coastermonger

A simple, and yet controversial fix that will improve the player experiences for ALL people.

Recommended Posts

I have to commend the devs here for designing balanced pvp game modes as best they can.  They walk a tight line that tries to ensure balance between a variety of play styles.  Throw paying customers into the mix and they have to make players feel like they're getting something extra for the money, while making other players feel like they're not at a huge disadvantage.  

But let's break down the bull and get to bare facts: 

1.) Getting blown up sucks. (but it must happen) 
2.) Losing sucks (but it must happen) 

3.) Players that lose/die consistently are more likely to leave the game.  

Star Conflict, like any PVP game, is constantly at risk of losing it's less skilled players because they just can't cut it.  How can it retain them even as they lose?  So far the ideas of offering medals and standards regardless of outcome is a pretty good idea. Allowing players to play co-op PvE also removes reduces the threat of elite players sloughing off the weak.  But there is always room for improvement, therefore I propose two solutions.

The first is simple, and yet controversial: Introduce more bots into PVP games, but don't advertise the fact that they are bots. 

A bot doesn't care when it's killed.  It doesn't get frustrated and it doesn't quit.  Matches are also more fun (and more balanced) when they are well populated.  So the idea of introducing bots means that all players will essentially have more fodder to work with.  The bots shouldn't be pushovers, but players will be able to rack up more kills, feel better about themselves, and they won't truly know whether or not it was a bot or player they're up against.  It would also solve the problem of wait times and less populated matches

The second idea is more complex, and less controversial: Allow multiple "teams" per match

Imagine a beacon capture mode which featured 3 teams instead of two.   Empire vs Fed vs Jericho, or other modes which had even 4 teams.  Multi-team or multi-squad games can become more balanced, and they make the threat of failure less severe.  2nd place isn't so bad in a multi-team game.  If a particular set of players always seem to come in first, maybe 2nd and 3rd place teams will gang up against them before going after each other, further balancing gameplay.  The point here is that 2 teams are 2 dimensional, and allowing additional teams allows more dynamic gameplay to evolve.  I for one, would be interested to see a multi-team match played out.

 

Thoughts, comments, and criticism is always appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the class load out the way it is, Jericho would be in big trouble since it has no access to engineers, gunships or main line covert ops ints.  Another negative is the total worthlessness of their LRFs compared to the Empire Snipers.  Multi team matches also can quickly end up with a two v one team up on the weakest group.  

 

Putting more bots in a game means that the team with more bots loses.  I've played matches with only one real person on each team and four bots, and one handedly because I could beat the one human player and the bots were too dumb to coordinate or capture objectives.  They would come in one by one and were swatted down easily.  To have bots stand in for players would require an order of magnitude improvement on the AI. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

separating good from average players is always a good idea but biggest obstacle against that right now is server population numbers

 

we don't have enough people playing to separate good from average to low skilled.

 

IF we do: simplest thing is to separate the pvp lobby into 2

 

lobby 1. Normal PVP server

- this is what we have now

 

lobby 2. Casual PVP server

- only players below a set standard can join this server

- a good index could be some function involving average kills per match stat, total pvp matches played ( < 1000 is a good start) and DSR i guess

- and to make it even more fair / competitive - mk.I and mk.II modules only

 

Critical mass for separating pop I would guesstimate at 2,500 actives, which is 1,000 away from where we are at now. Until then, peeps just have to balls-up and go thru the baptism by fire like the rest of us did :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and thanks for your interest into the game.

We are always trying to improve the fun and balance, but this is not always easy.


The first is simple, and yet controversial: Introduce more bots into PVP games, but don't advertise the fact that they are bots. 

A bot doesn't care when it's killed.  It doesn't get frustrated and it doesn't quit.  Matches are also more fun (and more balanced) when they are well populated.  So the idea of introducing bots means that all players will essentially have more fodder to work with.  The bots shouldn't be pushovers, but players will be able to rack up more kills, feel better about themselves, and they won't truly know whether or not it was a bot or player they're up against.  It would also solve the problem of wait times and less populated matches

The second idea is more complex, and less controversial: Allow multiple "teams" per match

Imagine a beacon capture mode which featured 3 teams instead of two.   Empire vs Fed vs Jericho, or other modes which had even 4 teams.  Multi-team or multi-squad games can become more balanced, and they make the threat of failure less severe.  2nd place isn't so bad in a multi-team game.  If a particular set of players always seem to come in first, maybe 2nd and 3rd place teams will gang up against them before going after each other, further balancing gameplay.  The point here is that 2 teams are 2 dimensional, and allowing additional teams allows more dynamic gameplay to evolve.  I for one, would be interested to see a multi-team match played out.

1.Idea:
We had more bots in battles in the past and the majority wanted the bots out of the game, because bots will never be as good as players and it's more frustrating to loose because your bots fight bad instead of loosing with a full player team. For this reason we introduced the PvE mode to squad up with some friends and fight bots and complete tasks.

 

2.Idea:

This one is a nice idea and it could be usefull when the corporations and sector conquest get a deeper improvement.

The only limitation here is the game engine which currently limits the battles to 32 players on the map

 

/topic moved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't entirely related, but I'd really like to see 8-10 player PVE matches.  Maybe then people would play ships other than engies and guards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PvE survival, more bot smashing, even some simpler brainless PvE: yeah. (I dont like the scaling of it)

More players in PvE: yeah.

More options in PvE: yeah.

 

More bots in PvP: nah. Hate empty matches as they are. 1vs1 with two bots really can be much too easy or simply frustrating.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

idea #2 is awesome and would actually make more sense in the games storyline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the Idea n.2 actually. Error said that the actual game engine limits the game to 32 players, so we could have 3 teams of 10, or 4 teams of 8, it looks like a very interesting idea, and i hope it gets implemented!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought: 3-teams matches could take place automatically (instead of being a specific game mode) when battles take place at the junction of the three factions on the sector-conquest map. It could make sense (assuming sector-conquest is improved to make sense), and it would avoid to create one other mode to spread the players amongst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The second idea is more complex, and less controversial: Allow multiple "teams" per match

Imagine a beacon capture mode which featured 3 teams instead of two.   Empire vs Fed vs Jericho, or other modes which had even 4 teams.  Multi-team or multi-squad games can become more balanced, and they make the threat of failure less severe.  2nd place isn't so bad in a multi-team game.  If a particular set of players always seem to come in first, maybe 2nd and 3rd place teams will gang up against them before going after each other, further balancing gameplay.  The point here is that 2 teams are 2 dimensional, and allowing additional teams allows more dynamic gameplay to evolve.  I for one, would be interested to see a multi-team match played out.

1. i like your idea

 

2. jericho vs. empire vs. fed wont work because of ship classes -> it should not limit ship choices, maybe if everyone has a specific faction but can take ALL ships it will work

 

3. whats about a 4th race? something strange, an alien race with purple, strange ships (cubes/many antenna-like things), different weapons and modules (blue lasers, green ion rays, rainbow plasma, light blue kinetic with rings around the trail,...)

 

4. the ship skin should refer to the players faction, so a jericho player has a different skin on a fed/empire ship (red-black/yellow-black/blue-black) and the other way around

 

5. just an idea: whats about having different objectives for every team, so jer goes for beacons, empire goes for emp bombs and fed goes for the enemy captains (or every objective for every team?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.