| Author |
The simplest, most reasonable way to achieve player balance in the MV |
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
|  Posted: 2011-01-22 09:39
The worst part about the MV is that there can be an overwhelming force on one side and a one sided force on another just because of time zones, because the faction sucks, or whatever. Either way, its just crappy. Scenarios don't suffer this, they have auto-balance.
But the MV makes you faction specific because of fleets, so that has alot to do with it.
So here we have the swing vote. The fleetless.
I think it would be reasonable to achieve player balance while still allowing choice if the following occurs:
Players in a fleet aligned to a specific faction, will always be guaranteed a spot on that faction. This means that a person who really loves a faction is probably friendly with at least some of the regulars on it too. So being in a fleet with them only makes sense.
You then have the fleetless. These are people who are loners, and like a little variety. However, you suffer the consequences of being a loner in a team-based game.
You can't join the faction with the most players on it curently. Simple as that. If you really love a faction enough you always want to be on it, join a fleet or hell, create your own. Or just join a fleet and ignore them. Either way, the fleetless serves as a balancing act to the MV. They are simply not allowed to join the faction with the most people on it.
I say this because faction hoppers are and always have been a big problem. People want to be on the winning side, and its most often the side with the most players. To discourage this and pretty much prevent incredibly boring stacked battles, the people who choose not to join a fleet can only join a faction willing to "recruit" them temporarily. Where the faction with the most players doesn't want to "pay" for more and thus doesn't want anyone more flying under their banner. I say this within the context of the universe.
This doesn't limit choice too much. You will always be able to choose at least two factions. If two factions have the same number players, they will both be available regardless of numbers. This is simply to pretent factions from becoming overpopulated and reduce competition.
-Ent
_________________
|
AP0LLYON
Chief Marshal
Joined: April 13, 2010
Posts: 103
From: Out In Space
| Posted: 2011-01-22 09:51
I like that idea
_________________
|
.:*Brennus*:.
1st Rear Admiral
Joined: March 27, 2004
Posts: 6
| Posted: 2011-01-22 11:56
seconded....
_________________
|
Serpentz2
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: October 03, 2002
Posts: 12
| Posted: 2011-01-22 12:05
3rd!
_________________
|
James 296
Fleet Admiral
Joined: March 19, 2009
Posts: 141
| Posted: 2011-01-22 13:43
I like and dislike this idea at the same time. I personally like getting pres but usually it's actually more enjoyable (for me at least) to be on the outnumbered side, unless your by yourself.
More to the point, we have dead periods in which no one or hardly anyone is on but this isn't just because of faction hoppers. this also because of the time periods that fleets are most active, thus if you say that fleet ( and it's members) has a guaranteed spot in that faction. so no matter what, there will always be a faction that has greater numbers because of the different times fleets are active, even if you "force' the faction hoppers to one side or the other.
There is also the annoying fact that it's not just two factions anymore but THREE.
I must admit, it is a great idea, but not a very effective one at that. This "inbalance" of players is not so simple, lets say your not in a fleet and I force you to choose a side so in effect I'm forcing you to choose which ships to use. it's sort of like trying to solve the problem of one too many players in dreads and stations. when you give players freedom of choice then try to take that away, they will fight it and right now, fighting will most likely means that will players leave. Don't get me wrong it's a great idea (as I've said before) but lets solve the problems we have at hand first.
P.S. I hope you can understand what I'm saying
[ This Message was edited by: James 296 on 2011-01-25 13:38 ]
_________________
|
Azreal
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 14, 2004
Posts: 2816
From: United State of Texas, Houston
| Posted: 2011-01-22 13:50
so scenario type rules for mv?
Why have an mv?
_________________
bucket link
|
The Fridge
Chief Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: December 13, 2008
Posts: 559
From: In Your Fridge, Eating your Foods.
| Posted: 2011-01-22 14:15
Option to choose to go Factionless for 3 Months.
Reward: 10% more prestige gain in suppying/building/bombing/capping
5% more in Combat.
You get the idea, Feel free to shoot it down as hard as you like.
The bonus might increase if you join the lowest populated faction.
Bonus decreases to zero if the faction becomes 1st in population.
And also decreases if your in the 2nd most populated which starts to rise closer to the 1st.
If in 3rd, depending on how populated it is will decrease as it gets closer to 1st.
P.s. The numbers have no actual meaning. And i've probably explained it badly
[ This Message was edited by: The Fridge on 2011-01-22 14:24 ]
_________________
|
Koba
Chief Marshal
Praetorian Wolves
Joined: April 20, 2010
Posts: 309
From: United States of America
| Posted: 2011-01-22 14:29
i like this idea,but i also love all 3 factions
_________________
|
Lark of Serenity
Grand Admiral
Raven Warriors
Joined: June 02, 2002
Posts: 2516
| Posted: 2011-01-22 16:39
so my understanding is:
fleeted: guaranteed but not mandated space on a faction
non-fleeted: auto-balance rules
which makes perfect sense and really should be implemented.
and no it isnt really scenario, because fleets dont exist in scenario, everyones just mixed together. here you will undoubtedly have the majority of fleeted individuals stick to their fleets faction, otherwise what would be the point to being in a fleet?
perhaps some small tweaks like was suggested, bonuses or handicaps or prestige gain or whatever, but generally, larky seal of approval.
_________________
Admiral Larky, The Wolf
Don't play with fire, play with Larky.
Raven Division Command - 1st Division
|
Reznor
Marshal
Joined: March 29, 2010
Posts: 316
| Posted: 2011-01-22 19:18
Well, I left raven to fiddle around with other factions for a little while (miss you larky!) . Mostly just to remind myself why I hate playing luth too much (am I the only one who doesn't like it THAT easy?) . So currently I'm factionless. But my garage is nearly filled with fully enhanced ICC ships. 2 stations, 2 ADs, a tranny, and a command carrier. I have an unenhanced MD, and one slot that I leave open (usually I leave it scout with all ECCM) .
So if you guys do this, and I get booted out of ICC, what ship am I going to use? A stock ugto battle cruiser? Meh.
I could always fleet up again, but I've just been chillin fleetless and I kinda like it.
_________________
Indictor: 1. To accuse of wrongdoing
Interdictor: (DS) A planetary emplacement or Cruiser Class vessel capable of preventing FTL travel in a certain radius.
|
Rebellion
Marshal
Faster than Light
Joined: June 20, 2009
Posts: 730
From: sol
| Posted: 2011-01-23 00:02
I also like this idea, Thumbs up! 
_________________
\"War does not decide who is right, but who is left\"
\"I stopped fighting my inner demons we're on the same side now\"
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2011-01-23 03:42
So....
No one wants to be forced to fly smaller ships.
No one wants to be forced to fly in a faction not of their choice.
Player balance can never be achieved.
What can we do then?
What is needed is smarter AI ships.
The faction with less players will simply have more AI ships.
More AI dreads and even stations perhaps.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
DiepLuc
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 23, 2010
Posts: 1187
| Posted: 2011-01-23 04:41
I have an opposite idea. There is time when rare fleet players online, I calculate and believe the fleetless players are balanced in MV. There is no problem with fleetless players.
The problem is:
- RSM is always crowded.
- PB is busy with other games.
- Big ICC fleets are not crowded.
[sarcasm]How about we limit fleet players instead of fleetless?[/sarcasm]
_________________
|
Tommas [ USF HunnyBunny ]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: February 04, 2006
Posts: 581
From: Norway
| Posted: 2011-01-23 04:53
Well i think its a bad idea. Simple because some of the "fleetless" players hate some factions and simple just dont want to play on it. It will become a bigger problem whit this.
Would be much better if the rewards of beein in a fleet is bigger. So we dont have so many fleetless players.
Fleetless players should also be locked into a faction for a week when first chosing one.
_________________
|
Code Red
Chief Marshal
Non Omnis Moriar
Joined: September 08, 2007
Posts: 184
| Posted: 2011-01-23 06:54
The simplest way to unbalance the MV = RSM go luth.
_________________
Code Red, For winning in the 1RA Fleet Wars event, here's your coupon for a week.
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
