Jump to content

Photo

Tasker Update - Alliance War [ Preview ]


  • Please log in to reply
143 replies to this topic

#41
Sev

Sev
  • 548 posts

As the person who has been working on this, I think that a couple of important things have been missed.

 

Mission points are much lower than Raiding Points 

... like, much much lower.  I think that Con said that PvP points were about 5 times, but in actual fact I think it is closer to 20 times.  The easiest mission areas are about 1/20th of what the lowest PvP level would be.  In fact, with the rewards being scaled up, I think the Mission points could actually be too low at the moment, but we will wait and see.

 

Your missions areas are capped

I can't remember the exact number, but I believe that you valid missions are limited to about 5 levels below your player level.  So as you level up, you can't just farm the lower levels.  

 

The mission points are linked to your level

To counter the fact that higher level areas are larger, harder and have longer return times, the points for areas increase with the level.  They are still substantially lower than the PvP points.

 

The White Flag is in effect

That means, if you put on a white flag, you can't get points. I'm sure there will be mixed feeling about this one, but we thought this was the fairest thing.

The raid points system should ensure that non raiders aren't at the top of anyone's target list, but it will also mean that they aren't immune to attacks either.  You may not want to raid, but you will probably still want to defend your compound a bit.

 

The stats have been recording for about a year

This probably isn't as important as the other things, but I thought you might like to know that I have been recording your alliance pvp stats for about 12 months, so all you awesome raiders out there will have something to show off from day one.

 

 

Finally, and most importantly, all of this is fluid.  

Nothing is set in stone.  

We have taken our best guess at what we think is the right balance, but I am sure that it will have to be adjusted.  We will just want to see the data before we do.  



#42
Aubrey Dickson

Aubrey Dickson
  • 557 posts

The White Flag is in effect

That means, if you put on a white flag, you can't get points. I'm sure there will be mixed feeling about this one, but we thought this was the fairest thing.

The raid points system should ensure that non raiders aren't at the top of anyone's target list, but it will also mean that they aren't immune to attacks either.  You may not want to raid, but you will probably still want to defend your compound a bit.

Well this just shot down my plan to create a alliance but i understand completely why y`all are doing it this way 


  • 5

#43
Cherry

Cherry
  • 792 posts

As the person who has been working on this, I think that a couple of important things have been missed.

 

 

The White Flag is in effect

That means, if you put on a white flag, you can't get points. I'm sure there will be mixed feeling about this one, but we thought this was the fairest thing.

The raid points system should ensure that non raiders aren't at the top of anyone's target list, but it will also mean that they aren't immune to attacks either.  You may not want to raid, but you will probably still want to defend your compound a bit.

 

You call it tasker update and now you want to force PvE players into PvP?

 

If missions give just 1/20 of raids it would be fair to let WFers take part on earning war points, otherwise this update is kind of irrelevant and only raiders who raid with one or two teams and loot with another will take advantage.

 

Many taskers are totally into PvE and will become easy targets if they pull down WF.

 

This won't help anybody but those people who are out for cheap or free banners ....


  • 7

#44
Zingman

Zingman
  • 3,168 posts

Mission points are much lower than Raiding Points 

... like, much much lower.  I think that Con said that PvP points were about 5 times, but in actual fact I think it is closer to 20 times.  The easiest mission areas are about 1/20th of what the lowest PvP level would be.  In fact, with the rewards being scaled up, I think the Mission points could actually be too low at the moment, but we will wait and see.

 

Your missions areas are capped

I can't remember the exact number, but I believe that you valid missions are limited to about 5 levels below your player level.  So as you level up, you can't just farm the lower levels.  

 

So what happens with max level players?  The "5 level rule" is supposed to happen with infected bounties, but we all know it "breaks" because there aren't enough areas within 5 levels of 55, and thus we have bounties in the West Bricks. 

 

At first glance a ratio of 1/20 still seems... a little generous.   A PvP raid at level 55 takes 2 hours with return time (iirc, not going to take the White Flag off to find out).    Since only played missions count and you have to scavenge all containers, you're looking at a minimum of 6 minutes per mission, even with a DMU (speeding up return times + time to load + mission time itself).   10 missions per hour, so yeah,in 2 hours time a DMU could have about the same amount of points as a raider. 40+ locations in Green Plains and Waterside alone, so that's enough to cover two raids by a raider in the same general time frame.

 

Raiders and DMU players are both very small segments of the playerbase (both less than 5% from what has been said), so if a DMU player can pull the same number of points as Raider in the same amount of time, the potential is there for it to be... disruptive.

 

---

 

The mission points are linked to your level

To counter the fact that higher level areas are larger, harder and have longer return times, the points for areas increase with the level.  They are still substantially lower than the PvP points.

 

We'll have to see, but this seems like it will heavily favor high level accounts.   You can correct me if  I'm wrong, but I don't recall there being a strong bias with raiding  (part of the reason people use low-level alts in war for raiding).   DMU accounts with the 5 min return times will of course have a huge advantage here.

 

---

 

The White Flag is in effect

That means, if you put on a white flag, you can't get points. I'm sure there will be mixed feeling about this one, but we thought this was the fairest thing.

The raid points system should ensure that non raiders aren't at the top of anyone's target list, but it will also mean that they aren't immune to attacks either.  You may not want to raid, but you will probably still want to defend your compound a bit.

 

Mixed on this.   Kinda agree with Cherry that the update is supposed to be about the "taskers", yet it forces them to expose themselves to raiding if they want to get the rewards.   I know i won't be taking off the White Flag myself personally, dunno how many others will either.  On the other hand, I do think they should be exposed if they're going to get the exact same rewards as a raider, so I think it's probably the right decision to have the White Flag rules in effect.   

 

---

 

I dunno, still very "meh" on the idea.  Kinda wish there there was a separate reward box for taskers, one tied to donation levels for the tasks, because really, that's what being a tasker is all about, and not running missions.


  • 7

#45
Furryicecubes

Furryicecubes
  • 144 posts

As the person who has been working on this, I think that a couple of important things have been missed.

 

Mission points are much lower than Raiding Points 

 

 

Your missions areas are capped

 

 

The mission points are linked to your level

 

The White Flag is in effect

 

Finally, and most importantly, all of this is fluid.

Nothing is set in stone.  

We have taken our best guess at what we think is the right balance, but I am sure that it will have to be adjusted.  We will just want to see the data before we do.  

 

Snipped to save a little space :D 

 

Firstly, thank you for the clarification and correction of the numbers. As well as the fact that missions are capped at 5 levels below. 

 

Given that, is there consideration to either extend that for level 55's or create new level 51+ areas?

 

As to the white flag stopping people earning, that does put a different slant on things, and personally, I think levels the playing field a fair bit and for me, is the right way to do it.


  • 1

#46
Wurstl

Wurstl
  • 204 posts

As the person who has been working on this, I think that a couple of important things have been missed.

 

Mission points are much lower than Raiding Points 

... like, much much lower.  I think that Con said that PvP points were about 5 times, but in actual fact I think it is closer to 20 times.  The easiest mission areas are about 1/20th of what the lowest PvP level would be.  In fact, with the rewards being scaled up, I think the Mission points could actually be too low at the moment, but we will wait and see.

I hope your calculations include the time for trading gear, fuel for upgrading lrs, lootluck or cash a raider has to constitute otherwise he would never score those warpoints. Raiding cannot exist with either running many lucky missions or spending long time trading, trade+$ or trade+skill; - it takes something.

Looters don't depend on anything, they loot the stuff they need; no need for upgarding hercarmors, deadeyes or anything like that.

Any lvl55 mission should be solved easily with pve gear worth 1key per item.. so 10 lvl3 keys. What will be the gear worth to get one of the top5 hardest lvl55 compounds down for probably 27 WP? maybe 200-500prems, probably even more to get everything crafted.

A looter can isolate himself from the game and needs nothing else for generating WP.

Please consider this essential part in your WP calculation.

 

The White Flag is in effect


The stats

 

 

back to my earlier top rated post here (-13) where I was obviously thinking way ahead of other people:

 

..so crappy PVE bases that are only designed to hold a zed attack off will become more warpoints worth now for their looting activity. they mix under our normal wartargets so we will have more weak compounds worth more points right?

 

...

 

 

WF in effect makes much sense, but it doesnt matter much. many weaker lower PVE players cant afford WFs. Im not sure if a stat system alone can prevent players leaving their compounds abandoned.. unfortunetly we have seen many doing that, not concerning, not giving us awesome raids but high points almost for free. others put defenders on one side and the flag to the other. I hope you consider giving that behaviour a fine in wps in some way when doing the new point system.

It will raise the quality of the new stat system and raids at the same time.


  • -3

#47
Disastra

Disastra
  • 31 posts

Such a shame. Not a reward for PvE taskers then after all. 


  • 9

#48
Jamesie

Jamesie
  • 10 posts

no freaking way will i be taking down my WF - this is utter bullshit yet again. We are an alliance of looters and it looks like we will yet again be overlooked in favour of children trashing compounds. This may well be the final straw for me

 

 

a very pissed off Mav3rick


  • 6

#49
hershelwise

hershelwise
  • 300 posts

I agree with Con's decision to not let WF looters to be eligible for war boxes since We (me included as a WF donator) actively opt out of the "war" part of alliance wars. We still get to enjoy the tokens and boosts and personally I find that more than enough.

 

And to quickly answer to "without WF I would get trashed" in my own experience that is in no way the norm of the raiders. I tried going without my WF for a while and had no such experiences. Zero trashers. Plenty of raiders.

 

I think that this new update is a very good addition to the Alliance Wars and should be treated as such. It is a good balance for raiders to get something more than ammo and supplies from missions and gives active donators something to aspire to. Very well done, all in all.


  • 1

#50
Disastra

Disastra
  • 31 posts

Why would tasking donators have anything to aspire to if they're not earning any points?  There's no balance at all to this, only raiders will gain, peaceful taskers get nothing.  

 

As for not being 'trashed' you've been lucky then.  I've already seen people in chat saying they can't wait to trash all the taskers who remove wf as well as steal their fuel/resouces.  

 

Had it not been touted as a reward for taskers I wouldn't be so annoyed, but it was and it isn't at all.


Edited by Disastra, 27 January 2017 - 02:20 PM.

  • 3

#51
Aubrey Dickson

Aubrey Dickson
  • 557 posts

Why are people raging so hard about how con and co are setting up this update? I`m part of the 5% or so of the playerbase that has a DMU AND I have a WF on so you would think I would be raging like the rest of PVE players but I`m not.


  • 3

#52
hershelwise

hershelwise
  • 300 posts

Why would tasking donators have anything to aspire to if they're not earning any points?

 

My point was that taskers have the points To aspire For. If they remove the WF, that is. And maybe I have been lucky with not getting trashed, just don't believe that it is as wide spread issue as everyone seems to think.


Just relax and see where this goes. Like Con said, nothing is set in stone.


  • 2

#53
Disastra

Disastra
  • 31 posts

I saw that nothing is set in stone, and am pleased about that.  However, if no-one voices their opinion against the idea of excluding wf looters then it's a possibility this aspect gets ignored or forgotten about. There could be a lower tier of rewards for super-looters that have no bearing on the 'war' boxes maybe.  

 

Currently all this update as it stands means is that the same alliances that lead now will gain more points and the ones that don't still won't so there's no change really. Making an update is an opportunity to add something for the peaceable who love the game in their own way.

 

Regarding trashing I speak from knowledge not rumour. Quite apart from people also bragging openly about doing it.

 

Unfortunately I know of players that were constantly trashed once protection stopped, by the neighbours they'd helped out whilst under protection and blissfully unaware they were drawing attention to themselves.  Sadly those trashers mostly had all uni gear/weapons, either alts or paid for keys to buy in trade, few players can afford to do that to defend themselves and can't save fuel whilst it is happening to get wf.  The field is not level.

 

Anyway, I shall indeed wait and see. I shall also hope that those who chose to play, for as much time as anyone else, notwithstanding in a different way, will not be left out entirely.


  • 0

#54
Wurstl

Wurstl
  • 204 posts

WF

 

If a raider equipps WF in a warround, he and his ally loses all his points that were scored up to this point.

It would only be fair if a "taskscorer" would lose all his WPs too and the allytask loses all resources that tasker donated that round.

 

 

Taskers should not be allowed to donate in the tasks (that the devs are planning to include in the warsystem now) if they got WF equipped!

I remember con's older idea that alliance members must have WF down if the ally wants to take part on war.

 

 

equality and fairness for all sounds good to me.


Edited by Wurstl, 27 January 2017 - 07:41 PM.

  • 0

#55
Con

Con
  • 4,105 posts

wbmpRoj.jpg

 

It's ok. Take a breath. All of this was highly speculative. Like Sev said, we'll look at the numbers and analytics we get back after launch and make adjustments. 

 

What we're looking for is a balance for both sides, it's not US vs THEM, it's not us trying to force raiding on people. We're just trying to open up options in the most fair way for everyone. 

 

I guess I can't say it enough. Nothing is set in stone, everything is in flux. 



#56
Aubrey Dickson

Aubrey Dickson
  • 557 posts

wbmpRoj.jpg

 

It's ok. Take a breath. All of this was highly speculative. Like Sev said, we'll look at the numbers and analytics we get back after launch and make adjustments. 

 

What we're looking for is a balance for both sides, it's not US vs THEM, it's not us trying to force raiding on people. We're just trying to open up options in the most fair way for everyone. 

 

I guess I can't say it enough. Nothing is set in stone, everything is in flux. 

 

TBH i think i`m the only one who understands this 


  • 0

#57
Disastra

Disastra
  • 31 posts

Thanks for the clarification.  Good to know you're thinking of all of us and still working on the game too.  :)


  • 0

#58
Zingman

Zingman
  • 3,168 posts

lol awesome graphic Con.

 

And yes I know nothing is set in stone, as you said, it's fun to "speculate" though.


  • 1

#59
Cherry

Cherry
  • 792 posts

Well Con, Sev and you threw in different numbers and made us speculate, so dont complain plase ;)

 

Waiting for the update to become live :)


  • 0

#60
Furryicecubes

Furryicecubes
  • 144 posts

wbmpRoj.jpg

 

It's ok. Take a breath. All of this was highly speculative. Like Sev said, we'll look at the numbers and analytics we get back after launch and make adjustments. 

 

What we're looking for is a balance for both sides, it's not US vs THEM, it's not us trying to force raiding on people. We're just trying to open up options in the most fair way for everyone. 

 

I guess I can't say it enough. Nothing is set in stone, everything is in flux. 

 

If the numbers aren't set in stone, then I have a completely off the wall idea for you. Ask the community for feedback on numbers rather than simply stating them, with widly different figures from yourself to those posted by Sev a day or so later.

 

 

Well Con, Sev and you threw in different numbers and made us speculate, so dont complain plase ;)

 

Waiting for the update to become live :)

 

As Cherry says, you give numbers, we'll give feedback on them, and we'll speculate on them. Especially when they seem so massively out of kilter with where they should be that they look like complete game changers.


  • 0