• Announcements

    • PITTPETE

      NEW Career Subscriptions now available   06/08/2019

      The all new highly anticipated / requested "Career Based Subscriptions" are available through www.WWIIONLINE.com/account only, starting at $9.99! There are three new subscriptions being added; 1) All Infantry at $9.99/mo, 2) All Air Forces at $9.99/mo, 3) All Ground Forces (Army Persona) at $12.99/mo. Continue reading to learn more and get back into the fight now! View the full article on battlegroundeurope.com
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
choad

A couple ideas regarding cap timers and spawn delay.

25 posts in this topic

I think that perhaps a couple minor changes to how things work with regard to SD and cap timers could provide for some better gameplay and balancing effects.

Would like to see them both tried out at the same time because i think they both place an place an emphasis on combat effectiveness and reward it. At the same time it works to help underpop side without penalizing overpop.

#1) Get rid of the sliding scale for cap timers based on side population balance entirely. Each side has the exact same formula. Basically, in order for the cap timer to move at all .... you need to have more attackers than defenders. So if there is one person defending, and one attacking and they are both inside the CP ... the timer doesnt move. The attacker needs to clear the CP and establish control. That, or if there are 2 attackers .... now the onis is on the defender to root them out (like it is now i suppose). I think it would make for a new interesting dynamic .... and bolster the defenders a bit. Encourage more combat vs hiding and hunkering down. Underpop side is generally on defense, this CP capture mechanic helps the defender in obvious ways. Plus promotes team play a bit better.

Even # attackers vs. defenders ... cp cap doesn't move.

+1 = 120 seconds

+2 = 90 seconds

+3  = 60 seconds

+4 or more = 30 seconds

 

 

#2)Sorry i mentioned in another post and am doung so again here. Get rid of spawn delay entirely. Instead have a base death/MIA timer that penalizes you for losing the unit essentially. Maybe have it be 20 seconds or something. Once you despawn upon dying or going MIA it kicks in. It does not reset if you change missions like current spawn delay does. Literally just 20 seconds after you leave game world, you can reenter on the same mission or a different one.  If you RTB or rescue ... or if it is your first sortie ... you never see the delay. It only penalizes you losing a unit. The reason i like this ... is it puts more of an emphasis on trying to stay alive vs. just riping through supply ... where the dumby who is doing that feels no consequence. Rather the rest of the players do. A war simulator such as this really should have some sort of penalty for dying .... and reward to the chap who killed you. Place emphasis on being cautious and not just mindlessly storming CP's or whatever. Now ... i also think that in underpop situations .... at a certain point .... that death penalty gets forgiven, or partly forgiven. So that is i guess the positive reinforcement for sticking with the underpop scenario. I would have the degree to which it is forgiven be factored not only on the % underpop but also take into consideration total population. So maybe if during low pop times it is 10 vs. 20 ... forgive the death penalty entirely. Now say during higher pop times it is 75 vs. 150 ... well maybe only forgive it 50% or something. Point being, during low pop ... you just physically dont have enough people to do the minimum required to hold a town. The same thing can not be said if u have 75 people on.

Perhaps an idea to mitigate the effect of point #2 is the death/mia penalty only applies if you are coming back in on a mission from the same origin or going to same target. Not sure how i feel about that stipulation TBH but i guess it provides a small way to mitigate it for those who take issue. 

I think both of these changes would be fairly simple to implement ... and would shake up things just enough. Plus ... it would help underpop situations during low pop IMO.

Thoughts?

Edited by choad
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This makes more sense, and makes your previous post in that other thread about having a fixed spawn delay for any KIA (vs RTB) make a lot more sense.

(and if that wasn't clear, good idea!)

 

Edited by tater
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not aggressive enough Choad, while I think your thinking should be in play, one of the overpop effects is that you DON'T die very much and have longer TOM per mission precisely because there are less underpop killers total and less that survive long enough to kill you.

The other problem is the time sink- takes X number of people to cap/recap, if the overpop has extra people to put on their caps they can cap towns much faster then underpop, part of the point of PN is that you aren't stuck in what I call the time well, taking too many people to recap a town and overpop shifts to another and uses their superior numbers to multicap fast when d is still back at the first town trying to lib.

 

Underpop goes and d the second town, overpop just switches back to the first town that never libbed and finishes it.  Underpop never gets time to get out and generate some offense.

 

So, more of the grouping up and rewarding team caps yes, rewarding the overpop with the Iwin button in beating the snot out of underpop with more faster teams creating a time well, hell no.

 

Edited by Kilemall
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent counter-argument.

I suppose the relative number of players to cap could be tied to the population. So 1:1 would not move the cap either way if the server pop is 1:1, but if the server pop was unbalanced, then 2 on the overpop side might not cap against 1, they have to kill him. Of course 2:1 usually guarantees killing 1 CP guard anyway.

Trying to fix capping and balance is (obviously) non-trivial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

Not aggressive enough Choad, while I think your thinking should be in play, one of the overpop effects is that you DON'T die very much and have longer TOM per mission precisely because there are less underpop killers total and less that survive long enough to kill you.

The other problem is the time sink- takes X number of people to cap/recap, if the overpop has extra people to put on their caps they can cap towns much faster then underpop, part of the point of PN is that you aren't stuck in what I call the time well, taking too many people to recap a town and overpop shifts to another and uses their superior numbers to multicap fast when d is still back at the first town trying to lib.

 

Underpop goes and d the second town, overpop just switches back to the first town that never libbed and finishes it.  Underpop never gets time to get out and generate some offense.

 

So, more of the grouping up and rewarding team caps yes, letting the overpop beat the snot out of underpop with more faster teams, hell no.

 

So the scenario that seems to be the nemisis of the community .... is ultra low pop, sides imbalanced.

The above outlined scenario allows for two things. Defending a cp against 1 capper is many many times easier. In fact, it is up to them to get you. Not the other way aroynd. When you kill them, they wait to respawn. The same likely isnt true for you. Now if they cap an unguarded cp .... getting it back is tougher! But i mean, come on .... guarding spawns is always P1 and if you dont do it to a minimal degree ... well then. This change would make it easier as a single defender. Seems like an improvement from staus quo imo.

Share this post


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

So the scenario that seems to be the nemisis of the community .... is ultra low pop, sides imbalanced.

The above outlined scenario allows for two things. Defending a cp against 1 capper is many many times easier. In fact, it is up to them to get you. Not the other way aroynd. When you kill them, they wait to respawn. The same likely isnt true for you. Now if they cap an unguarded cp .... getting it back is tougher! But i mean, come on .... guarding spawns is always P1 and if you dont do it to a minimal degree ... well then. This change would make it easier as a single defender. Seems like an improvement from staus quo imo.

Follow you right to the last.  Don't get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kilemall said:

Follow you right to the last.  Don't get it.

Which one ... better than status quo part?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about we just make a rule the over pop side can never win?

If they take 95% of map, or 3 factories, they automatically lose.

Then, everyone will always move to the under pop side.

Which, will then become over pop - so some will move back.

Ultimately leading to even pop on both sides.

Allowing either side to win, as at that point there is no over pop side.

 

SD is bad;  30 sec SD is abysmal.

Even the horrid capture timers are better than having SD.

( Capture timers only ruin attackers fun - SD ruins everyones fun)

Remove SD.  (and fix the EnterWorld bug for free)

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, delems said:

How about we just make a rule the over pop side can never win?

If they take 95% of map, or 3 factories, they automatically lose.

Then, everyone will always move to the under pop side.

Which, will then become over pop - so some will move back.

Ultimately leading to even pop on both sides.

Allowing either side to win, as at that point there is no over pop side.

 

SD is bad;  30 sec SD is abysmal.

Even the horrid capture timers are better than having SD.

Remove SD.  (and fix the EnterWorld bug)

 

Seems a wee bit knee jerk ... what i am saying has more potential for your beloved map roll than currently is .... but i suppose you stopped reading because there were a lot of words. I get it. 

In your mind you are arguing against what i am suggesting in favor of something that doesn't exist. Will never exist. A pure fantasy you have in your head .. no SD, no cap timers .... honor system. I am putting up an alternative against what is our reality ... which seems to enrage a number of people.

 

Edited by choad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If ruining fun is even part of the equation, guarding CPs needs to go away. When you are seriously underpop, defenses don;t even have enough people to guard all the CPs even if it's one of those rare groups of people who will all do that.

I'd be a lot more open to issues with the attacker's fun if every single attack was't 360 degrees. Everything about the game is far too porous, and defenses don't get started until after infantry are everywhere. If the goal is 360 degree deathmatch with ww2 style weapons, then it's great, I guess. If you want it to feel like a ww2 battle for more than a couple seconds every few hours in game... something needs to change.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** Seems a wee bit knee jerk ... 

As knee jerk as SD going from 10 to 30?

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, tater said:

If ruining fun is even part of the equation, guarding CPs needs to go away. When you are seriously underpop, defenses don;t even have enough people to guard all the CPs even if it's one of those rare groups of people who will all do that.

I'd be a lot more open to issues with the attacker's fun if every single attack was't 360 degrees. Everything about the game is far too porous, and defenses don't get started until after infantry are everywhere. If the goal is 360 degree deathmatch with ww2 style weapons, then it's great, I guess. If you want it to feel like a ww2 battle for more than a couple seconds every few hours in game... something needs to change.

Well that is the crux of it i guess. Everyone has a different definition of fun. Some just looking for fps action .... otgers have the long view and invest in a campaign wun.

Well unless you reduce the number of AO's (which i think they did already) i am not sure what the game can do about that. They give us the tools already (EWS .... ao timers, etc). 

Edited by choad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, delems said:

*** Seems a wee bit knee jerk ... 

As knee jerk as SD going from 10 to 30?

 

Did you READ the point of this thread? That is a big NO! Try harder delems. This isn't a 30 second spawn delay defense thread ... take your gripes elsewhere.

 

What is the old saying .... when all you got is a hammer everything looks like a nail ... something like that best describes your tantrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What ever, the 30 sec SD got old - tired of sitting at map - logged off.

The SD is working to even the population......

Be back later.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, delems said:

What ever, the 30 sec SD got old - tired of sitting at map - logged off.

The SD is working to even the population......

Be back later.

 

Ah christ take your pi$$'n and moaning elsewhere until the point in time you bring alternative solutions to the table.

Edited by choad
1 person likes this

Share this post


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

How about we just make a rule the over pop side can never win?

If they take 95% of map, or 3 factories, they automatically lose.

Then, everyone will always move to the under pop side.

Which, will then become over pop - so some will move back.

Ultimately leading to even pop on both sides.

Allowing either side to win, as at that point there is no over pop side.

 

SD is bad;  30 sec SD is abysmal.

Even the horrid capture timers are better than having SD.

( Capture timers only ruin attackers fun - SD ruins everyones fun)

Remove SD.  (and fix the EnterWorld bug for free)

 

I can't speak for what CRS' intent and goal is vis-a-vis side wins or whatnot- my objective for pushing PN has virtually NOTHING to do with win counts.

 

In fact, if you had perfect PN only the better organized side over longer hours or more effective actions would win- I'm looking to eliminate population from the equation of victory.

 

I don't want that hours and hours of agony spread on the rack of being underpop under the no-mitigation policy of the earlier game, for days weeks and years.  I want a GAME that you can come in and get your team going to WIN WHILE you are on, 24/7.

Share this post


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

Which one ... better than status quo part?

The whole statement-

 

Quote

This change would make it easier as a single defender. Seems like an improvement from staus quo imo.

It doesn't make sense to me re: helping the single defender that much vs. other impacts.

Share this post


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

The whole statement-

 

It doesn't make sense to me re: helping the single defender that much vs. other impacts.

Single defender vs 1 capper. Defender does not have to seek attacker. Attacker needs to take out defender. Anyone who operates around CP's knows that it is way easier to let them come to u vs clear cp. Combine that with a delayed respawn for everyone that u kill ... well there u go. If u can't hold a spawnale cp at that point .... u prob deserve to lose it.

Edited by choad
1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Single defender vs 1 capper. Defender does not have to seek attacker. Attacker needs to take out defender. Anyone who operates around CP's knows that it is way easier to let them come to u vs clear cp. Combine that with a delayed respawn for everyone that u kill ... well there u go. If u can't hold a spawnale cp at that point .... u prob deserve to lose it.

Yeah, I'd like this to always be true (clear the CP to cap it, period).

Honestly, I might like PPOs which could cover the doors---they can be blown with an inf satchel---so that the defenders can actually fight to keep people out a little better.

Most all the defense issue would go away with two things, player numbers (so that there are people to do all the necessary jobs), and TIME.

EWS/AOs are nonsense for providing this as the game is actually played. I've participated in attacks where we cap a bunch of stuff before the defense even gets organized, they it's the same old fight back and forth losing stuff for lack of guards, recapping, etc. I've participated in many more defenses where I spawn in to help the 2-3 other people in town with inf already everywhere (are allied maps/comms hobbled by UK vs France vs US forces, I seem to not see people on the map, then hear shooting in that empty area a lot?).

It;s tough, because you'd like to have surprise, but the defenders, while surprised, would already be entirely arrayed defensively around a town (once the war starts, anyway). And my arrayed around the town, I mean arrayed along the front facing the enemy. Short of paratroopers, there should be no attacking from the rear. Because of these realities, which can never be in the game 24/7 in a fair way without vast NPC units, I'd say for gameplay at the MAP level, that AOs should have to be placed even longer in advance. The problem of course is that people who want to fight... don't want to spend an hour setting up.

That's why the game needs more persistent MSPs that are spread out along a front, and players who spawn in get randomized among those. Say a new MSP that spawns players randomly along a line 100m long. The MSP can have foxholes, and maybe other indications of where it is. These defensive positions always have missions to them. When EWS/AO goes off, players spawn into those, and there is some certainty that the enemy is in FRONT of them, where they belong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion only, but attackers should not be able to capture a depot if defenders are present, i.e. have not been cleared.  Again, my opinion only, but in order for the capture timer to start, the depot should be cleared of defending troops.  1-2, 10, don't care how many defenders there are, defenders shouldn't lose ground because an enemy troops is nearby.

S!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, augetout said:

My opinion only, but attackers should not be able to capture a depot if defenders are present, i.e. have not been cleared.  Again, my opinion only, but in order for the capture timer to start, the depot should be cleared of defending troops.  1-2, 10, don't care how many defenders there are, defenders shouldn't lose ground because an enemy troops is nearby.

S!

I agree to a certain extent. The fact that you are guarding a CP and an EI places one foot inside the CP and waits for you to come clear him .... seems kinda absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, choad said:

Single defender vs 1 capper. Defender does not have to seek attacker. Attacker needs to take out defender. Anyone who operates around CP's knows that it is way easier to let them come to u vs clear cp. Combine that with a delayed respawn for everyone that u kill ... well there u go. If u can't hold a spawnale cp at that point .... u prob deserve to lose it.

Ok, I didn't misunderstand.

Hell no.

Underpop often can't clear depots reliably on cap or recap, it's the very nature of being hit with superior pop.

Also throws the game more towards second accounts on guard, which is already distasteful to me in terms of SD/CT calc.

It would also be multiple times harder for OP or UP to simply capture, and offense needs goosing more then anything else.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Kilemall said:

Ok, I didn't misunderstand.

Hell no.

Underpop often can't clear depots reliably on cap or recap, it's the very nature of being hit with superior pop.

Also throws the game more towards second accounts on guard, which is already distasteful to me in terms of SD/CT calc.

It would also be multiple times harder for OP or UP to simply capture, and offense needs goosing more then anything else.

 

Meh - i just disagree. Offense is rewarded by making it easier to hold what they took. Defenders are provided a great opportunity to resist OP more effectively for those that show interest in actually guarding spawnables.

IMO it is better than the situation as it exists presently .... it provides a better opportunity to defend for underpop while at the same time .... does not penalize OP.  If UP does not do the things necessary to hold spawnable CP's ... well it shouldn't be at the expense of the OP players at a certain point. 

Edited by choad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, choad said:

Meh - i just disagree. Offense is rewarded by making it easier to hold what they took. Defenders are provided a great opportunity to resist OP more effectively for thosevthat show interest in actually guarding spawnables.

IMO it is better than the situation as it exists presently .... it provides a better opportunity to defend for underpop while at the same time .... does not penalize OP.  If UP does not do the things necessary to hold spawnable CP's ... well it shouldn't be at the expense of the OP players at a certain point. 

Definitely against the principles of PN I am promoting, forcing UP to be defenders only and against the rack of "I better not leave this depot".

That's not going to generate any more fun of fire and movement for the UP much less allow offense for that side.  Bleh.

OP definitely should get 'reward' for getting their people on target and coordinated, but not to the point that their defended points are virtually impregnable and they are the only ones with extra people to clear depots consistently.

Edited by Kilemall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with @choad here. I get stuck guarding a lot (someone has to), and if I'd prefer to look out the windows and actually shoot, yell out contacts, etc, then I am in a situation where ei can just sneak into the closet, and then I notice the bar moving, (say distracted by shooting at ei trying to approach), and I have to try and clear. The guys assaulting should have to clear ME, I don't see this as draconian.

UP players are stuck on defense most of the time anyway, and whatever side is playing you are required to guard, or you lose. That's the whole issue with the cap system and low pop in general. There are a minimum number of players for any defense to be viable vs a real attack, and even with moles it's just frustrating garbage play that wastes players.

Going to the PPO idea, if you could block CP doors, then a rifle could blow the door. Heck, maybe a close enough grenade could blow a door PPO. The ei could still get in, but every CP cap attempt ends up announced by a BOOM. If he tries to replace the door object (however long that is set to take), he likely gets killed. This would allow UP players to be near the CP, but not IN the CP, which would at least be more fun. If the elect to box themselves into the CP, then they can fight out the windows, and know they won;t be surprised in the room, there will at least be a boom first.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.