x4. On the attacker side it would be all about the flags, with base XP being around x1. Take one flag and whole team gets XP and the people currently on the flag get a small, maybe 2-3k bonus. On a map with total of 7 flags for example in a 30 minute round the flags could be worth 30*x4.5/7=19x per each flag capped. That would give out great XP when capping all flags quickly, but really low when capping no flags at all.

Let's say Team Grey Stack would take all 7 flags in 20 minutes. They get the base XP of 1k for 20 minutes = 20k plus 7 flags=133k=7.65k/min plus bonuses for the flagcappers. Defenders would get 2k/min plus bonuses
Let's say Team randomers would fail to take but one flag in 30 minutes. They get base XP of 30k plus 1 flag=19k which totals to 1.6k/min plus bonuses for those pro players with high KDs that suffered in the losing team

Pros: Gives incentive to be quick about the flag cap and not leech with a constant multiplier
Cons: Stacks could be horrendously effective

[Spartacus]

2. Change the multi system
Yes, the multi system is silly. I have no trouble admitting that :]

It makes you stop playing when you drop to x1, and it forces you to continue playing when you have x5.

Therefore, we'll change the system to something that rewards personal skill and risk more. It will be, among other factors, proximity based, as we had in the early versions of cRPG. It will definately not be purely kill based, we don't want to reward fraghunters over teamplayers. It will also not reward proximity leechers. You can expect this change soon.

No need to code multi for conquest! We will get a new xp gain system soon!

[Crob28]

Haven't read the whole thread, sorry if something like this has been suggested.

For lack of a better way of providing the example, why not make the system something like Arathi Basin in WoW, where each team gains reward based on the number of flags they control each tick.  Gives the defenders incentive to launch counterattacks rather than just camping it up.

Defenders start with x5, attackers start with x1, if attackers take a flag they go x2 and defence drops to x4, etc.

Reset multi for everyone to this level at the start of each round.

[Kafein]

Bump, gieb ideas!

The best ideas are already here.

[FRANK_THE_TANK]

Or... get rid of the shitty multi system once and for all?

So I read the whole thing... Frank will now fix it for you, you dumb dumbies.

One word Strat. Implement strat ticks for xp (payment at rounds end). You make the gold payout based on performance, and at the end of the round you have to pay for the full load of gear you used during that match or they could port in the gold algorithm form DTV and use that. At the end of the day gold only matters for upkeep, it's the xp that people care about. Using the strat xp algorithm will be make conquest a very popular game mode.

No doubt it will require tweaking but it's the best for the mode imo.

[Thranduil]

Haven't read the whole thread, sorry if something like this has been suggested.

For lack of a better way of providing the example, why not make the system something like Arathi Basin in WoW, where each team gains reward based on the number of flags they control each tick.  Gives the defenders incentive to launch counterattacks rather than just camping it up.

Defenders start with x5, attackers start with x1, if attackers take a flag they go x2 and defence drops to x4, etc.

Reset multi for everyone to this level at the start of each round.

The only problem is for smaller maps that only have maybe 2 or 3 flags (e.g. current siege maps cause some of those may get absorbed by conquest if conquest eventually replaces siege). Attackers can only get a x2 or x3 at best in those cases, and defenders get a x4 or x3 at the worst. Everyone would be playing conquest for the uber multis. ... Which might not be too bad a thing. I'll try to think up something.

It's not a bad idea though.

[Rebelyell]

x5 for winner and x 3 for rest

- 1 for flag that you lost and and + 1 for ataker hat took that flag

that game mode is last thig that may bring me back  to crpg
so plz add it

[FRANK_THE_TANK]

Would you people stop. I already solved it. Case closed. Equation equated. Boom goes the dynamite.

[Jona]

Or perhaps something similar to strat could happen where every 5 minutes or so you get one tick, where this tick is: your score * some constant. So instead of it being based on the price of gear you burned, it is based on how much score you accumulated in the last round.

One word Strat. Implement strat ticks for xp (payment at rounds end).

Would you people stop. I already solved it. Case closed. Equation equated. Boom goes the dynamite.

You solved it, eh?