Jump to content

Photo

War Point Changes - [ Under Revision ]


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
367 replies to this topic

#21
Con

Con
  • 4,259 posts

What about tying scavenge goals to the current task objectives?

 

i.e. if the current tasks call for metal, cloth, food, ammo

 

Then only scavenging those would count toward the raid objective.

 

Might not have to increase the time that way.  Sure the time increase would be good for war raids, but it might make the non-war raids too easy.

 

We're trying to avoid scenarios where you turn up to compounds that don't have their resources stocked and you don't get the points as a result. Hence why we're counting empty containers as part of the "scavenged" count.



#22
Gronf

Gronf
  • 32 posts

As a non dmu user, the scavenging points will be a huge problem...if i get trashed and all stolen, it will take me hours to rebuild all, while a dmu can do it in 5 minutes

 

Also the equipment is not variously used because people dont try, many guys mix stuff and beat strong guys anyway...

 

And lags are a much more important thing to fix imho, much more than ai or stuff


Edited by Gronf, 29 January 2015 - 01:32 AM.

  • 5

#23
Con

Con
  • 4,259 posts

Recruiting is out of hand already.  If war points were based on individual, not alliance, standings then all alliances are equally good for a new recruit.  No need to find a lower ranked alliance to train in, no need for lower ranked alliances at all really.  Sounds like another way to further ossify the status quo.  Not convinced that is a good thing for the game.

 

I think the larger and more organised Alliances are that way because of the number of raids they do, not necessarily their quality target selection. They simply out pace everyone else. They're also really effective at pulling people together to fulfil their War Tasks. 



#24
DZplayer

DZplayer
  • 368 posts

We have to scavenge everything to earn points? Thats gonna be brutal for non-dmu users.


  • 5

#25
Ivan

Ivan
  • 571 posts

m416 and m60 are very much used because their range allows it (uniqes with good range boosts + deadeyes).

 

Lower lvl AR and LMG are not effective because of their low range and damage..not the best hit chance either.

Pistols,shotguns,SMG..think that will be a masterpiece if you guys pull it off and make them usable :)


  • 0

#26
Jillian Storm

Jillian Storm
  • 9 posts

The way I see it, this is going to lead to the classic "Outside Corner Defense" where everyone is crammed together, and all the storage buildings will be in their sight - this in turn will turn raids into simple weapons/gear challenges. Do you have good enough equipment to kill everyone off and loot them? Good. Otherwise, don't even try.

 

I hope I'm wrong.


  • 4

#27
The Mentor

The Mentor
  • 164 posts
The damage dropoff removal concerns me. It's a double edged sword that would get us nowhere. With M60s being able to hit at full damage at a distance, raid crews would be chopped up in seconds. Same goes for the M107. Wouldn't you also have to boost attacker covet as well just to level it off? As we all know, the jersey barrier barricades suck compared to the car barricades. Being left on those would leave you more vulnerable to gunfire than ever before.
  • 0

#28
Toshio_Ota LXS

Toshio_Ota LXS
  • 17 posts

With regards to removing the drop off:

 

You're saying that now range doesn't matter with any gun that has 99% hit chance: The determining factor will be aps and damage. Therefore you do not integrate all weapons, but just the ones with higher aps (lmgs) since this will outweigh the accuracy falloff. Any lmg with hit chance bonus is a raiding weapon, in much the same way as Long Rifles with range bonus now dominate the system with range being the most prized characteristic.

 

I:n the end you may just end up changing the game from Long Rifles to LMGs and the dominant stat from Range to APS.


  • 3

#29
Lmar

Lmar
  • 3 posts

Idea. Add aiming time for LRs if outside of range, the farther target the more time for aiming before shot


  • 2

#30
chris327

chris327
  • 76 posts
Con my thought is this. In my level range on yahoo there are few who acore lots of pts individually. But many are in top alliances and dont score. So I would have a few targets that score to hit since im very active? Not sure if it will work good. Bc if thats the case I will have maybe 3 other raiders who score as much as I do in my range and maybe 10 total that even score. So the 4 active raiders in range will all be after the same 10 targets. And non raiders in top alliances are basically given a white flag for raiding purpose since im not attacking someone worth 0 but in the top alliance.

Also.consider some.of the raiders use fuel to speed up so they can clear the few targets and nobody else get any.

Edited by chris327, 29 January 2015 - 02:41 AM.

  • 2

#31
LLiquid

LLiquid
  • 2,533 posts

War and Competition makes the game fun in your opinion, that's fine. Did I mention that the average number of raids per player per month is still less than 1? There's still a bunch of people who find that loot gathering appealing.

 

Based on this (and not wanting to sound ungrateful for the time you and your team spend developing the game) why have another update to the PVP/Raiding aspect of the game while non-raiders are still waiting for the final PVE levels to be released (3 years-ish after the game was released)?

 

Is it money/revenue based or something else?

 

Knowing that you have said your raiding skills are "limited"....... I struggle to understand how you can develop a part of the game you are not so good at playing yourself.

 

EDIT:

 

 

Err actually im a nice raider, if someone doesn't have the DMU I try not to scavenge their containers unless i need stuff, this could put a lot of Pepe of raiding as every raid they will get everything taken...

 

Even if they have DMU and its a respected foe, its normal only to take ammo, this will encourages a lot of frustration... just my 2 cents..

 
Sums it up very nicely. By rewarding PVP Players for stealing resources, is this not going to encourage "griefing"? We already see players complaining that their compounds are being trashed e.g. http://forum.conarti...eason-not-good/

Edited by LLiquid, 29 January 2015 - 02:46 AM.

  • 0

#32
frijolito

frijolito
  • 233 posts

Err actually im a nice raider, if someone doesn't have the DMU I try not to scavenge their containers unless i need stuff, this could put a lot of People off raiding as every raid they will get everything taken...

 

Even if they have DMU and its a respected foe, its normal only to take ammo, this will encourages a lot of frustration... just my 2 cents..


Edited by frijolito, 29 January 2015 - 02:45 AM.

  • 6

#33
Toshio_Ota LXS

Toshio_Ota LXS
  • 17 posts

All I hear and see is that there is one right way to raid. For some people, that's fine, because they like to min-max. But for me and for a lot of other people, it's boring. There's no room for player agency, there's no room for variety. So it becomes, have these 5 rifles and this gear, or lose. There's no fun in that. 

I disagree. The deficiency leading to this lack of requirement for strategy is due to the fact that everyone is the same: compounds exactly the same, street cover in exactly the same place for everyone. This means that there are certain types of defenses that work and the rest don't -- there's little room for variation. This inevitably leads to a uniform code of defenses and attack strategies. Everything that works has already been developed after 2 years.

 

Unfortunately any fix to this problem seems to have downsides that outweigh or balance the upsides: 

1) If everyone's compounds were different, it may give some an unfair advantage.

2) Changing the compound designs periodically but for everyone at the same time would work for the first week they are implemented; until someone got a chance to again share what works best (and changing around your compound every week would get tedious).

3)Changing the dominant weapon in raiding (from long rifles to lmgs, see my previous post) would have a similar effect -- new designs would be necessary, but after a while the same thing will happen again, that is, someone will publish a new raiding strategies guide and compound defenses guide and you're stuck with the same problem all over.

 

I appreciate that the team of devs has probably thought long and hard on this issue, but honestly there is no perfect solution. The only thing we can do is listen to each other's arguments and try to make the best changes we can!


  • 1

#34
Con

Con
  • 4,259 posts

We have to scavenge everything to earn points? Thats gonna be brutal for non-dmu users.

 

I think you're misunderstanding. You have to scavenge 100% of the buildings in an enemy compound. 

 

Edit: Misread what you wrote, didn't make the connection you were alluding to. 



#35
frijolito

frijolito
  • 233 posts

I think you're misunderstanding. You have to scavenge 100% of the buildings in an enemy compound.

 

As in take resources from all storage's and drop offs? If so I think we understand..


  • 0

#36
Con

Con
  • 4,259 posts

To address the concerns about griefing and players losing their hard earned resources, we will be looking at a reduction in the percentage of resources taken when a building is raided.



#37
Con

Con
  • 4,259 posts

Based on this (and not wanting to sound ungrateful for the time you and your team spend developing the game) why have another update to the PVP/Raiding aspect of the game while non-raiders are still waiting for the final PVE levels to be released (3 years-ish after the game was released)?

 

We're working on multiple other features at the moment. 

 

These changes are relatively easy. Changing the way that damage drop-offs work for example is a few lines of code. The larger overall change with War Points obviously takes more time, but it's being done in amongst the other stuff we've got going on. 

 

Currently in the works is:

- Map content update of about 30 new map variants (which will launch next week)

- War Point changes

- Incinerator

- Crafting & Upgrading Update

- Island planning

 

We really haven't looked at PvP since June of last year, though we did make some minor tweaks in November. For the very small amount of people who do play it, they play it ferociously. It's good for the long term health of the game to have people hanging around once they've hit the cap.



#38
Zingman

Zingman
  • 3,179 posts

Err actually im a nice raider, if someone doesn't have the DMU I try not to scavenge their containers unless i need stuff, this could put a lot of People off raiding as every raid they will get everything taken...

 

Even if they have DMU and its a respected foe, its normal only to take ammo, this will encourages a lot of frustration... just my 2 cents..

 

This is kinda what i was trying to get across, but not being a raider, didn't do effectively I guess.

 

If the resources looted are the same as the tasks for that round, then it makes sense.

 

Even as a non-raider I know that taking resources for the sake of taking resources, especially food/water, when you're at max capacity already -- is pretty gauche.


  • 1

#39
Con

Con
  • 4,259 posts

This is kinda what i was trying to get across, but not being a raider, didn't do effectively I guess.

 

If the resources looted are the same as the tasks for that round, then it makes sense.

 

Even as a non-raider I know that taking resources for the sake of taking resources, especially food/water, when you're at max capacity already -- is pretty gauche.

 

Yeah, again, we can tweak the impact on the "victim" in these cases to lessen the blow. But really, from my perspective, it's a WAR, you're trying to weaken your opponent. :D



#40
Ivan

Ivan
  • 571 posts

Con how do you expect the new point system based on individual scores will work on a server like Kong?

 

Up until now,on all servers our main concern was to have enough players and their alts accros all lvl ranges scoring.

What is next ?

Have enough people in all the individual score ranges scoring?

 

Because on Kong you have 3 alliances to work with.3 alliances times lets say 10 people raiding. I cant imagine how the new system would work,infact i am sure it wont work at all.

Cheering for technical issues! :D


  • 0