Pages: << prev 1 next >>

Thoughts on the first big fight.

*goat starer* Special Circumstances Darkwind Guru Evan Reds Faction Group: Contributors Posts: 10,908 Joined: Oct 29, 2007 Nice to see the competing strategies of Pay to Win v Play to Win. Also good to see that tactics and terrain beat 300m ranged RGMs, multi specced gangers and lasers easily. But... 1) 4.5 hours is ludicrous. These events, and the king of the hill, were supposed to encourage more open attacking play. The only way to do this is to dramatically reduce the number of turns.. given that an hour seems like a reasonable length that is 50 turns. It's still enough turns to offload 4 clips of mortar fire at an opponent if that's how you want to play. 2) in the interests of playability a CR cap might be a good idea. I would have if that you can deploy any amount of CR to a tile but the most you can use is capped.... The player with the lower CR deployed then gets theirs reduced proportionally. 3) then also reduce Cr per player to 500. 1 large vehicle or 2 SUV sized cars. Make it fast. 4) start the king of the hill timer from turn 1 ......................... vet wv zom pvp4 cont community deathrceL1 marshal pvp3 pvp2 Posted May 23, 2020, 10:48 am Last edited May 23, 2020, 11:06 am by *goat starer*

Tez Blood Roses Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 579 Joined: Sep 13, 2009 Less CR, shorter times. Also in other games of capture points usually if the losing team is still gaining points but runs out of time, the game goes into overtime until they win or stop scoring. Something to consider for the future. ......................... vet wv combat1 pvp3 pvp51,4,0 Posted May 23, 2020, 11:00 am

*Longo* Longos Merry Men Darkwind Guru Mutants Faction Group: Marshals Posts: 6,677 Joined: Dec 15, 2007 Here is what I sent Sam last night before I went to bed - Cut CR in half? Imagine 5 times the cars when we meet XMAN. -Turns from 201 to.... 125 or 101? Fun battle but 4hrs? -Address turn time change abuse. -When all occupants insta escape- car not demo? If it’s empty it should ? King of the Hill- needs tweaked. Maybe take points away from a team if a car demos or escapes? This was a tough map to fight on. As the maps change, battles will to. This was mostly long range, but on other maps close combat could prevale. That’s all I got for now. Also, goat, if your teams wants to set aside a few days(potentially weeks) I would be willling to work on training them for combat so if they ever have 2 to 1 odds again, they won’t get devastated losing numerous vehicles and taking numerous deaths. It would be favor to you because I want camp wars to work and your showing last night needs Significant improvement. ......................... vet combatL1 ped1 paintladder semiprocombat ped2 wv pvp4 pvp1 gwped paintball pvp3 pvp5 slay2013 marshal circuit2 combat1 e2g raceL1 gwextrav gateautumn pvp2 triangle1 Posted May 23, 2020, 11:14 am

*goat starer* Special Circumstances Darkwind Guru Evan Reds Faction Group: Contributors Posts: 10,908 Joined: Oct 29, 2007 Longo... Every loss was calculated. We risked nothing of value. It's a tactic that less well equipped armies have used through history. A replay of Stalingrad. If you need training on how not to just sit on a hill relying on ineffectual firepower I'm happy to run a course! If krak needs some help with "how not to be duped into fighting wars he can't win by people who will risk nothing whilst he risks his camp" I will also run a course. 😁 ......................... vet wv zom pvp4 cont community deathrceL1 marshal pvp3 pvp2 Posted May 23, 2020, 11:26 am

*sam* The Salthill Sluggerz Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Lead Developer Posts: 16,782 Joined: Jan 19, 2006 CR reduction: definitely. Goat's idea is good too, i.e. to do it proportional to higher CR squad if it's above some threshold. Turn reduction: definitely. It was far too long. 50 sounds a bit too low to me though; it could reduce the space for combat tactics too much and make it impossible to go for a traditional (demo) victory. I'd prefer 80 or 100 (for now). To speed it up: yes, reducing per-player CR would help, though best done in combination with global reduction in CR from tiles and fame. Another way to speed up would be to have an enforced time limit of say 60 secs per turn. I guess removing marshal extra timeouts for these too, to remove moral hazard. Is it time to review mortar CR? Overall it went well as a first attempt, despite a little bickering. Thanks everyone. I reviewed the game log by the way, and noticed that my Apaches were bugged. It shows that actually I was the best player. ......................... marshal vet deathrce1 paintladder combat1 wv ped1 cont slay2013 Posted May 23, 2020, 11:30 am Last edited May 23, 2020, 11:47 am by *sam*

*Longo* Longos Merry Men Darkwind Guru Mutants Faction Group: Marshals Posts: 6,677 Joined: Dec 15, 2007 *goat starer* said: Longo... Every loss was calculated. We risked nothing of value. It's a tactic that  less well equipped armies have used through history. A replay of Stalingrad. If you need training on how not to just sit on a hill relying on ineffectual firepower I'm happy to run a course! If krak needs some help with "how not to be duped into fighting wars he can't win by people who will risk nothing whilst he risks his camp" I will also run a course. 😁 I think the event speaks for itself. And for what it’s worth, I didn’t ask anyone to join camps wars and ask anyone to “risk his camp.” I was asked to help fight, and answered the call. You throwing around “risking a camp” is really detrimental to the whole camp wars concept. Sam has fail safes, as you are aware, that allow camp owners to bow out of the camp wars at any time if it’s not for them and chances of losing a camp are low. I wish more would become involved, and you implying this falsity isn’t helping anyone, the game, or the camp wars concept. ......................... vet combatL1 ped1 paintladder semiprocombat ped2 wv pvp4 pvp1 gwped paintball pvp3 pvp5 slay2013 marshal circuit2 combat1 e2g raceL1 gwextrav gateautumn pvp2 triangle1 Posted May 23, 2020, 11:35 am

*sam* The Salthill Sluggerz Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Lead Developer Posts: 16,782 Joined: Jan 19, 2006 Longo said: When all occupants insta escape- car not demo? If it’s empty it should ? King of the Hill- needs tweaked. Maybe take points away from a team if a car demos or escapes? On the 1st point: yeah, oversight in the new code. Will fix. On the 2nd point: needs more discussion.  There are certainly interesting things we can do with the KoTH points system.  One thing I want to do is use it to penalise teams who have no-show players. Other ideas: multiple flags, perhaps also switching scoring between them at intervals. I think penalizing combat losses in the way you suggest though might weaken the whole KoTH effectiveness too much. Losing cars is already penalizing enough, I think, in terms of ability to compete. ......................... marshal vet deathrce1 paintladder combat1 wv ped1 cont slay2013 Posted May 23, 2020, 11:42 am Last edited May 23, 2020, 11:45 am by *sam*

*Longo* Longos Merry Men Darkwind Guru Mutants Faction Group: Marshals Posts: 6,677 Joined: Dec 15, 2007 *sam* said: Is it time to review mortar CR? For what it’s worth, I was disappointed in mortars and found them less effective than what I expected of them. Against human players, they are much more difficult to hit with. As I mentioned to you in a PM and reposted here, I think the map had a lot to do with the long range battle, and the Initial placement. It was a great spot for us to be protected, was like a natural Great Wall of China. But I burned through every mounted mortar round I had, and I missed alot. It’s much too early to tweak weapons, and do we want camp wars to be regulated like this anyways? How effective will mortars be on a gates map? How effective will a laser or rgm be on a FL map? Also, Longo DW stat- that is my most hated map. Thanks Bast. Lol ......................... vet combatL1 ped1 paintladder semiprocombat ped2 wv pvp4 pvp1 gwped paintball pvp3 pvp5 slay2013 marshal circuit2 combat1 e2g raceL1 gwextrav gateautumn pvp2 triangle1 Posted May 23, 2020, 11:56 am

*HarryRed* Harrys Hippos Racer Evan Reds Faction Group: Marshals Posts: 139 Joined: May 3, 2009 I don't think that battle is representative of most battles - it was effectively a corridor map like salt flats and neccasarily favoured mortar play. It negated the theoretical disadvantage of mortars (that being flanking). Even the two landy's that managed to get to us were enough to cause problems - now imagine if they had committed more to it and there was more flat terrain. Part of what caused the long range build was also the CR mismatch - it forces the lower CR side into cheesy strats to even the odds. So from what I gather krak put lots of CR onto one tile while goat put lots onto the other resulting in 2 highly uneven matches. Is there a way around this? I think that we all agree in a scenario like this where both sides have similar total camp CR it would be preferable for there to be 1 more or less even battle rather then 2 uneven ones. ......................... vet wv gwextrav combatL1 marshal Posted May 23, 2020, 12:07 pm

*Ninesticks* The Wombles Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Marshals + Rule Council Posts: 3,371 Joined: Apr 11, 2008 Ok here are my thoughts. 1. All agreed 200 turns was way too much - but good to get an idea of how it plays out over the length. Was starting to get tiresome at around 100 so would seeem about right. 2. Not sure about overall CR cap at all. There are plenty of options of how to deploy CR without putting a whole pile into one hex a la Risk. Indeed it is arguable that a wider spread could actually generate better strategic results and options. Furthermore you would be creating more fights - yay! but generating more time required for events and problems with scheduling - boo! I would want to see the argument for why people think this is a good idea when event length is best controlled through limited turns. Furthermore, not sure proportional reduction works that well. It would allow the player who puts in least to narrow the cr gap between the two forces. Certainly they would still be at a disadvantage but less of one nonetheless. 3. Agree an empty car should auto-demo - no brainer. 4. If you want to look at CR for some weapons, while the mortar should be in the frame, there are I would argue there are equally, if not more, problematic weapons. Especially as it seems the vast majority of most vehicle CR is armour related and not weapon related. If the wiki remains correct the RGM is cheaper than a car cannon 5. Smack talk in the scrum isn't bickering, it is what it has always been - a means to attempt to influence/distract your opponent(s). 6. I think if you are going to look at anything, look at the strategy point calculation/equivalency to CR. If you do this then it seems reasonable to adjust the personal CR cap accordingly. All that said, it was a great event and was I feel a real step in the right direction if PvP is to be a thing - even if I did run out of port quite early on. Really enjoyed the mortar minigame - felt like a proper battle of wits with a suitable amount of luck thrown in - respect to Joel, Longo and Tez - I hope you enjoyed it too. ......................... vet wv marshal pvp4 community pvp20,1,0 Posted May 23, 2020, 12:14 pm

*Ninesticks* The Wombles Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Marshals + Rule Council Posts: 3,371 Joined: Apr 11, 2008 *HarryRed* said: I don't think that battle is representative of most battles - it was effectively a corridor map like salt flats and neccasarily favoured mortar play. It negated the theoretical disadvantage of mortars (that being flanking). Even the two landy's that managed to get to us were enough to cause problems - now imagine if they had committed more to it and there was more flat terrain. Part of what caused the long range build was also the CR mismatch - it forces the lower CR side into cheesy strats to even the odds. So from what I gather krak put lots of CR onto one tile while goat put lots onto the other resulting in 2 highly uneven matches. Is there a way around this? I think that we all agree in a scenario like this where both sides have similar total camp CR it would be preferable for there to be 1 more or less even battle rather then 2 uneven ones. The map favoured all long range weaponry full stop - even if it has been wide open you would have run and gun - indeed you were set up for that. I don't think the mismatched CR argument holds much water Harry. Given any scenario those with the 'cheesy strats' option will generally deploy them to gain an advantage. That's just what people tell themselves to make themselves feel better. I don't believe if we had come with the same CR as you that your squad would have been any different at all. ......................... vet wv marshal pvp4 community pvp20,1,0 Posted May 23, 2020, 12:24 pm

*Longo* Longos Merry Men Darkwind Guru Mutants Faction Group: Marshals Posts: 6,677 Joined: Dec 15, 2007 *Ninesticks* said: Ok here are my thoughts. Furthermore, not sure proportional reduction works that well. It would allow the player who puts in least to narrow the cr gap between the two forces. Certainly they would still be at a disadvantage but less of one nonetheless. +1 4. If you want to look at CR for some weapons, while the mortar should be in the frame, there are I would argue there are equally, if not more, problematic weapons. Especially as it seems the vast majority of most vehicle CR is armour related and not weapon related. If the wiki remains correct the RGM is cheaper than a car cannon  RGM is powerful. That’s why they are so rare. A loss of one would be devastating. Having said that, the many negatives and reasons why I seldom use them - 3 shot clip with very bulky reloads, requires very high skilled ganger to man effectively. Very costly ammunition. 6. I think if you are going to look at anything, look at the strategy point calculation/equivalency to CR. If you do this then it seems reasonable to adjust the personal CR cap accordingly. +1 - respect to Joel, Longo and Tez - I hope you enjoyed it too. You too sir! Always a gentleman, even in time of war. And a very worthy opponent! ......................... vet combatL1 ped1 paintladder semiprocombat ped2 wv pvp4 pvp1 gwped paintball pvp3 pvp5 slay2013 marshal circuit2 combat1 e2g raceL1 gwextrav gateautumn pvp2 triangle1 Posted May 23, 2020, 12:42 pm

FireFly Anarcho-Pumpkin Privateers Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 5,468 Joined: Mar 3, 2008 Well, here is an observers 2c. 1. For what it's worth I agree with Ninesticks but if anyone can put a hard cost to infinite ammo, absurdly long range or the ability to fire over obstacles I'd be impressed, because I certainly can't. Doesn't help how these unicorn weapons are all fairly useless and overcosted without the prerequisite specs, but blatantly undercosted with them. That said, a balance pass on weapon CR is probably not unwelcome. As to nine's point about armor CR, I'm not sure about this but it always felt vehicle capacity should matter more. A stormer with 74 points of armor and an MG/RL is 122cr whilst a landrunner with matching armor and weapons is 144. Don't really know how to put it, but I feel the value of the SUV chassis is a bit more than that, not even getting into the BPU. 2. I do like what I saw with the escape system and I hope that is kept in! Whilst it might feel a bit cheap for someone to attack and then run when it goes bad we might actually see some aggression in PvP now. There was not that much of it when last I played, so I'm hopeful there. 3. The event was definitely to long and it's probably a good idea to reduce the CR numbers overall as well as the timers. Not only does it make the event go faster, but the cheesiest builds lie either on the very high or very low cr spectrum, at least they did half a decade ago. I understand limiting the number of cars a player can use to keep turn timers down, it's not a bad idea. But may I suggest putting an upper limit on the turn timer instead of limiting the player? Maybe top the timer out at 90 (or even 60) seconds at most. If someone still wants to bring 4 low-cr muscle cars it's their choice, but it won't overly extend the game timer. ......................... vet wv zom gateautumn deathrceL1 elmsautumn pvp1 pvp2 sssc raceL1 e2g combatL1 santa1 pvp3 gwextrav ww circuit32,18,0 Posted May 23, 2020, 1:11 pm Last edited May 23, 2020, 1:13 pm by FireFly

*sam* The Salthill Sluggerz Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Lead Developer Posts: 16,782 Joined: Jan 19, 2006 FireFly said: I understand limiting the number of cars a player can use to keep turn timers down, it's not a bad idea. But may I suggest putting an upper limit on the turn timer instead of limiting the player? Maybe top the timer out at 90 (or even 60) seconds at most. If someone still wants to bring 4 low-cr muscle cars it's their choice, but it won't overly extend the game timer. We limit each player on CR rather than number of cars (that was a recent change so you probably saw 'old info' in the forum). The rationale is mostly to do with making new players valuable and to build a career path for them in the game, and to stop top players from dominating and being utterly untouchable. (But also, yes, it's partly about speeding up play). Putting a hard cap on the timer is definitely a thing to consider though. ......................... marshal vet deathrce1 paintladder combat1 wv ped1 cont slay2013 Posted May 23, 2020, 2:28 pm

FireFly Anarcho-Pumpkin Privateers Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 5,468 Joined: Mar 3, 2008 Fair enough! I read this as if hard limiting the number of vehicles a player can bring was on the table. No worries from me on that point then. Been trying to catch up on what is and isn't active from the older discussions, so please excuse me if I get parts of it wrong. ......................... vet wv zom gateautumn deathrceL1 elmsautumn pvp1 pvp2 sssc raceL1 e2g combatL1 santa1 pvp3 gwextrav ww circuit32,18,0 Posted May 23, 2020, 2:51 pm Last edited May 23, 2020, 2:51 pm by FireFly

Iffler Ifflers Irritants Autodueller Renegade Group: Members Posts: 321 Joined: Jun 14, 2009 *Longo* said: Also, goat, if your teams wants to set aside a few days(potentially weeks) I would be willling to work on training them for combat so if they ever have 2 to 1 odds again, they won’t get devastated losing numerous vehicles and taking numerous deaths. It would be favor to you because I want camp wars to work and your showing last night needs Significant improvement.    *shrugs* For what it's worth both my vehicular losses were calculated and discussed. With the crew skills I had available as a returning player and the map involved, It was decided both the BPU, and especially the Tractor were loseable to buy turn time on the cap and win. It worked.... Otherwise.. yes, far too long, I ditched at 2am because I had worked all day and had work today. It was fun and I honestly thought the artillery tactic was going to win out when I went to bed, but for newer or returning players, potentially losing your best gangers when you have so few that are any good is not going to happen. Newer/returning players are going either going to use fresh meat in camp wars, and deploy/use them appropriately (to die), or simply not take part. A potential concern? Be interesting to see other battles on different maps with teams with varying tactics before coming to too many conclusions though. ......................... vet wv pvp40,1,0 Posted May 23, 2020, 7:51 pm

*Rev. V* Cestus Dei Darkwind Guru Civs Faction Group: Marshals + Contributors Posts: 3,208 Joined: Aug 4, 2010 Mortar CR revisiting? Nah. Longo tried like hell to nail Nine, and Nine didn’t move more than 10m in any direction for..what...12 turns or more? Nine is, indeed, a “lucky chap”! ......................... vet wv zom marshal paintladder cont Posted May 24, 2020, 12:42 am

Joel Autobaun Joels Bastards Darkwind Guru Deathrace Mafia Faction Group: Sinbinned Posts: 4,598 Joined: Nov 10, 2008 I think Step 1 is limit CR (in some way - perhaps half the amounts allocated to camps, perhaps limit amounts to one hex...maybe camp combat limits are higher). Step 2 (and easily at same time as step 1) - cut turns. I know the knee jerk is to cut in half... however I think the fight was still meaningful to turn 75. We had to decide if we'd make a run for the points marker or just go for damage. So the problem was the Loooong Denouement. Vaulters had their points and would win as long as they staying in the match to end...without being killed by our long range weapons. They pulled it off, though it might have shredded a year of all our real lifespans to get there. I think you try for this: the first 60 turns were certainly important. Another 60 for possible end match cleanups/guarding : 121 instead of 201. I think 121 is the limit in arena combats. That the next try perhaps. 80 is too low in my opinion. The kicker was the relatively high CR. That makes things go slower, just the way it is. No the answer is NOT 10 second turns. Sometimes lag to server is easily 7 seconds in parts of the world not in the UK. Plus running 3-4 maybe 5 vehicles in 10 seconds is horrible sportsmanship, the team with more players can force. 10 Seconds should be taken out as an option, but 15 seconds would still be possibly really bad sportsmanship in my opinion. I don't think anyone was delaying on purpose! That would be my only complaint on how things went. Limiting CR and turn numbers will naturally limit the super weapons. The way they work: - more time the better. Particularly MM which performed about as well as I thought... though they kept both sides at bay. Limiting/cutting (total) CR will help with CR matchup numbers. That was a major factor in this thing going to turn 201. We were out matched and we dug in hoping for lucky shots to move on. We didn't get them. At even CR, a rush at turn 75-80 would have happened. Edit: I guess I am saying do not make too drastic a change(s) just yet. We must consider the chance this fight was unusual. These are the closest two camps to have a fight also. Since that can vary, maybe we need consideration for that somehow. ......................... vet northernsummer deathrce1 raceL1 deathrceL1 ww ped1 sssc paintball semiprocombat ped2 e2g gwextrav gwped combat1 paintladder elmsautumn gateautumn wv race1 combatL1 pvp1 pvp5 pvp4 zom pvp3 circuit1 pvp2 circuit2 circuit3 ss2fl67 slay2013 storm2013 geek triangle198,100,31 Posted May 24, 2020, 2:58 am Last edited May 24, 2020, 4:58 am by Joel Autobaun

darthspanky McSPANKYS LOLLIPOP GANSTAS Darkwind Guru Anarchists Faction Group: Subscribers Posts: 4,036 Joined: Jul 29, 2007 maybe have a max limit area of fighting or be 'out of bounds' and centered around flag, and over time area of fighting shrinks. and dont do too many changes imo this was a battle between 2 closse camp later youll need that cr to spread out to defend territory, there bogged up early when most others have to march to get neibors. ......................... vet paintball wv1,0,3 Posted May 24, 2020, 3:04 am Last edited May 24, 2020, 3:19 am by darthspanky

*Bastille* Raging Scavengers Darkwind Guru Evan Reds Faction Group: Marshals + Contributors Posts: 7,513 Joined: Mar 31, 2009 Joel Autobaun said: The kicker was the relatively high CR.  That makes things go slower, just the way it is.  No the answer is NOT 10 second turns.  Sometimes lag to server is easily 7 seconds in parts of the world not in the UK.  Plus running 3-4 maybe 5 vehicles in 10 seconds is horrible sportsmanship, the team with more players can force.  10 Seconds should be taken out as an option, but 15 seconds would still be possibly really bad sportsmanship in my opinion.  I don't think anyone was delaying on purpose!  That would be my only complaint on how things went. 10 - 15 seconds per vehicle still seems reasonable to me. You can't expect people to make all their turns in this time. 5 cars in 15 seconds for 80 turns, have RSI by the end of it. Limiting CR and encouraged team play could help this. *Longo* said: Also, Longo DW stat- that is my most hated map. Thanks Bast. Lol Glad you like it, but not sure you should thank me for that one. ......................... marshal vet wv pvp4 zom cont pvp32,12,1 Posted May 24, 2020, 12:11 pm Last edited May 24, 2020, 12:16 pm by *Bastille*

Pages: << prev 1 next >>

Powered by MercuryBoard [v1.1.4]
© 2001-2005 The Mercury Development Team

0.1353 seconds - 30 queries - 0.41 load