24 replies to this topic

[Phaaze]

As is the game is very imbalanced as many can tell, here are some fixes that may help. (needs some tweaking)

1. Auto balance for starters if one team is wrecking the other then make sure players are even or more players on loosing team; this is needed badly....

2. To keep people from being butt hurt about loosing: remove win/loose ratio and all hawken credits from won/lost matches and increase credits earned from time played.

3. Increase usefulness of turret mode of heavys like increased defense and ability to turn.

4. Make optomizations useful again besides a fully amped up defence mech with 3.5% more hp and 2% less damage taken....cmon.  To off set the imbalence of that make deaths give a little exp aswell so if you are getting killed repeadly it is not futile and encourage players to get in and not cower.

5. give some exp for time played; this will help new players to lvl up quickly.

6. Add a boot system for anyone who is inactive for 3 min or set them as a spectator.

7. make a visible thing showing who is talking.

8. Lower the heat on SA hawkins (you fixed its fuzzy bunny dps but now it doesnt even last long enough to kill anything with out over heating)

9. Removed

10. Lower the power of emp a tad like shorten duration by 0.25 of a sec. As is it is a little OP.

More to come...

I would prefer stright upgrades with the optimization tree but everyone starts with all 25 pts at lvl 0 for customization.
If anything the lvl up system should unlock different weapons and internals/items not better.

Please give construtcive feedback (NOT just "oooh thats great" or "thats a terrible idea" but some plossible fixes to above why it would or would not work and how to accomadate).

TL;DR: Stuff is busted and needs to be fixed.

Edited by Phaaze, November 21 2012 - 05:21 PM.

[StormTec]

I can only offer a simple agreement to point #1. I personally think auto-balance is the best solution to team stacking, so long as it doesn't, like, switch over someone who's been on that time from the very beginning, or something.

I can see #9 being a point of contention. Some explosive weapons are quite powerful and designed to be used at certain ranges. A recent discussion about the TOW comes to mind, wherein it was mentioned that adding self-damage immunity would mean a Scout equipped with a miniflak and TOW would be ridiculously destructive at close range (not that it isn't already, by the sounds of things). The miniflak is pretty good right up in someone's face on its own, imagine if a Scout can unleash both the TOW and the miniflak on someone. I can see issues with that.

#4 would be a difficult one. Where would you start_ And what would you do_ It's a pretty broad area for discussion, I think.

I'm not sure I have an opinion either way on the other ones.

[Phaaze]

StormTec, on November 21 2012 - 03:34 PM, said:

#4 would be a difficult one. Where would you start_ And what would you do_ It's a pretty broad area for discussion, I think.

I would set it back to beta 2 (imho) and give.. I dont know 5-10 exp per time you die.

Edited by Phaaze, November 21 2012 - 03:39 PM.

[Ace4225]

I have to disagree with points #2, 4, and 5.

2 and 5 are similar; people complained for the opposite reason before. If too much exp is gained by simply playing, what's the point of supporting your team/doing well in a match_ It takes the incentive out of playing well

as for #4.. this is even more serious. Making optimizations significant flat-stat increases will give higher-level players a flat advantage over noobs. The devs don't [and players shouldn't] want that. The devs' intentions are to make optimizations side-grades, where everything will give you both a boost and a trade-off.

All these points were asked for before CB3, and now you want that undone_

[Phaaze]

Ace4225, on November 21 2012 - 03:40 PM, said:

I have to disagree with points #2, 4, and 5.

2 and 5 are similar; people complained for the opposite reason before. If too much exp is gained by simply playing, what's the point of supporting your team/doing well in a match_ It takes the incentive out of playing well

as for #4.. this is even more serious. Making optimizations significant flat-stat increases will give higher-level players a flat advantage over noobs. The devs don't [and players shouldn't] want that. The devs' intentions are to make optimizations side-grades, where everything will give you both a boost and a trade-off.

All these points were asked for before CB3, and now you want that undone_

As is they are just small useless upgrades and as is to remove the flat advantage over noobs the lvl up system would have to be taken away. Everyone would have to be the same lvl. As is the lvl up system is just a grind for tiny bonuses.

If anything the lvl up system should unlock different weapons and internals/items not better.

As for playing well: Team fortess 2 and may other games do that well with no incentive at all what so ever.

Edited by Phaaze, November 21 2012 - 03:51 PM.

[Ace4225]

Phaaze, on November 21 2012 - 03:45 PM, said:

As is they are just small useless upgrades

That's because it's a beta. They're trying to transition it over to a new optimization system of side-grades rather than upgrades,

[Phaaze]

Ace4225, on November 21 2012 - 03:54 PM, said:

That's because it's a beta. They're trying to transition it over to a new optimization system of side-grades rather than upgrades,

I would prefer stright upgrades with the optimization tree but everyone starts with all 25 pts at lvl 0 for customization.

Edited by Phaaze, November 21 2012 - 03:56 PM.

[Frenotx]

Phaaze, on November 21 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

Ace4225, on November 21 2012 - 03:54 PM, said:

That's because it's a beta. They're trying to transition it over to a new optimization system of side-grades rather than upgrades,

I would prefer stright upgrades with the optimization tree but everyone starts with all 25 pts at lvl 0 for customization.

This is really the only way I can see their system ever being balanced. The devs just need to come up with different rewards with leveling.

Edited by Frenotx, November 21 2012 - 04:07 PM.

[Crimson_Corsair]

<sub>Make optimization tree straight upgrades, but everyone has them on lvl 0 mech in a default preset.
as you level up you can free up the points putting them where you want instead of where you're told.

Keep internals and weapons as sidegrades to push the optimizations even more.</sub>

[Lord_Trent_Kellan]

I totally disagree with points 2, 9, and 10.  This is a competitive game.  There are scores to keep track of anyway.  If you feel bad about your k/d ratio and stuff, get better.  That's what I do.  When I first started I was quite negative in the scores, but this changed.
Self-damage from missiles helps prevent carelessness and is fairly realistic (unless the rockets were changed to be smart shaped-charge rockets, but still).  Also, scouts would be even MORE devastaing without the possibility of killing or seriously hurting themselves up close, and imagine a rockateer who just point blank hellfired EVERYTHNG constantly. <.<  As for 10, I've been emp'd quite a bit, and I'm very rarely killed because of it.  This might be because I'm a light mech who can run away very effectively, however, but sometimes I don't even run and I just kill the person anyway. <.<  I've also had the inverse happen to me.  I actually think the emp time is a bit short.

That said... 1 is probably important, because when you get stuck with a horrible team, even some of the best players can't do much because it's like 1v6ing everything.. And it doesn't help new people adjust much.   3 is absolutely necessary-- turret moded heavies are like free kills for me usually.  Their ability should actually be an ability, not a 'oh fuzzy bunny I didn't mean to hit that button WHY!_ D:' thing.  7.. I want.. really badly.  Even if you ask who's who, sometimes it's easy to forget the different voices till you get reallllly familiar. :/

6, I thought we already had an anti-idle system.  Snipers were complaining about it kicking them even when they were shooting.  4, I'm neutral on. While I personally miss the old system, I did have a light mech with 620 health and a +45 per sec repair rate, which got to the point of just not being fair, considering I went 15/0 matches more than once.  ..I do miss that, but I can't blame them for nerfing things. As is, the advantages do present a bit of help, but not so much that a low level cannot outplay you still.  5, I'm semi-neutral on mostly because that would give a person who did almost nothing but died a lot a chance to get a much higher score than someone who came in late and wrecked everything, if it wasn't balanced right. At the same time, it'd be a very nice feature, and would reward people for sticking through rough matches more.

[Pap]

i had the similiar topic in CBE2 here are my ideas:
http://community.pla...ing/#entry87442

[Etan]

1. Yes team balance is awful. I myself switch teams to try and maintain balance because the XP gained in a match with people that quite is horrid. Matchmaking should put higher level players into the losing team to maintain balance. Coming into a game late should do something for you as well because half the time i join the losing team its impossible to win at that point i just like shooting stuff and having targets.
2. Would help with team balance.
3. turret mode needs more def although its better now then it was in CB2
4. Subtle differences can make a big change in gameplay i dont think trees are bad now. Also death xp would be nice for new players.
5. AFK in base
6. Address's 5
7. Yes
8. Hasnt the ROF been slowed as well_ dont use it so idk.
9. No this is something that should be there yes it sucks just like grazzing a wall sucks. Its legit element to the gameplay.
10. I dont think its a garuntee kill its all about timing it right and not getting yourself with it. However i think the item cooldown for the EMP should be longer.

[Phaaze]

Lord_Trent_Kellan, on November 21 2012 - 04:09 PM, said:

I totally disagree with points 2, 9, and 10.  This is a competitive game.  There are scores to keep track of anyway.  If you feel bad about your k/d ratio and stuff, get better.

I said win loose ratio not k/d
You can control k/d not w/l
keep k/d

[Phaaze]

Thank you everyone for your construtive posts!

[Phaaze]

Etan, on November 21 2012 - 05:07 PM, said:

8. Hasnt the ROF been slowed as well_ dont use it so idk.

yes but damage went up to compensate.

[Ace4225]

Phaaze, on November 21 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

I would prefer stright upgrades with the optimization tree but everyone starts with all 25 pts at lvl 0 for customization.

Seriously_

We had something closer to that in the last beta [even though it wasn't that significant] and I can't begin to tell you how many times a noob whined because I was a "higher level" [even when I wasn't] because the miniscule stat boosts painted just enough of a picture of higher-level superiority that it was scary to anyone not accustomed to the game. By widening/sharpening the learning curve of the game, you'll just discourage a lot of new players from ever coming back.

Regardless of your other F2P experiences, this game is trying to be competitive. Flat stat boosts in optimizations are counter-competitive. Period. You're talking about giving people who have played more a pure advantage over people who have played less--just because they've played more.

Even if everyone started with all 25 points, it would still be a bad system [if not a worse one], simply because with flat stat boosts that have no trade-offs, there will be certain combinations of stats that will always dominate others, which gives more experienced players even more advantages over less experienced ones.

Go back to your single-player RPGs and stop ruining our fun.

Now, if we had trade-offs for stats [like the devs are doing], then I'm all for an optimization system that gives you all the points you need and you just fill in the blanks on what you want [though at that point it wouldn't be necessary]. Because now, you're truly "specializing" for a particular role on the battlefield.

Edited by Ace4225, November 21 2012 - 06:26 PM.

[Phaaze]

Ace4225, on November 21 2012 - 06:16 PM, said:

Phaaze, on November 21 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

I would prefer stright upgrades with the optimization tree but everyone starts with all 25 pts at lvl 0 for customization.

Seriously_

We had something closer to that in the last beta [even though it wasn't that significant] and I can't begin to tell you how many times a noob whined because I was a "higher level" [even when I wasn't] because the miniscule stat boosts painted just enough of a picture of higher-level superiority that it was scary to anyone not accustomed to the game. By widening/sharpening the learning curve of the game, you'll just discourage a lot of new players from ever coming back.

Regardless of your other F2P experiences, this game is trying to be competitive. Flat stat boosts in optimizations are counter-competitive. Period. You're talking about giving people who have played more a pure advantage over people who have played less--just because they've played more.

Even if everyone started with all 25 points, it would still be a bad system [if not a worse one], simply because with flat stat boosts that have no trade-offs, there will be certain combinations of stats that will always dominate others, which gives more experienced players even more advantages over less experienced ones.

Go back to your single-player RPGs and stop ruining our fun.

Now, if we had trade-offs for stats [like the devs are doing], then I'm all for an optimization system that gives you all the points you need and you just fill in the blanks on what you want [though at that point it wouldn't be necessary]. Because now, you're truly "specializing" for a particular role on the battlefield.

ahhh belittleing me for my opinion, I love the internet...

[Ace4225]

sorry for the rudeness, but I hope you see my point:

The key to a competitive game is balance; balance among chassis, balance among weapons, balance among player attributes. Giving noobs a fighting chance against skilled players that would otherwise completely dominate a battlefield every time, so that if they lose, it's their own fault and not the game's.

^This is what the devs [and most of the players] want.

You'd be working to counteract that balance by suggesting we backtrack [and take a step further backward] to a more experience-based leveling system rather than a skill-based one. That's sort of like putting people on welfare when they already have the qualifications for the jobs they want and there's openings available.

Edited by Ace4225, November 22 2012 - 12:40 AM.

[Ace4225]

I don't necessarily agree with all points made in this link, but there's some good points made here:

http://community.pla...-kill-the-game/

Edited by Ace4225, November 22 2012 - 12:49 AM.

[Phaaze]

Ace4225, on November 22 2012 - 12:37 AM, said:

The key to a competitive game is balance; balance among chassis, balance among weapons, balance among player attributes. Giving noobs a fighting chance against skilled players that would otherwise completely dominate a battlefield every time, so that if they lose, it's their own fault and not the game's.

I appreciate the apology and I do see where you are comming from.  I also do want the same thing the only thing is: how do you balance a game for skill_  Just about every game ever that has a skill aspect to it will have pro players stomping noob players.  Even if everything in the game had a penalty AND bonus pro players will still get scores like 40/0/30 and noob players will be stuck with 1/30/3.

How could they accomadate_