nugx

Rank overhaul - point based system

64 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, viper69 said:

I like the rank system the way it is.

 

Once you have max rank, there is no reason to have that rank anymore, and players just use the top available stuff, meaning the newbies are left in first tier stuff to be clubbed by the old vets, also with every new campaign, 'old vets' have an unfair advantage over any new players that would start to play.

Every campaign should be a fresh start for everyone.

Edited by nugx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Need to remove rank from gear association imo.

Sure, can rank up based on gear, but if your rank is changed, gear doesn't change (i.e. gear tracked by another value as well)

As a squad leader, I need to be able to set the ranks of all my members - and it shouldn't impact the gear they can spawn.

I don't need 20 Lt Col in my squad, I need mostly privates and corporals; with a few sergeants and officers.

Right now I'd like to show 'appreciation' to a few of my squaddies, would like to promote them from private to corporal - but I can't;  we have no squad ranking system for COs.

This would so much help in the creation/formation and retention in squads imo.

It would also show leadership and be a way for CO to award members.

 

Do something for squads for a change - NOT one thing done for squads (cept squad website, which has helped a bit).

I've heard squads are important, but haven't seen one in game change to show that.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Need to remove rank from gear association imo.

Yea this is exactly what it does,

but there also should be some form of progression,  so people cannot drive tigers or fly late planes from the start  (because then no one would use the early stuff), and this does this also.

Edited by nugx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, nugx said:

Yea this is exactly what it does,

but there also should be some form of progression,  so people cannot drive tigers or fly late planes from the start  (because then no one would use the early stuff), and this does this also.

I’m 100% committed to a rank-XP system that could really change the way the game plays, but restricting gear to newer players is possibly not a way to win new hearts, minds and subscriptions.

 

You want new players to come in and be competitive from the start, not just be fodder to more expert players armed with more lethal equipment 

Edited by Silky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

but restricting gear to newer players is possibly not a way to win new hearts, minds and subscriptions.

New players are restricted right now by rank.

This unlocks the restriction - it would give actualy more freedom than there is now !

 

Quote

You want new players to come in and be competitive from the start, not just be fodder to more expert players armed with more lethal equipment

Exactly !  The players are fodder with current rank system.

This unlocks the restriction and if someone would want to he would be able to pick the 'top ride' - i've explained it everything on the slides.

 

With this system there is no restriction at all - all you need to do, is get points by playing.

 

Edited by nugx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We talked about Personal Spawn Limits years ago, but the discussion never went anywhere.  Mainly I think the point of it was to discourage RDP runs ending by crashing into factories.

Or H81s suiciding into the ground because they were sacrificing themselves to penetrate the upper armor of Tiger cupolas with their 50cals, despite the fact that no sane pilot in the war would dive at such an angle, unless you were a Japanese kamikaze.

I think with the system, nugx, you need to start people out with points - give them the benefit of the doubt.  New players will burn through points by crashing planes mainly cause they haven't been taught how to fly / too impatient to learn.

But that just goes to show that every person subscribed needs to invite one other person to the game for 1 on 1 personal training - especially if we want this game to thrive again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an in-game showing, might be easier to understand

 

Wm2GfP7.png

 

 

 

Quote

think with the system, nugx, you need to start people out with points - give them the benefit of the doubt.

Totaly, if 'new player' would join at middle or end of the campaign, give him points, but at the start of the war, everyone goes without points - it's only fair for everyone.

Edited by nugx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Short summary:

 

Current rank :

1) Restriction

2) You earn points to level up the rank - which is linear and once you attain max rank. nothing happens, max rank is a dead end

3) Old vets have unfair advantage over new players that start to play at any point.

 

This system :

1) No restriction

2) You earn points to unlock the ride you want - with added personal spawns it's non linear but dynamic  because if you attain 'max rank' - you can lose the 'max rank'

3) Everyone at start of every campaign would have equal chances, and during middle and end, give new players joining some points so they are not left out so much.

 

Basicaly, it's same as rank - without restriction and with added personal spawns.

 

So 2 things are needed to 'fix' the rank:

- remove the restriction from gear

add personal spawns.

 

Wm2GfP7.png

Edited by nugx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The points could even go together with your 'persona' from one campaign to other (if you had any left) - at this point yes, give points at start of new campaign to new players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going even further - add a timeline.

 

At 1939 - only 109 e1 available for everyone (purchase higher tier for points)

At 1941 - 109 e1, e4, f2 available for everyone (purchase higher tier for points)

etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a proposal floating around my head needing articulating into a coherent plan. 

 

I would factor Mission Success into your point scoring considerations. Currently, the mission objectives don't mean anything.

 

Let's imagine a game where the points you score are strongly connected to the success of the mission objective (CP attack/defence, town attack/defence, bombs on factories, bombers downed, air-ground targets destroyed, enemy fighters destroyed etc) and this then encourages grouping to achieve the mission objective and placed less emphasis on the players to achieve kills, so long as the mission grouping achieves the kills and objectives. This take some pressure off new players and also slightly reduces the burden on each of us to be one another's contents.

Edited by Silky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then also factor in other abilities that one could use to reward rank advance, other than access to equipment. Suppose there was differentiation in abilities such as the ability to annotate mission maps for players moving up to NCO ranks, with officer ranks being able to access a command chat communication layer, or officer ranks accessing enhanced FMS placement tools or NCOs enhanced PPO options. Imagine bomber pilots having slave drones for bombing missions, with the number of drones correlated to the rank of the pilot - Pilot Officers has no slave drone, Flying Officer has one, Flight Lt has four, Squadron Leader has eight, Wing Commander has sixteen etc

 

Then also perhaps consider a way to link these abilities with side loyalty, so there's a reward for sticking with one side for the campaign, and also a reward for the way the campaign plays out - quick victories are rewarded, prolonged are rewarded over rapid defeats

 

Then also let's look at points being awarded based on underpop/overpop, so the side that is underpop is balanced by being able to progress in abilities and options faster than the overpop sides.

 

There's a plethora of options and game balance mechanisms available should there be development hours thrown into the entire XP/Points systems. I just don't get the feeling the XP 'currency' as KFSone use to call it is really on the radar at the moment. It should be front and centre, because we can use XP to shape player behaviours, and these behaviours are the most important elements of the entire game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you want to chuck all the work older vets have done down the sh!tter? The game is never going to draw swathes of new people until it looks a whole lot better. If anything the rank XP needs reduced globally. The only advantage we old vets had was a target rich environment, new people have to contend with a lot less attackers or defenders so ranking up is longer with its current point level. But don’t even suggest after joining earlier this month a complete rank overhaul wiping out everything a lot have people have done to get where they are. You want to bring in new people without a thought of what the older people went through. Unless your an alt account that is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you want to chuck all the work older vets have done down the sh!tter?

Old vets don't get anything with max rank anyway, they can only club newbies or players with low rank.

If you want to maintain 'top ride' - atleast play for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, viper69 said:

So you want to chuck all the work older vets have done down the sh!tter? The game is never going to draw swathes of new people until it looks a whole lot better. If anything the rank XP needs reduced globally. The only advantage we old vets had was a target rich environment, new people have to contend with a lot less attackers or defenders so ranking up is longer with its current point level. But don’t even suggest after joining earlier this month a complete rank overhaul wiping out everything a lot have people have done to get where they are. You want to bring in new people without a thought of what the older people went through. Unless your an alt account that is.

it is a difficult topic to engage with. I would favour a periodic reset of all ranks - annual? Every 10 campaigns? Every major version release? - but only if rank was disconnected from equipment access, which has been my point in this thread. 

I’d much rather have a hundred privates a side with a few officers than the Lt Colonelfest it is currently. But to go in that direction and deny players access to units would indeed be suicide 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And ranks need to be able to be set by COs of squad to show their squad organization.

What is a squad?  A sergeant, couple corporals and mostly private FC and private.

That not how the ranks look in our squad.....

Or, they may structure themselves as a platoon with corresponding ranks.

If a squad chooses not to this fine, then rank can be how system determines it to be.

 

Edited by delems
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, delems said:

And ranks need to be able to be set by COs of squad to show their squad organization.

What is a squad?  A sergeant, couple corporals and mostly private FC and private.

That not how the ranks look in our squad.....

Or, they may structure themselves as a platoon with corresponding ranks.

If a squad chooses not to this fine, then rank can be how system determines it to be.

 

Agree. The officer ranks should fit with squad structure 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.