• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      New Forum Lead!   11/17/2019

      It's with great pleasure to announce B2K as the new Forum Lead.   I am very confident he will be good for the forums, he has great ideas and direction for the future of the forums.
      Good luck sir and GOD speed.
BADGER

Ideas for Fixing Balance

288 posts in this topic

On 1/26/2016 at 11:01 PM, jwilly said:

One driver of population imbalance is that a significant number of players want to be on a side that is advantaged, so that they can more easily achieve kills and/or captures.

Better balance could be achieved, at a cost of frustrating those players and maybe losing some of them, by implementing automatic mechanisms that would make the two sides combat-balanced even when they're not population-balanced.

One way to do that would be to evaluate population every half hour or so, and give the lower pop side's map commander some number of virtual artillery missions, assignable by that person to whatever local commanders he choses, subject to appropriate use limits.

At present, in engineering terms, population is a "positive feedback" system. As it goes out of balance, some players are motivated to switch to the overpop side, or begin a game session on that side, or quit their game session playing for the underpop side, resulting in increasing imbalance...and this continues until the imbalance is enough that the overpop side is dominant.

If population imbalance had little effect on victory because combat power was separately maintained close to balance, that positive feedback mechanism would be broken.

Better yet, create truly lethal HE in real artillery.  Now, control how much is available in the spawn list, based on population.  If your side is underpop, the system keeps a fairly steady supply of these in your inventory.  Now, people scout, and mark enemy on the map.  You sit in your position, and use the map to find range, and then start firing a barrage.  Make the explosions as powerful as those bombs that clear ABs.  If you are overpop, you would have significantly less in your inventory.  And, to prevent scamming the system, if you spawn a bunch of artillery, and then suddenly go overpop, the artillery would get an RTB order, and no be able to fire.  Or, their position is suddenly marked on the map, and updated every minute, until they are KIA, or the population balances.  Since they are guns, they would be spawnable at depots, which would prevent camping an AB to prevent their being deployed.  In reality, you would use it much the same way you would a mortar, but it would have more range and be more lethal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2016 at 9:26 PM, BADGER said:

Since the game has been released, a major issue has been around. Several attempts have been made to fix it, yet it still continued on. Some of the changes did help along the way, but in the end it is still here and the time is coming to address it once and for all.

We are asking the community for help in this matter by presenting any ideas that they might have. Ideas outside the box, inside the box, or where ever you get them from, they are welcome. We know many have posted suggestions through the years, but this thread will be the central point to collect the ideas for all to review and to discuss.

This thread will be moderated to keep it on topic. As you write your idea, please do so in a big picture view, meaning best for the game as a whole, and not side oriented. This issue is game wide, and not a problem for just one side.

Non-useful comments will be removed in order to keep the thread on topic.

In the Weeks ahead, FOHDRON and I will be arranging some chats to discuss these ideas with the community. For lack of a better term, we will have planning chats where we will discuss the ideas fully with the community in an organized fashion so that the chats remain productive. We will invite everyone who would like to attend and help. When we believe we have a good selection of ideas, we will take them back to the team in order to utilize the ideas to help develop a plan to put a fix into the game.

I hope to see a healthy discussion here on this topic, and look forward to seeing what comes of it.

 

Badger, I played Allied for years, and landed in the top 20 tankers every single map with the lowest time on mission and least amount of sorties of everyone on the first page.  Many people claim to have played both sides, but few really do.  Most have no idea what it is like to play Axis when the numbers are even or worse, when it is underpop.  Playing Axis when it is vastly overpop because some Aliied squads decide to go Axis for a campaign is not playing both sides.  In fact it paints an unrealistic picture.  It is time for people to put in their big boy pants and admit there is a problem.  There is a thread on the forums right now trying to shame Axis players into logging in.  Like it or not, there is a fun imbalance.  If that is not addressed, the problem will not be solved.  For Allied player who disagree...the 88 is the best gun in the Axis inventory, and yet towns often fall with a full inventory of them.  If you don't think that points to a problem, what would wake you up?  Imagine there being a flaw in the game that caused people to not want to spawn a Matty, or Char.  Would you think that is a problem?  Life is like this.  You have to be able to talk openly and honestly about the problem, or the problem cannot be identified and fixed.

 

That said, yes there are problems that can be fixed that affect both sides.  So I see this as two pronged.  The fun factor needs to addressed for the Axis side.  And, improvements need to be made that affect both sides.  I will separate my comment into two sections to address that.

General Fixes

  • Keep infantry and ATGs out of bushes through collision boxes.  If performance is an issue, make them only appear within 25 or 50 feet of a player.  If that is possible.  Side benefits to this is it makes it harder or Joe Rambo to walk up to an 88 behind enemy lines and put a pistol round in the gunner's head.  Also, what is the cry of new players?  I keep getting shot but never see the enemy.  Of course he doesn't because they are all hiding in bushes.
  • Create fortifications that an ATG or AAG can erect around his gun.  Make them never disappear so long as the gun is there in it, but despawns within 5 minutes of the gun exiting the fortification.  Or, just let the player remove it when he wants to move.  Make them destroyable much like a CP is, with HE.  All of this includes the 88mm.  Make AAG fortifications provide significant bomb splash damage protection.  Make all guns faster to push.  It was a nice idea to expect that players would always provide tows, but often, they don't.  This causes huge frustration for those who want to use a heavy ATG or AAG.  Fun takes precedence, so this should be an easy one.  The light guns do not need an increase, but the big guns do.  They are painful and frustrating to use.  Many players only have one computer to play the game on, or can't afford $30 a month just to be able to tow themselves.  Towing will still be preferable, but pushing will at least be possible.  5 minutes just to get out of the AB is unacceptable.
  • Create multi-barreled AA and SPAA.  Sorry, but low and slow aircraft are a major problem in this game.
  • Fix the sound.  Go out to a road where semi trucks drive by...a road that is not a busy highway.  Watch trucks approach and measure how close they get before you can even hear them, and how far they travel away before you can no longer hear them.  The fact is, you would not hear an Opel 2K away, nor would you hear just one or two tanks.  A whole slew of them, yes.  But that is when it is quiet where you are at.  It is unrealistic and bad for game play that you can never flank the enemy without them knowing way in advance what you are doing, just by sound alone.
  • Create a barracks what you can spawn into, and actually fight from.  That means smaller windows that are easier to shoot out of, than shoot into.  And make many of them so one sniper can't camp it. Double wall them so that your feet and legs don't stick out of them.  Or just fix that collision problem.
  • Create an armor spawn that can't be camped.  Put doors on it that open within a few seconds after you start your engine.  This way you can spawn in, align your gun, set range, Start the engine and hop back to the gunner seat and have a fighting chance against somebody camping the outside.  Nothing worse than being dead before you even spawn in fully, or dying the second you are spawned in.  I have several ideas on how this could work and would be open to discussing them on TS.
  • Address the graphics.  Like it or not, graphics do matter, and while it can never compete with CoD, it needs to be much better.  I would start with the ugly crew members.  ATG, AA, Boat crews and Tank Commanders.  I never understood why they did not take normal player models, and just use those on these items.  I suppose back then, computers could not handle it, but they can now.  I noticed that some AI ATGs actually had animated and decent looking  crews.  That is a good start.  Maybe also put actual pilots in the cockpits and tank crews in the tanks.  Eventually, shoot for graphics on everything that are at least 1K,
  • Make FBs and FRUs more hardened than you have planned, but make it such that it allows combined arms to kill the FBs, and anything can kill FRUs.  So, with FBs, it would go like this.  Infantry can do 100%  of the damage that can kill and FB.  Engineers can fix them, but the repair takes a long time to do...very long time, but he does not have to sit their the whole time doing nothing.  This replaces the automatic healing of an FB.  Tanks and ATGs can do up to 50% of the damage to an FB, and aircraft can do up to 25% of the damage.  Damage heals based on when it happened.  In other words, if a tank did 50% damage, and then planes did 25%, and then infantry come along and only do 15% damage, the FB still has 10% health, it still stands.  Now the attack falters, and the FB begins healing.  The healing is the tank damage because that was done first.  So 35% healing takes place and the FB health is now at 45%.  After a certain time, a reset takes place.  This reset allows the tank to then do a total of 50% damage.  This makes you want to put a press on healing your FB.  It should be such that if you did not, the time will likely allow a tank to finish the job.  In this case, we will say that this is what happened, and so a group of tanks roll up and do the remaining 50% damage.  Same could happen if it were only at 25% and aircraft showed up.  This allows other units to affect the damage, but requires that infantry be part of the assault on the FB.  Give the 75mm HE the historical advantage that it had.  Look, not tier 1 Axis tanks actually have a purpose, and an advantage.  Weak in AT, but better in HE.  88mm and French 75mm now have ore purpose, and the 2pdr now has something it is not so good at, compared to the tier 0 ATGs.
  • Turn Freighters into a form of FRU that can spawn a certain amount of supply.  Maybe give each weapon a weight, or size and let the Captain decide what he wants to draw from the pool of resources to put on his ship.  When he lands it, an FB type structure is created just off the beach, and from there, units spawn in.  Maybe make it a new type if FRU structure that is much harder, closer to FB hardness, and the structure is set up to put most of its defensive front, facing inland.
  • Create trench lines that zig zag around cities, and place them about 150 meters apart, no more than 200 meters, no less than 125 meters.  The idea being that infantry can't just make the entire distance between the two in a sprint.  They would get winded between them.  These should have entrances at both ends, and intermittently in the middle, on both sides so they are usable by both attackers and defenders.  Remove some of the dense foliage as a result of these.  Trucks, ATGs and AAGs should not be able to traverse them, but tanks can.
  • Make the German version of a Fairmile, and an Allied Destroyer.  Create new ships.  The goal should be to eventually have battleships and Aircraft carriers for both sides.
  • Create a Terrain 2.0 so that the landscape can start looking better. Same for the cities.  Think in terms of something a Mod community can get involved with.  In fact, a game engine that supports a Mod community would breathe life into this game like you could never imagine.  Those who create content that makes it into the game get a free subscription.  Content would not include damage models, vehicle performance, etc... An emphasis on city construction, including famous landmarks, should be a focus of the mod community, followed by new equipment, fortifications, etc...

 

Making Axis Fun

I believe that some of the suggestions above, while not being side specific, will actually help make Axis more fun.  By making the HE advantage of the Axis tanks a real thing, and by reducing the threat to 88s, it will allow for less frustration.  Here are some things I believe need to be addressed for Axis to be more fun and less frustrating.

 

  • Remove the Antenna from the 232.  Nobody likes it.  It causes frustration.  Bad enough Axis has the worst AC, but it also has the worst view for the commander.
    SdKfz_232_sA_Kischinowo_44_PzAA14_14_PD.
  • Screw historical accuracy.  Speed up the Axis turrets to the same as Allied.  Bad enough some of the Axis tanks have no MG, but the turrets are so slow that it makes them sitting ducks.  Look it as a compromise for the commander not having an SMG, grenade or rifle.
  • This!
    Flak36b.jpg
  • Axis players have one army, Allied players have 3, and different sets of equipment.  So add a few Armored vehicles
    Tier 0, Panzerjäger I
    box_cover.jpg

    Tier 1, Marder II Sd.Kfz. 131
    dml_6423_title.jpg

    or, Sd.Kfz. 138 - Marder III Aufs. H
    1418_rd.jpg
    Helps break the dominance of the Allied tanks, but comes with some serious, and obvious drawbacks.  Mainly, easy to kill.  Also, the Marder I may also work but would require modeling the Lorraine 37L chassis.  All 3 mount the Pak 40.

    Tier 3, Sd.Kfz. 234/3
    954-deckel.jpg

    Or, Sd.Kfz. 234/4/
    9262f46b1c66a83035317b687aebef72.jpg

    Some might ask about the Puma (Sd.Kfz 234/2) but the fact is, the two above have better armor penetration, with the downside of the 234/4 being that it only carries 12 rounds.  234/3 would not do as well as the 234/4 in AAT, but if the Armor vehicles are allowed to damage FBs, the 234/3 would be more useful, and the same with the hardening of the FRUs.  The 234/4 would be more useful.  75mm HE FTW!  In short, the Puma is sexy and has a cool name, but the 234/3 and 234/4 are more useful.
  • Easy to use bombers.  I suggest the Jabo.  Easy to implement.  Everything is in the game.  The 109E4, and the bomb.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

imsneaky

  your expectings from CRS are realy optimistic :D I THINK FOR START  just give us ( axis ) ONLY ONE TANK in TIER 0 ABLE DESTROY MATILDA AND CHAR ! thats what will make BIG STEP in BALANCE FRONT ;-)

Even we dont need new tank, just make HEAT shells of PZIVd working on matty and char !!!!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW 5 years ago i spoke with some RAT about pistol for SNIPER AND TANK COMMANDER ;-) they told me that this is silly, and now they made it in sniper case. So i think comander of tank wil get pistol in 2022 ;-)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, zvire said:

imsneaky

  your expectings from CRS are realy optimistic :D I THINK FOR START  just give us ( axis ) ONLY ONE TANK in TIER 0 ABLE DESTROY MATILDA AND CHAR ! thats what will make BIG STEP in BALANCE FRONT ;-)

Even we dont need new tank, just make HEAT shells of PZIVd working on matty and char !!!!

 

Oh, to be sure, I think I gave them ten years worth of work there.  haha.  Not nice of me at all.  But, I will do you one better.  Create multi-barreled AA, and maybe even make the Flak shells work like Proximity fuses with a lot oa variation, to simulate the crew setting the fuse based on the computations, and that will drive aircraft up off the deck.  Then put those collision boxes in so that the infantry can't use running through bushes to get behind enemy lines too easily, and you will completely transform this game.  And these aren't even side specific changes.  But, what it would do is make the 88mm a little more survivable so that they can kill a few more tanks.

Then, make the fortifications that ATGs and AAGs can put around themselves, making new ones as necessary, and that will also change the game.  And again, nothing side specific has been done.

 

After that, make the PzJgr 1. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@imsneaky This is fixing balance only thread, not throw all ideas in your back pocket into a single post thread.

Please re-read the forum rules here --> 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, XOOM said:

@imsneaky This is fixing balance only thread, not throw all ideas in your back pocket into a single post thread.

 

 

Those were just the ones in my front pocket.  I haven't gotten to my back pocket yet.  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I attempted to try this game this weekend. kept logging in and was always listed as axis overpopulated. I could not even attack there were so many of them and all with machine guns. I would try to fire at them but they would just warp around it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BIGEST PROBLEM of this game is bad balance of tanks ! Its big problem , becouse tanks are here  in the fact only one really atacking weapon. 

its realy not normal that germany tanks from tier1 aren not able destroy tanks from ally tier0 . That germany tanks are in game crap , ok , players was lern how to use them.

BUT IMORTALY TANKS on ally side , its realy terrible.

But i dont write this only for critic, with out bring some solution. Even solution is very easy, dont need new models, no investitions, no change some system in game.
 :

MAKE HEAT MUNITION OF STUG B and PZIVD WORKING vs MATILDA and CHAR !!!!

This still will not make PZIVD good tank,  but atleast we dont play like vs GOD , and will bring BIG PLUS in balance of tank battles !!!!!!

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cost effective

- Make FB's Health change dynamically according to player population, UP side can blow enemy FBs faster while theirs take more damage to blow up.

- Change Dynamically the capture and recapture time of CPs according to player population imbalance.(this and the previous point would be adjusted each hour or half hour)

- Decrease the speed of AB capture and number of AO's according to the % difference of the highest 24h server population, the bigger the difference the less AO's you get and capture timers increase a bit.(to prevent low pop timezones to win or impact greatly the war the campaign)

- Unlock some premium equipment for F2P when the population has become unbalance for some straight hours or for a few days.(not tigers, snipers or mortars but Semi-Riflemans, ATS, Sappers, Engineers, LMG, SMG, ATG and PZ IV's not camping equipment but equipment that is more offensive)

- Lower EWS or Remove them to underpop side.

- Lower the distance from enemy CPs to place FRUs. 

- Lock sides per war - each first time you spawn that will be your side for the game, this rule would be lifted when the opposite side would be underpop (prevent side switch when losing)

Ideal solutions

- Bring back infantry placed FRUs but with limited spawn list squad or platoon size. (makes camping harder on the initial stages of an attack)

- Implement a credit/point system for F2P which are gain according to their gameplay or content generation ingame, lower prices to spawn that equipment

- Cities or FBs on the underpopulated side would spawn some PPO's to make more difficult to capture them and less player intensive. Example : Make AB wall holes patched, add some tank traps/obstacles on the entrance locking it completely from tanks or forcing them to go through just one entrance, add extra respawn points or spawn buildings to make less campable the town..

- Allow to get out of ATGs and Trucks/self tow an ATG and then use it on the same account and then be able to retow the gun

- Improve the damage and ballistic models making more realistic like warthunder and make it more transparent to players just like Warthunder

- Add different time of ammunitions to the tanks that had them just like Warthunder

 

In the end I think the overpopulated size if it kept OP for an entire campaign it should eventually win but the underpopulated size would slow them down so there would be some of those players switching side and preventing the defenders from login out because they would be getting more kills and having more fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/2/2016 at 9:19 AM, pbveteran said:

Cost effective

- Make FB's Health change dynamically according to player population, UP side can blow enemy FBs faster while theirs take more damage to blow up.

- Change Dynamically the capture and recapture time of CPs according to player population imbalance.(this and the previous point would be adjusted each hour or half hour)

- Decrease the speed of AB capture and number of AO's according to the % difference of the highest 24h server population, the bigger the difference the less AO's you get and capture timers increase a bit.(to prevent low pop timezones to win or impact greatly the war the campaign)

- Unlock some premium equipment for F2P when the population has become unbalance for some straight hours or for a few days.(not tigers, snipers or mortars but Semi-Riflemans, ATS, Sappers, Engineers, LMG, SMG, ATG and PZ IV's not camping equipment but equipment that is more offensive)

- Lower EWS or Remove them to underpop side.

- Lower the distance from enemy CPs to place FRUs. 

- Lock sides per war - each first time you spawn that will be your side for the game, this rule would be lifted when the opposite side would be underpop (prevent side switch when losing)

Ideal solutions

- Bring back infantry placed FRUs but with limited spawn list squad or platoon size. (makes camping harder on the initial stages of an attack)

- Implement a credit/point system for F2P which are gain according to their gameplay or content generation ingame, lower prices to spawn that equipment

- Cities or FBs on the underpopulated side would spawn some PPO's to make more difficult to capture them and less player intensive. Example : Make AB wall holes patched, add some tank traps/obstacles on the entrance locking it completely from tanks or forcing them to go through just one entrance, add extra respawn points or spawn buildings to make less campable the town..

- Allow to get out of ATGs and Trucks/self tow an ATG and then use it on the same account and then be able to retow the gun

- Improve the damage and ballistic models making more realistic like warthunder and make it more transparent to players just like Warthunder

- Add different time of ammunitions to the tanks that had them just like Warthunder

 

In the end I think the overpopulated size if it kept OP for an entire campaign it should eventually win but the underpopulated size would slow them down so there would be some of those players switching side and preventing the defenders from login out because they would be getting more kills and having more fun.

I like it.  Some of those, like allowing the FRU to be placed closer for the UP side, can also be made to have to be placed further away if the side is OP.  Reducing or increasing of offensive equipment of the UP side can help too.  Often I spawn into an UP Axis side, and we are out of quality tanks, while the enemy keeps bring tank after tank to the battle.  Increasing and decreasing the numbers available in a depot spawn list would also help.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(repost to correct typos)

Cost effective

- Make FB's Health change dynamically according to player population, UP side can blow enemy FBs faster while theirs take more damage to blow up.

- Change Dynamically the capture and recapture time of CPs according to player population imbalance.(this and the previous point would be adjusted each hour or half hour)

- Decrease the speed of AB capture and number of AO's according to the % difference of the highest 24h server population, the bigger the difference the less AO's you get and capture timers increase a bit.(to prevent low pop timezones to win or impact greatly the war the campaign, they could have a town locked but they had to wait more time for AB radios to be capable this would not prevent advances on lower timezones but would reduce greatly the impact of low pop timezones on the game)

- Unlock some premium equipment for F2P when the population has become unbalance for some straight hours or for a few days.(not tigers, snipers or mortars but Semi-Riflemans, ATS, Sappers, Engineers, LMG, SMG, ATG and maybe even PZ IV's?.. not camping equipment but equipment that is more offensive)

- Lower or Remove EWS FROM underpop side.(Make soft attacks more scalable and with a higher chance of success with fewer players, this works due to experiencing first hand with the US truck ews bug)

- Lower the distance from enemy CPs to place FRUs. (Same purpose has lowering or removing EWS)

- Lock sides per war - each first time you spawn that will be your side for the campaign, this rule would be only lifted when the opposite side would be underpop (prevent side switch when losing and make player populations more stable without hurting the players who only play one side)

Ideal solutions

- Bring back infantry placed FRUs but with a limited spawn list, squad or platoon size. (10-30 tickets, makes camping harder on the initial stages of an attack, would improve squad gameplay and allow give a chance at breaking camped towns if the enemy had poor comms or organization)

- Implement a credit/point system for F2P which are gained according to their gameplay or content generation ingame, thus lowering prices when the side is underpop allowing them to spawn more toys with less effort this would also make side switching more attractive especially for free accounts.

- Make Cities or FBs on the underpopulated side Auto-Spawn PPO's to make more facilitated defense, requiring less players to do so. Example : Make AB wall holes patched, add some tank traps/obstacles on the entrance locking it completely from tanks or forcing them to go through just one entrance, add extra respawn points or spawn buildings to make less campable the town, make it harder for infantry to get inside the vehicle AB ..

- Allow to get out of ATGs and Trucks or/and self tow an ATG and on the same account and then be able to retow the gun after being used to relocated or rtb..

- Improve the damage and ballistic models and add more transparency to them just like.

- Add different type of ammunitions to tanks that had them just like Warthunder.

 

In the end I think the overpopulated side if it kept OP for an entire campaign it should eventually win but the progress would be much slower and the underpopulated would have more fun would get more kills and better gameplay out of it, making side switching less attractive to enjoy the game which in turn would keep population size more stable and give more time and opportunities to change the course of the campaign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More two that could help..

Cost effective

- Add one random HEAT satchel or ATS to be given to a infantry player when the side is UP and there are no more anti-tank infantry.

Ideal solutions

- Implement a reserve pool of equipment for good and top players, a player with a good K/D on a specific equipment could use them, this could be checked from the current players ingame, so that it wouldn't be locked to the top ranked players.. allowing usage on all timezones.

(The right equipment on capable hands can change the course of a battle, too often much of the good equipment is lost in the start of the battle due to bad players, which is frustrating for those that know they could do a much better job(and are paying to play the game but can't use a tiger or ATS because they decided to first scout the battle to see if it's viable or figure an approach to use that piece of equipment just to see all players spawn all that value equipment and loose on the first seconds), this would also make battles less linear currently when a brigade gets their ATS or Tanks to 0, the town is pretty much lost making one tank or X good unit appear on the course of a long battle would be great for everyone.)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if the under populated side get an increase of "Luck" depending on how big the difference in active numbers is? Up to a limit obviously. I bet the code is full of functions where variables are randomized. These functions could be altered to favor the underpopulated side.

I apologize if this idea already has been discussed or isn't applicable for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys

My intro:

We need to survive till the Steam release and we need both incomes And more players.

Nowadays, only the RATS know for sure, but in my opinion, new players are more needed than incomes.

And we need them badly.

 

My point:

- An unbalanced situation is bearable with enough numbers. For example. In a 1/4 ratio. 3 players have no chance to hold an AO against 12 but, 30 players could hold that same town against 120 or at least, they would have a nice fight and fun.

- a new player, finding himself in a lowpop/unbalanced situation is probably not going to enjoy the game and would quit.

- old players are quitting.

IDEA: increasing player base numbers may not solve side balance but makes it more bereable to the underpop side. (or the effects of umbalance are less noticiable)

My proposal:

As a way to get new players fast, with the excuse of the next patch release, send an offer to every player, no longer playing, THAT DID PAY IN THE PAST

"6 months of free playing with the same subscription they had"

Example: If they were playing/paying early access -> they get 6 months Early access for free.

 

Cons:

With this, the players actually playing and paying for it may complain.

Solution: RATs keep a list with the names of the players paying to play during this 6 months and, when the game is launched in STEAM, when and if the RATS have enough incomes, those players in the list who request it get then their own "Play for free during 6 months" offer.

Over

 

 

Edited by piska250

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One possible solution: Slow down town captures.

How?: Change town captures so that the bunker/dock capture timer does not become active until the attacker captures EVERY CP except the Bunker/Docks, and THEN the 10 minute timer starts. If the defender is able to recapture a CP, the timer starts again. Couple this with the pop dependant timers on CP capture (longer timers for overpopped caps), and you greatly enhance the ability of an underpopped defender to hold out when defending, both slowing an attacker's ability to capture CPs and then to capture Bunkers/Docks.

Would this make town captures more difficult? Yes. That said, the new FMSs are very hard nuts to crack, so making it take longer somewhat more time consuming to capture towns isn't such a stretch. It would also ensure that an attacker would have to spend more people to hold CPs once they are captured.

This idea doesn't increase Spawn delays or involve asking anyone to switch sides. What ti does is increase the time needed to capture a town, slowing the ability of either side to cap a large number of towns in any one time period. This would help mitigate TZ3 rolls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another suggestion: Slow down map advances.

How?

1. Once a side captures a town, all of the FBs from that town leading to any connected enemy towns switch to enemy control and are indestructable for one hour.

2. After capturing a town, the new brigade supply for that town does not trickle in slowly; instead it comes in completely after a one hour delay timer.

By adding this idea, an overpopped side would still have to wait an hour after capturing one town to attack another that it connects to. In addition, the delay before supplying the town allows for the enemy to re-AO that town without facing a fresh town supply. The new owner would still have to spawn defenders from spawn CPs and FMSs  from the town they originally attacked from.

This method would slow advances from towns just captured, and allow defenders the chance to recapture lost towns before they become fortified. The underpopped side would be able to slow the enemy advance. In addition, if the overpopped side capped a town, they would have to wait an hour

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I have just gotten back so I,m going to throw this one out there.

Unit fatigue.   When a unit is moved to a new area or a certain percentage of its supply is used in any way it suffers a fatigue setting.

This fatigue has different consequences.

(1)  Because of its combat effectiveness being lowered it has its movement range lowered.  New undamaged unit has unlimited move  range where as damaged unit cannot move longer distances.

(2) Movement timer is increased ( as in you may have waited x amount of time to move a new unit but a battled unit takes x more time)  As in if its an hour before you can move a ground unit with no battle damage one with damage would take 2 hours.  Mind you it can go in steps.  25% of units used 1.25 hours 50% 1.5 hours 1.75% 1.75 hours and 100% used 2 hours.

(3) Bonus as a unit gains more experience in battle it should be able to OVERPOPULATE its base units.  Meaning because its proven itself in battle it gets more units then it normally would.  So if a tank unit normally has 20 tanks it gets as it gets battle damage over time it may start to repopulate at 25 units etc.  This rewards unit types outside of player control but allows players to move per say tougher units first into fighting situations.

I know that is a bit of math to do but it does lend toward credence for how units were treated. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2016 at 10:11 AM, Quincannon said:

If you want to alienate the F2P players who want a choice in what they play, and to virtually guarantee that side switchers who don't care will have even LESS reason to subscribe, then keep chewing on this bone.

Relying solely on this idea will do more harm than good in the long run.

Don't let the best be the enemy of the good.

I think this solution is not perfect but better than many of the other suggestions. Incentivising F2P to play underpop by giving access to a reserve SMG for example, gets around many of the problems.

You are right, most MMOs have a free to play option - but everyone who games understands that there is no such thing as a free lunch and people generally accept that if you are playing a game for free, then 1. you have some restrictions and/or 2. paying players will have access to more than you.

Sure, there is a risk of putting people off, but ask yourself if the risks associated with some of the other solutions being thrown around aren't worse?

Edited by Di11on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some more points to make:

1. Let's put this issue in perspective - imbalance is not all bad. If we had perfect balance we'd have WWI and a static front line. We only want to address this issue to the extent we think it is a real problem and not just a perceived one. 

2. Balance can be the enemy of variety - any long time player has played through campaigns they won and campaigns they lost - it's par for the course. If we exaggerate this issue too much then it creates an unrealistic expectation and a lower tolerance for slogging it through when the odds are stacked against you. New players will read all this discussion and think the game is broken when they are losing. We can't all be winners all the time.

3. By far the biggest impact on balance is when some squads switch sides. A small coordinated group of people can have a huge impact on this game - so to a large extent, we are the cause of and solution to this problem.

4. More players will mitigate the issue significantly.

Edited by Di11on
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok this idea came to me while I was laying in bed thinking about the game!:). What if the tiers were released at different times? So if the axis owns 3/4 of the map and every one is on tier 2, then allow the allies to have access to tier 3 for x amount of time before axis can get access to tier 3.  I would suggest only making it a few days but it could do a lot to swing the balance around or at least prolong the campaign!  I would also suggest when the off balance realese of the tiers happens to keep it announced in game for the duration of the off balance tiers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More carrot, less stick. 

 

1) Invest in in creating a rank/skills XP-based framework that avatars climb. 

2) Overhaul the scoring system to reward players for all positive behaviour and activity (killing stuff, capping, driving FMS, towing guns, hot drops, flying para transports, adhering to mission orders, escorting bombers, intercepting bombers, bombing bridges, destroying enemy FMS, building PPOs etc)

3) Be brave enough to reset or demote player rank at the end of a campaign or set of campaigns to create the requirement to work back up the career path

4) Link the rate of XP accruel or points per action to population level, meaning a side that is grossly underpop will claim more XP per action and an overpop side will accrue XP very slowly 

5) Let the market adjust 

 

If points meant something, and I get x10 points on side vs the other, a few players are going to switch to profit 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2017 at 1:47 AM, Silky said:

More carrot, less stick. 

 

1) Invest in in creating a rank/skills XP-based framework that avatars climb. 

2) Overhaul the scoring system to reward players for all positive behaviour and activity (killing stuff, capping, driving FMS, towing guns, hot drops, flying para transports, adhering to mission orders, escorting bombers, intercepting bombers, bombing bridges, destroying enemy FMS, building PPOs etc)

3) Be brave enough to reset or demote player rank at the end of a campaign or set of campaigns to create the requirement to work back up the career path

4) Link the rate of XP accruel or points per action to population level, meaning a side that is grossly underpop will claim more XP per action and an overpop side will accrue XP very slowly 

5) Let the market adjust 

 

If points meant something, and I get x10 points on side vs the other, a few players are going to switch to profit 

Bump.

 

This is a good idea, as it creates incentive for new players to get more points for helping the underpop side.

 

Also, I think it's the simplest idea offered, and I like to keep things simple.

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.