New way to award perks

[Traveler]

With each war, perks would be earned as is now done, however, perks would not be awarded until the war was won.  If you win the war, you get 150% of your perks.  If you finish second, you get 50% of perks and if you lose, you get zero.   Just like in any war, it's best to be the winner.

[SmokinLoon]

With each war, perks would be earned as is now done, however, perks would not be awarded until the war was won.  If you win the war, you get 150% of your perks.  If you finish second, you get 50% of perks and if you lose, you get zero.   Just like in any war, it's best to be the winner.

No.  Regardless of if the war is won or lost, if an F4F is able to hand a George his beehind then the F4F player should get his... 4.375 perks.     The outcome should not effect the individual earnings of perk points.

Plus, I bet that would be a "coading" nightmare and memory hog. 

[APDrone]

Um.. I don't think there should be perks for 2nd place.  Seems to me that would encourage the two leading countries to dogpile the other country, thinking that some perks are better than none.

[waystin2]

Nope.  Award them as they are awarded now.  Based on individual performance, not an overall country's performance.  Besides...

[Traveler]

No.  Regardless of if the war is won or lost, if an F4F is able to hand a George his beehind then the F4F player should get his... 4.375 perks.     The outcome should not effect the individual earnings of perk points.

Plus, I bet that would be a "coading" nightmare and memory hog. 

Isn't that what the DA is for?

[Traveler]

Um.. I don't think there should be perks for 2nd place.  Seems to me that would encourage the two leading countries to dogpile the other country, thinking that some perks are better than none.

You have a valid point, however, are they not just as likely to pileon the leading country thinking that they want the 50% bonus.  The way the game is set up now, there are always two pileing on one.

[APDrone]

You have a valid point, however, are they not just as likely to pileon the leading country thinking that they want the 50% bonus.  The way the game is set up now, there are always two pileing on one.

LOL.. it seems that, invariably, somebody is going to point fingers that the front between the other two countries is totally dead and everybody is picking on us..  The only thing I've seen change over the years are the people pointing the fingers.  Right up there with "SPIZE!" "Fight the war my way, you #$!#$ ",  "Thanks for the check-6, NOT! " .. etc.  Same game, different voices.  And, I will admit, I have been guilty of a few of those views at some point during my virtual career. 

I can count the number of times, on one hand, that there wasn't any discernible activity on the other enemies' front when such accusations were made.

[Brakechk]

Some folks like to win the war, others like to win the battle.  Why penalize those who like to win the battle vs the war by messing with perks based on wining the war?  I like it how it is....there is a mild perk bonus for winning the war but most come from individual performance.  Everyone has the same chance to earn perks but you can get a little extra something for resetting the map.  Bonus for both camps...where is the problem in that?

[Traveler]

Some folks like to win the war, others like to win the battle.  Why penalize those who like to win the battle vs the war by messing with perks based on wining the war?  I like it how it is....there is a mild perk bonus for winning the war but most come from individual performance.  Everyone has the same chance to earn perks but you can get a little extra something for resetting the map.  Bonus for both camps...where is the problem in that?

No one said there was a problem.  Not sure where you read there was a problem.   This is just a statement of a wish, nothing more.

[Brakechk]

No one said there was a problem.  Not sure where you read there was a problem.   This is just a statement of a wish, nothing more.

My bad....I saw a wish for a change to the current system which I thought implied a problem with the current system since it's a change. 

[ink]

Horrible idea

its not just about the "war"

Thankfully HTC will never implement something like this.

[Brakechk]

Horrible idea

its not just about the "war"

Thankfully HTC will never implement something like this.

Heresay!!!  Your stake and bonfire are being prepared!

You'll never find a more rabid group of individuals than the war winners who incessantly complain about "furballers" ruining the game.  It's fun to take a base or two on occasion, it's fun to defend a base on occasion and on occasion it's fun to just go furball.  The current system supports this varied play so we can all be happy on occasion so I like it.

[Karnak]

The effect this would have would be to encourage people to concentrate in one country in order to ensure that country won as some perks are better than no perks.

It would also completely gut the ENY reward motivation for flying for the out numbered side(s) as getting two times the perks for shooting down an aircraft multiplied by .5 or 0 results in either no benefit or an actual penalty.

[DEECONX]