Author Topic: Arena Balance (Read 5293 times)

SkyRock · « **Reply #30 on:** December 06, 2006, 01:50:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by JimBeam
b/c some people loyal to there country / squad and dont go side hoping just to fly their La7s

Chess piece loyalty is a thing of the past! Just like tha old MA! With a growing community it will eventually stagnate itself if the chess piece loyalty continues. Now the good question is how to change the mentality of someone who thinks they have loyalty to said chess piece.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #31 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:03:03 PM »

That one's easy!

HTC inserts some malicious code into the game, and gives the player a pop up message that says, "Hi, you will now go to the country with the least numbers, and you will play nice with all the other kids for the next few days, or I will wipe out your computer! Thanks and enjoy!"

After a month of this, if they played nice, you let them choose where they want to fly, and if they go right back to the horde, you wipe out their HDD!

Platano · « **Reply #32 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:06:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty

Hrm... maybe a perk multiplier incentive? If rooks have 120 players, knights have 60 players, and bish have 70 players, then bish and knit get a higher perk multiplier for ROOK KILLS. They get standard multiplier for knit/bish kills.

That would add incentive to even things out, right? EDIT: I mean, the bish and knit would both be inclined to attack the rooks, and it would help lessen the strength of the rooks to fight on 2 fronts. Sort of like an unofficial alliance, created by perks.

This could work But only for the Greedy "I want Moar purkz" type of flyers...

What about the type like me that could give a S*** about perks or score and are only in it for the fun?? how would it work out then?

SlapShot · « **Reply #33 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:10:38 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
Currently having 2 different thoughts.

1 Go back to my original idea of having a wait time between flights based on country balance. This would put the same numbers in the air at one time.

2. Write the cant fly in this arena unless you changes sides.

3. Say screw it, turn off ENY and let everyone complain.

Number 1 is way to restrictive ... whineage would be deafening.

Number 2 is the way to go !!! ... not easy to do but best bang for the buck

Number 3 ... turning off ENY won't solve anything ... whineage would almost reach Number 1 levels.

Quote

Originally posted by SlapShot
Let me see if I have this right ... and I will use numbers that are easiest for explanation and not the real numbers.

If ...

LW1 and LW2 have a cap of 100 and when an LW arena population reaches 50% of the cap, the other LW cap is increased by 50 seats.

So ...

Once LW1 reaches 50 players, LW2 cap is increased to 150 and LW1 still has room of 50 more players before is reaches its cap.

Once the 100 cap is reached in LW1 no more entry is allowed.

Now that LW2 cap has been increased to 150, players will begin to fill up LW2. Once LW2 reaches a population of 75 players, LW1 cap will be raised to 150. At this point, people really have a choice of LW1 or LW2 because neither has reached their respective caps.

So at this instant we would see ...

LW1 - 50/150
LW2 - 75/150

==============================================

Now lets go back to the beginning and start again ...

Once LW1 reaches 50 players, LW2 cap is increased to 150 and LW1 still has room of 50 more players.

Once the 100 cap is reached in LW1 (current numbers in LW1 are - 60 Rooks - 25 Knights - 15 Bish) and someone selects LW1 while the cap has been realized, they are presented with another popup choice ...

LW1 - Knights (until they reach a population of 60*)
LW1 - Bish (until they reach a population of 60*)
LW2 - Open for all at the moment

*60 is set by the highest single population at the point that the cap had been reached ... in this case, the Rooks had 60 when the cap was reached.

This way, someone who wants to play in LW1 and is willing to join one of the weaker sides, is allowed entry. So ... If I choose Bish ... the the cap is now 101/101 ... so on and so forth until balance is achieved (180/180), and at that point, there is no more entry into LW1 until LW2 has reached its saturation point causing the cap in LW1 to be increased.

So if LW1 did reach 180/180 by people choosing the under populated countries and LW2 eventually did reach it 50% saturation point, the new cap for LW1 would be 180 + 50 = 230 so we would see ...

LW1 - 180/230
LW2 - 75/150

I realize that this would take some coading, but it could help to alleviate lopsided numbers in "capped" arenas using people who don't care what country they belong to.

Quote

Originally posted by Overlag

something like that would be cool

the numbers i used are just made up... percentages or hard numbers would have to be thought off after the coding is put in place.....

Waffle · « **Reply #34 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:19:42 PM »

Well, if the perked ordinance system ever comes to life, and the price of ord load outs is affected by the perk modifier / ENY - the perk point will become more of a commodity than it is now. If perks points become more valuable, there will be more incentive for people to switch side for the perk mod.

Also, reseting perks every tour would be one way to increase the value of the "perk point" .

So creating more incentive for gathering perks..
or punishing the outnumbered side by harsher ENY,

.....or even once a certain ENY is reached -

"our side has too many planes in the air now, our supply can't keep up, you can only take 25% fuel"

"our side is having problems delivering ordinance due to our overwhelming numbers, no ordnance is available"

if you can't catch a rat with cheese, try a stinkier gourmet cheese...

if that don't work... buy a cat.

Virage · « **Reply #35 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:19:45 PM »

Vote for #2.

Other games use this successfully without the gripes.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #36 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:25:41 PM »

I really like that idea ^ of Overlag and Slap's (or whoever should be credited).

JimBeam · « **Reply #37 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:27:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SkyRock
Chess piece loyalty is a thing of the past! Just like tha old MA! With a growing community it will eventually stagnate itself if the chess piece loyalty continues. Now the good question is how to change the mentality of someone who thinks they have loyalty to said chess piece.

its not really the chess pieces its the loyalty to my squad. most of our members myself included frown upon side hoping. unfortunately i forsee the MA's turning into mass dweeb arenas with no stradegy and only fight town for a map. in which case squads and chess pieces are irrelivant

Lye-El · « **Reply #38 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:31:53 PM »

I agree with Slapshot that the caps might be the way to go. Heck, try it in Orange and see what happens.

EagleDNY · « **Reply #39 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:34:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
Currently having 2 different thoughts.

1 Go back to my original idea of having a wait time between flights based on country balance. This would put the same numbers in the air at one time.

2. Write the cant fly in this arena unless you changes sides.

3. Say screw it, turn off ENY and let everyone complain.

1. Wait time between flights would probably work for a short time, until the folks on the horde end realized that they just need to stop at the rearm pad instead of ending their sortie.

2. Cant fly in the arena unless you change sides will probably cause as many problems as it solves. What happens if I get this message more than once a day? How many times can I switch sides and go back to the same arena?

3. Screw it - MODIFY the ENY a bit to get a better, more balancing formula, and maybe re-ENY some of the rides as well. Everyone will complain anyway - you aren't going to escape that

4. Take Krusty's idea - a perk bonus / horde bounty bonus multiplier sounds like it wouldn't hurt either. Its OK to have half the arena be one country if the other two are attacking it.

EagleDNY
$.02

kamilyun · « **Reply #40 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:38:33 PM »

ZOMG I HAVE AN IDEA!!!!!!!111111!!!!!!1111111111

Seriously, HiTech...check it out:

How about combining some elements of Combat Tour (i.e. the characters I saw in another thread) to help limit #'s imbalances? Here's the scheme:

#'s are something like 80:40:40 (realistic based on the last few days at the times I've played)

For the big # country, when you go to the hangar and select you airplane to go attack the low # country you get a little crew chief character or supplies officer that shows up and says (or cartoon bubbles):

"The number of flights out of this base are taxing our supplies, Cap'n. Can't fill ya up 100% and you can just forget about loading bombs (rockets, whatever). Unless I get some more supplies here, we'll be throwing rocks at the NME"

This then gives the offending horde member the option to: 1) Drive and M3 or fly a goon to bring gas and ord to the base (field supplies or something) effectively taking this individual out of combat. Or 2) Switch countries where the supply lines haven't been "stressed" in the high # country.

It gives a "friendlier" face to forcing players to stop gangbanging. You have a little character explaining in somewhat realistic terms that supplies are limited b/c of all the activity in that sector. Obviously, the fuel and ordinance load would be linked to ENY and scaled in an appropriate fashion.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #41 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:39:40 PM »

#2. "Chesspiece Loyalty" is pathetic.

Platano · « **Reply #42 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:41:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by kamilyun
ZOMG I HAVE AN IDEA!!!!!!!111111!!!!!!1111111111

Seriously, HiTech...check it out:

How about combining some elements of Combat Tour (i.e. the characters I saw in another thread) to help limit #'s imbalances? Here's the scheme:

#'s are something like 80:40:40 (realistic based on the last few days at the times I've played)

For the big # country, when you go to the hangar and select you airplane to go attack the low # country you get a little crew chief character or supplies officer that shows up and says (or cartoon bubbles):

"The number of flights out of this base are taxing our supplies, Cap'n. Can't fill ya up 100% and you can just forget about loading bombs (rockets, whatever). Unless I get some more supplies here, we'll be throwing rocks at the NME"

This then gives the offending horde member the option to: 1) Drive and M3 or fly a goon to bring gas and ord to the base (field supplies or something) effectively taking this individual out of combat. Or 2) Switch countries where the supply lines haven't been "stressed" in the high # country.

It gives a "friendlier" face to forcing players to stop gangbanging. You have a little character explaining in somewhat realistic terms that supplies are limited b/c of all the activity in that sector. Obviously, the fuel and ordinance load would be linked to ENY and scaled in an appropriate fashion.

LAWL

...I like teh Idearz

BaldEagl · « **Reply #43 on:** December 06, 2006, 02:53:27 PM »

2. Write the cant fly in this arena unless you changes sides.

This is probably the best idea.

"Chess piece loyalty is a thing of the past! Just like tha old MA! With a growing community it will eventually stagnate itself if the chess piece loyalty continues. Now the good question is how to change the mentality of someone who thinks they have loyalty to said chess piece."

I've always been a Bish but not for loyalty to a chess piece as much as familiarity with the others who have always been Bish too.

That said if there were automatic side balancing (i.e. your automatically placed into the country most needing the numbers) I wouldn't have a problem with it. In fact it would probably improve the sense of "community" within the game getting to fly with others and against friends.

The squads would have problems but how about if whatever country the first squad player got logged into then the rest of their squad was automatically directed to the same country? Still a problem for mega-squads with different squads within a squad but then it might just limit the size of squads to whatever the initially intended limit was (not sure if there is a limit because I'm not in one and don't want to be).

LYNX · « **Reply #44 on:** December 06, 2006, 03:03:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hubsonfire
Every once in a while I get these wild ideas that things like "fair and balanced gameplay" are good things. After falling off the roof and cracking my head on a rock, I realize now how foolish I must have sounded. Apologies to all involved.

Fair play....You would like folks to switch sides to balance the arena. ?

Fair play....You would expect folks to stay on their side instead of bailing to another arena

Fair play ...You want me to switch sides to make up for the quitters. ?

Fair play....2 LW arena's promotes arena quitters leading to side imbalance.

Look! Two late war arena PROMOTES side imbalance a couple of way. If side "Z" is taking a hammering in 1 arena side "Z" will be doing the hammering in the other arena.

Folks being hammered in 1 arena bail to the other arena which in turn widens the imbalance. 1 arena dominated by side "Z" and the other arena by side "X".

Some are even switching sides the wrong way

You can just check rosters and follow them around.....

yet you want me to switch sides because of arena quitters.

Well, I pays to play for rooks. I pays to play to use all the plane/vehicles. I pays to play to be able to switch from spit 16 to p47 to lancs to tigers in the same arena. Equally I pay not to be hoarded or do the hoarding. I have been logging off. I'd rather log than be USED to fill in for a quitter.

FAIR PLAY.... with 2 late war arenas. You gotta be out your tree mate. The argument don't stand up.

You give these guys the opportunity to go to another FULL PLANE SET arena and they go.

Over all the 3 sides have near enough equal numbers....OVER ALL. Yet Bish are favouring LWb while rooks favour LWo. Poor old Knights numbers spread thin in all both arena.

Your argument would stand on merit if there was just 1 LW arena but there are 2.

Either make it 1 LW arena or deny access or place the player.

I'll make you this promise "I ain't switching to stand in for arena quitters".