HTC - You asked for my Idea to move people

[Midnight]

Here's my ROUGH idea to move people to balnce country numbers.

I don't want to put a huge amount of time into smoothing details unless HTC would consider this and implement it.

Many parts of this outline have been suggested in some form or another by other players.

Side Balancing Perks
Using the current perk point system with the country numbers modifier.. Change the rate at which perk points are earned.

1. Reset everyone to 1000 perks.

2. Set all aircraft up as perk planes with costs ranging from 1 to 200 and using the current perk point multipler based on country numbers.

3. Set bombs as perk values (perks / pair) for fighters
    A. 100 lb = 1 perk
    B. 250 lb = 2 perk
    C. 500 lb = 4 perk
    D. 1000 lb = 8 perk
    E. Rockets = 4 perks

4. Bombs and rockets would always be INCLUDED in the perk cost of Attack / Bomber only aircraft.

5. C47s would always be free (for supply missions to regain perks – explained later)

Perks can be earned by
A. Shooting down an enemy you get perks based on the current ENY values

B. Getting an assist, you get perks based on the current ENY values x 0.25

C. Successfully delivering needed supplies to field, factory or HQ. Player receives 20 perk points that may be allocated in the desired categories of Fighter, Bomber, Vehicle.

D. Destroying ground targets.

E. Getting troops delivered to a map room (2 perks per trooper in, regardless of actually making the final capture)

winning / loosing the war
F. Being in the country that Wins the war = +50 perks
G. Being in the country that Looses the war = 0 perks
H. Being in the middle country = -10 perks (This is designed to encourage the middle country to attack the winning country, rather than pig-pile on the loosing country which is common now)

Perks can be saved by
    A. Successful landing / end of sortie in an undamaged aircraft / vehicle. 100% perks returned.
    B. Successful landing / end of sortie in a damaged aircraft / vehicle. 75% perks returned.
    C. Ditching an undamaged aircraft / vehicle in friendly territory – 50% perks returned.
    D. Ditching a damaged aircraft / vehicle in friendly territory – 25% perks returned

Perks can be spent on
    A. Aircraft or Vehicles
    B. Bombs
    C. Rockets
    D. Mission planners can check an option to “pay” for the aircraft used in a mission.

Victory Multipliers for Perk Points
    A. Shooting down fighter aircraft with ordnance = x1.5
    B. Shooting down bombers with ordnance = x1.25
    C. Shooting enemy troops = 2 perks per trooper
(This encourages defending rather than always being on suicide attack missions)

Perks can be transferred to different catagories at a rate of 4 for 3.

Local perk multiplier
Rather than using the arena numbers as the perk multiplier, use a local multiplier based on a 4 sector area. This would allow players to gain perks by not joining in a huge roving horde that is so common. A squad could go out alone in a smaller group to attack a larger group of enemy. The outnumbered aircraft could be gaining more perks.

The general idea
The general idea of the system would be that all vehicles are perked and that every time you go on a combat mission, it costs you some of the perks from your account. Extra perks can be spent in the fighter class for external ordnance.

A successful pilot would be able to maintain their perk account to be able to fly most aircraft whenever they wanted. Players that repeatedly died in high-cost aircraft would have to switch to lower cost aircraft. If a player’s perk account reached 0, they could fly supply / base capture missions to get perks awarded again.

At the beginning of each tour, all player perk accounts with balances below 1000 are reset to 1000 perks. Player accounts with balances above 1000 perks are not effected.

With everything being tied into the perk system - rather than just certain aircraft, the perk multipler system would have a great effect on the country numbers. Players would be encouraged to go to outnumbered countries so they could gain perks faster.

Everyone would be "given" enough perks every tour to fly what they wanted right at the start. They would just have to be mindfull so not to waste perks foolishly. To do this, I think the perk earning may be adjusted some to allow the average player a good enough chance to earn what they need to fly most of the aircraft all the time, while at the same time preventing constant suicide dive bombing and trying to vultch fields with AAA still up, etc.

[Kev367th]

Reset everyone to 1000 perkies! Anti whine armour on lol.

[Furious]

Midnight, that seems more like the makings of a strategy game than a combat sim to me.  A system like this might be great for Axis/Allied commanders to have to deal with when planning scenario missions.  Each side given X points to accomplish specific goals.

...but for a few minutes fun in the MA?  



Kev, I think it is safe to say that most folks with 1000's of perks, really don't care about 'em.

[hitech]

Thanks a lot for the idea midnight. Obviously you have put some thought into it.

But have a few issues.

1 Im becomeing more convinced perks are not the way to balance the arena.

Primarly because it is not fair to new users. And the perk system is realy desiged to limit the choice of each user as to how often they can fly some planes. When you try make it a balancing issue you suddenly have created a big economic system And where it would lead becomes very unpredictible results.

2nd your idea of reseting all to 1000 would create a huge cry from those who have been saveing perks. Next it would remove the goal of the new guy to want to to earn points to try out the 262.


3rd with this "use a local multiplier based on a 4 sector area" you suddenly are complety changing the issue at hand.

Basicly I am not against consentration of forces in the arena. That is a very valid war tactic and infact it is a fundemtal doctren that the attacker must have a numbers adavantage. When all sides are equal each country has the choice of how to allocate there forces i.e. in a group to go on attack/ or spread out/ how ever they wish. I do not see this as an issue.  With a country imbalance 1 country could still dominate 2 different 4/sector areas while the others putting up adefense would have the same limitations as the large country but only in 1 area, and hence you are back to square 1. More numbers in a country would still be an advantage.

The issue is all about country balance not consentration of forces.

And to put it simply, fairly equal numbers between sides makes a better a game and is lot more fun for every one. I realy can not think of one game either board game/sport/computer game any type game where each side is not equal. It apears to me to be a fundimental game concept.


HiTech

[Kev367th]

I might agree with you Furoius but for a few points.
1) I don't believe most would be willing to have their perks reset to 1000 each month, theres seems to be some 'status' attached to having loads of perks built up.
2) People suggesting perking currently disabled planes only seem to willing to pay around 20 perks for them.

[JB73]

as stated by HiTech, one person's idea of how to make the game fun is the thing another person dislikes about the game.

i have watched this debate from aside for the last few days (since the patch was released) with pretty much no comment on it yet.

all sides have "some" valid points, and most options out there i can find a personal flaw with in regards to "gameplay" or whatever you call it.

want my personal opinion? i loe it all, strat, furballing, 1-1 fights, gangbangs, all of it. there are nights i will fly and do nothing but kill barracks or similar. other nights you wont find me near a "toolshed".

i know everyone has an impression on what would make the "best" game out there, and a majority are very convinced / stubborn that their idea is the best, and the whole community will love it.

just to use a goofy example from the above scenario, when have you ever seen "lazs" or a similar pilot fly carrying any bombs or rockets? the perking of ordinance woudl have absoulutly no effect on their flying (and there are a bunch like him out there).

personally i have came to the realization that there is no point arguing anyone's ideas on the direction of the game. Midnight, by using yuor system in my example i was just attempting to show there are loops in everything.

considering HiTech has been the online flight sim business for what 15 years + he has seen/heard it all. i do not envy the choices he has to make regarding the game, but am glad he does do it.

just my thoughts

<> my begining of this post was citing HiTech from another thread... he posted while i was typing this LOL

[Midnight]

Originally posted by Kev367th
I might agree with you Furoius but for a few points.
1) I don't believe most would be willing to have their perks reset to 1000 each month, theres seems to be some 'status' attached to having loads of perks built up.
2) People suggesting perking currently disabled planes only seem to willing to pay around 20 perks for them.

If you read again, you will se that I stated only players will perks <1000 will get them reset to 1000.. players with >1000 will keep what they have.

Why would someone think there is a 'status' to having lots of perks? No one else can see them. I've got over 4800 fighter perks and I only fly the P-51D, one of the lowest perk earners out there. Unless a P-51H shows up, I have no use for my perks right now.

Yes, I think 20 perks is very reasonable to pay for an aircraft, providing the entire aircraft set is perked. In the system I am suggesting, everything is perked, so things can't be so expensive you run out of perks on day 1 of every tour.

-----

Also, everyone, please don't quote hard numbers in negative responses. The numbers I used in the original post are examples for disscussion, not exact figures that must be implemented in order to make the concept work.

-----

The concept is that the 1000 perks you get at the beginning of a tour would be enough to get you through a couple weeks of average play time as an average pilot (Getting around 1.0 K/d for example only) If a player ran out, getting more perks would be a simple matter of flying supply misssions.

If a player was concerned about the rate at which he was earning perks, all he would have to do is switch to the lower number country where he could earn them at a multiplier.

[humble]

I don't see any incentive for folks to change sides or any help for the outnumbered country (countries). The fundemental problem is an imbalance in numbers, explain how you think this would effect the actual balance. I don't see your squad willing to "change sides"...why would others?

[VolsCAF]

Edit for flaim bait.

[humble]

VolsCAF...

The problem is your looking at it from a rooks perspective. No one is "taking away" anything...."I was all caught up in the whole immersion, squads, missions, teambuilding, coordination, community, etc. thing"...you can do all that on ANY side. But if one side constantly has an unfair advantage in numbers then your not really doing any of the above...your just pretending to. I'd love to see one or two of the top rook squads rotate for a couple of tours. Is it the caliber of teamwork tactics and skill in the squad or just being on the right side of a "gangbang"...why not find out?

[Kev367th]

cc Midnight, but I guess as HT has said he is not convinced that perking will fix anything, guess its mute. But at least you tried to come up with something.

[VolsCAF]

Humble:

I could care less about being on the winning side. I was commenting more about the "game" definition HT used in describing his reasons for the change. It's just tough having the plane choices limited because the squads and country I enjoy flying with happen to be in the country that has numbers. I understand that being on the other side of that coin sucks too because  I have been there as a Rook. I know it's a tough issue. Just seems like HT doesn't aknowledge some of these other aspects at work but maybe its just me. Anyway I'll be patient and see how it all works out. I know he is trying to work it out in the way that is appreciated by the majority as any good businessman would do.


 

[humble]

I guess I just don't see the issue regarding plane set. But then I usually flew just about everything anyway. So many good choices in the 30-40 range it just doesn't seem like a big deal to me...205/F4U-1/109G-2 are all outstanding MA planes...

[Midnight]

Originally posted by humble
I don't see any incentive for folks to change sides or any help for the outnumbered country (countries). The fundemental problem is an imbalance in numbers, explain how you think this would effect the actual balance. I don't see your squad willing to "change sides"...why would others?

You don't see it because you lack vision... It's simple.. The "big number" country pilots won't be earning a lot of perks back during their sorites. If they keep getting shot down (which most everyone does) they will start to run out of perks. To gain more perks, they switch to the low number country and start earning them back.

This would allow stubborn guys, like me, to run out of perks rather than switch sides. But I can earn perks back by flying the supply / troop drop missions.

[humble]

And so could anyone else...


Whats curious to me is the "plane issue" . I went back and checked out my last tour(50). I was 19-6 in F-6 18-6 in FM-2 9-2 in la-5 and 19-11 in spit V. No hops in la-7 or pony at all, was 3-0 in 38. Showed some tiffie hops and think I was 12-4 in temp. 4-11 in nikki and bout same in spitIX (usually fly em if base is bout being vulched). Pretty typical in that most flights must of been defensive....very little in Jabo or what I'd call offensive iron. F6F would be "dual purpose" but FM-2/la-5 strictly circle the wagons plane for me.  I didnt have a single hop in La-7/pony/190-D etc.
Thats not ment to knock anyone or their choice in iron. just to point out the wealth of options available. Losing "your ride" has no real effect on score...or perks.