This game is too balanced

[RustyShackleford]

Devs please fix balance. I can't be playing 4 hour matches, I have shit to do.

[yosh56]

WE hear you... buffing doubling damage on everything 

 

[Novilan]

Thumbs up for these Photoshop skills! 

[Suspiria]

Exactly!
I worked out the same theory: Needs more "amplitude".
Allow for more spikes, swings, sudden events.

Example influencers:

In C&C, cutting off the harvester(s) was a much more game-turning factor as there was no base income either.
=> Harvester respawn delay (e.g. 2 minutes), and lower refinery credit base-rate (-0.5c/s), while harvy's yield is considerably higher (+125)

Rare vehicle crates are considerably (e.g. +15%) more powerful while having a lower chance to be had (-20%)
This keeps it special while introducing a healthy imbalance.

A sudden, unexpected +20%-buffed M1 tank with good support could change the frontline.

Also where applicable: Any team balancing should work on the principes of equality of opportunity.
Do not balance according to equality of outcome.

The latter I call "equalizing" a match instead of balancing a team, and is currently being done by using last match's playerscores to balance the new match. Which is a classroom example of a stalemate inducer.

Calculate a player's median score from multiple data points.

In 2019 I've packed a comprehensive list of statistical factors that go into the subject.
Along with the code system prototypes to support it.

Which includes a non-Steam global statistics server.

Edited March 7, 2020 by DugeHick

[yosh56]

This dude's gonna' be disappointed when he realizes this post is sarcastic. 

[Movoza]

1 hour ago, DugeHick said:

<...>

Calculate a player's median score from multiple data points.

In 2019 I've packed a comprehensive list of statistical factors that go into the subject.
Along with the code system prototypes to support it.

Which includes a non-Steam global statistics server.

I thought this thread was a joke thread. Didn't expect such a serious answer.

Calculating things to place people in teams on those scores is a poor idea. There are plenty of jobs that can be crucial, but don't garner much score, kills or renown. Sometimes I go out into the field as an SBH and move behind their tank lines, waiting for the right opportunity to destroy a tank or kill some of their engineers. It can give the extra impulse to break their lines and take more control.

Engineers patrolling for infiltration, mining and emergency repairs don't garner much either, but killing that one or maybe a few infiltrators can help your base survive and the rest of your team in the offencive. Supporting tanks is much the same.

Infiltrating a building even can give you a mediocre score. Biding time, taking risks can give all your scores a hard time, only slightly mitigated when you finally destroy a building. In the end the ones that get a high score get tons of kills, damage or both. In many cases it is because lots or people are doing their jobs, as in this game teamplay is more important than in many others.

 

The harvester yield shouldn't be buffed while the rest is nerfed. It would devolve in a single strategy. Destroy the harvester, protect your own, steamroll over the enemy as they are outfunded. The current system is great in that regard. It is a huge blow to lose your harvester while the opponent's harvester lives, but you'll certainly have a fighting chance. No battle is decided by the harvester.

Putting more power to the vehicle crate and make it rarer? It'll make people be more salty, as it was random luck that gave them far superior hardware. If that changes the battlefield and not the skill and insight in what they can expect normally... was it a just victory? 

 

Finally:

I've played on marathon servers in the old days. Some were even a weekend long. Long games of 2 hours or so weren't rare, with some excesses to 4, 6 or even higher. It created creativity and higher teamwork. I have to say there was less teamwork and more individuality in the warfare then, but in those cases people did crazy shit to get it done, or just as often get thwarted as the enemy team suddenly banded together as well to the thread. 32 gunners making a show on a walls stalemate? A harvywalking rush with engineers in city? Tank rushes and infantry rushes of all kinds, just to break the stalemate. It's a loss that people want to just have a quick battle that doesn't allow for much exotic tactics anymore.

Edited March 7, 2020 by Movoza
Clarification

[Suspiria]

42 minutes ago, yosh56 said:

This dude's gonna' be disappointed when he realizes this post is sarcastic. 

Yea well guess what it's not anymore.

[Suspiria]

42 minutes ago, Movoza said:

I thought this thread was a joke thread. Didn't expect such a serious answer.

Calculating things to place people in teams on those scores is a poor idea. There are plenty of jobs that can be crucial, but don't garner much score, kills or renown. Sometimes I go out into the field as an SBH and move behind their tank lines, waiting for the right opportunity to destroy a tank or kill some of their engineers. It can give the extra impulse to break their lines and take more control.

Engineers patrolling for infiltration, mining and emergency repairs don't garner much either, but killing that one or maybe a few infiltrators can help your base survive and the rest of your team in the offencive. Supporting tanks is much the same.

Infiltrating a building even can give you a mediocre score. Biding time, taking risks can give all your scores a hard time, only slightly mitigated when you finally destroy a building. In the end the ones that get a high score get tons of kills, damage or both. In many cases it is because lots or people are doing their jobs, as in this game teamplay is more important than in many others.

You're totally, totally right on this part. I couldn't have said it any better myself.
There are way, way more other factors involved in estimating a player's skill.
And there are smart ways to go about it to actually be able to calculate such. Not just talking RenScore here.

[roweboat]

Plot twist: topic leads to productive conversation. 

[Madkill40]

On 3/7/2020 at 11:19 AM, DugeHick said:

Calculating things to place people in teams on those scores is a poor idea. There are plenty of jobs that can be crucial, but don't garner much score, kills or renown. Sometimes I go out into the field as an SBH and move behind their tank lines, waiting for the right opportunity to destroy a tank or kill some of their engineers. It can give the extra impulse to break their lines and take more control.

Off-Side +5 VP plz @yosh56

[Movoza]

1 hour ago, Madkill40 said:

Off-Side +5 VP plz @yosh56

Not sure why you quote DugeHick quoting me XD

[Madkill40]

7 hours ago, Movoza said:

Not sure why you quote DugeHick quoting me XD

@Agent quote boxes are not what I'm used to

[Suspiria]

On 3/7/2020 at 11:29 AM, Movoza said:

The harvester yield shouldn't be buffed while the rest is nerfed. It would devolve in a single strategy. Destroy the harvester, protect your own, steamroll over the enemy as they are outfunded. The current system is great in that regard. It is a huge blow to lose your harvester while the opponent's harvester lives, but you'll certainly have a fighting chance. No battle is decided by the harvester.

Putting more power to the vehicle crate and make it rarer? It'll make people be more salty, as it was random luck that gave them far superior hardware. If that changes the battlefield and not the skill and insight in what they can expect normally... was it a just victory? 

You have kind of convinced me now about this harvy part tho.

In original C&C there were other elements in play like map shadow, multiple fields and harv control.
So that one could sneak another harv to some other field if one particular field was annexed.
We don't have that on Ren at all, so hereby I kind of agree with your assessment.

Perhaps! There are other ways to make the harvester mechanics more interesting.
E.g. a map with multiple tib-fields, where commander can switch which of 2-3 routes the harvester will take.
Makes the harvester game mechanic less predictable and somewhat more exciting. Introduces tiny escort missions, maybe.

Thank you for your input here.
Something good definately came out of it.

[Suspiria]

On 3/9/2020 at 5:32 AM, Madkill40 said:

@Agent quote boxes are not what I'm used to

Yea well you're quoting a misunderstanding anyway.

I'm well aware of those other factors and their complexity.
And I think the global median RenScore ought to be the first of those factors.

There are currently five of such in the model that I have in mind.
For example if one player is literally always on the winning team then in the long run that might say something about their (commander) skill.

Edited March 14, 2020 by DugeHick
Wording

[Demigan]

People seem to hate stalemates these days. But what if that is the wrong conclusion? They might not hate stalemates, they hate not having the satisfaction of finishing a fight.

So instead of trying to unbalance the game or make it easier to destroy stuff while making it harder to defend (destroying that awesome feeling you got in original Ren when you had a good shot at destroying something), perhaps you could add mid/late-game goals that help players feel like they accomplished something? That way the feeling of reaching a milestone so you can leave can be created even if you havent finished the battle.

[RustyShackleford]

What if we try a new way to fix the stalemate issue:

 

1. As the game time progresses, the Tiberium field grows and keeps growing and reaches inside the bases. We've always been told that Tiberium is infecting the planet and the whole planet has been divided into Red, Yellow and Blue zones. But we never get to see it grow. Also this will force players who wander around as SBH to either get in a tank or get a chem trooper.

2. Re-spawning in base is not very realistic. I know that the re-spawn timer delay was added to alleviate some "realism" concerns, much to the dismay and disapproval of the whole player base. Perhaps maybe we can re-spawn via Cargo Plane dropping us off over top the map and we press space to parachute in.

3. Buying weapons at a purchase terminal is not very realistic and is inherently unbalanced. Last I checked, Bernie wasn't the president in the tiberium universe. So why are we just handing out credits equally to the whole team? Perhaps the map should be littered with weapons of fallen soldiers.

4. Crates hovering and spinning in the air is also not very realistic, and not very balanced. Perhaps cargo planes should fly above and drop the crates.

5. Finally if the team is still not cooperating and is unable to organize a rush, then we should turn on friendly fire. Because lets be realistic here, we've had over an hour to work together and defeat our enemy. So why should I suffer because my team is tarted? At this point it should be a matter of survival before the tiberium zone grows stronger.

 

[--==00G==--]

The only fixes required are as follows:

1) Allow buying multiple airstrikes at a time.

2) Reduce the price to 400.

3) Remove the cooldown on airstrikes.

4) Profit!

[Guest]

Here comes that boi. O snap 300 kills 

[HIHIHI]

5 hours ago, --==00G==-- said:

The only fixes required are as follows:

1) Allow buying multiple airstrikes at a time.

2) Reduce the price to 400.

3) Remove the cooldown on airstrikes.

4) Profit!

Tony? Is that you?

[limsup]

8 hours ago, RustyShackleford said:

But we never get to see it grow.

I suggest you should check X-mountain's Nod Tiberium field then. 

[--==00G==--]

16 hours ago, HIHIHI said:

Tony? Is that you?

I'd like to think I am Iron Man...

[MammothMKII]

On 3/10/2020 at 9:41 AM, limsup said:

I suggest you should check X-mountain's Nod Tiberium field then. 

Wait what, Tib grows on that map?

[limsup]

20 minutes ago, MammothMKII said:

Wait what, Tib grows on that map?

Start Skirmish and watch the Nod Harvester do its thing at the Nod Tiberium field on X-Mountain. Also watch the GDI side too, and submit a Bug Ticket to @kenz3001

[kenz3001]

kismet always bugs out ... it would need to be coded ... so dont send me tickets unless it for a good show

[Tytonium]

EZ fix for balance.

Remove Islands, Field, Canyon, Oasis, UNDER, and under from 50+ player rotation.

Result: A new era of peace in Renegade X history.

you fuckers

[RustyShackleford]

EZ fix for balance.

Remove I,M,N,O,T,U,Y

Result: no Tytonium's

 

 

[yosh56]

2 hours ago, Tytonium said:

EZ fix for balance.

Remove Islands, Field, Canyon, Oasis, UNDER, and under from 50+ player rotation.

Result: A new era of peace in Renegade X history.

you fuckers

Sounds like the dark ages.