Meh, its not like it wasn't expected. EPN is the only group who can do well with crappy drone ships.
Next time (if I'm allowed to join another fight, if not - too bad) I'd like to know about the no cap style rules because that event was utter rubbish, how am I supposed to have any chance of winning when I roll 3 and the defender roll 1 and still succeeds or I miss the attack entirely. It might be it's to bring more people in but if I had my faction standing around for an hour before the game went down and then when it did go down nothing you did would be able to win the scenario --- seriously--- don't waste my 2 am to 4 am GMT sleep another time, thank you.
Lt0Brien wrote:
Even when damaging them by running one into another...like what I did (god that was hilarious and epic)
Well like I said, drones have no fighting ability. They have no ballistics et cetera, while we have full stats with upgrades. So when we shoot with a +2 on Ballistics and you defend with a +1 on shields we win more often then not, then when the crappy drone ships attack they have a +0, and we defend with a +1 or more. We simply out stat the Drones.
Tis all about tactics and well, we had them seeing as how the bottle neck + wall tactic owns drones.
"when it did go down nothing you did would be able to win the scenario --- seriously--- don't waste my 2 am to 4 am GMT sleep another time, thank you."
In the EPN colony Event, we took 6 drones through Mech and Cyph ships with full stats. we had no guns and barely anything but energy. You could have won, we did in our scenario and we had the same rules "Fly these crappy ships past these epic ones and reach the wall without dying" except we had to get 4 out, you guys only needed two. And that 2AM crap was nothing like the Locke Battle XD friggin 5 AM Eastern Time WOO!
Synapse777 wrote:Next time (if I'm allowed to join another fight, if not - too bad) I'd like to know about the no cap style rules because that event was utter rubbish, how am I supposed to have any chance of winning when I roll 3 and the defender roll 1 and still succeeds or I miss the attack entirely. It might be it's to bring more people in but if I had my faction standing around for an hour before the game went down and then when it did go down nothing you did would be able to win the scenario --- seriously--- don't waste my 2 am to 4 am GMT sleep another time, thank you. Neoteny wrote:As stated, this battle will happen this coming Saturday, April 11th at 5 PM MCT (5 PM Pacific, 6 PM Mountain, 7 Central, 8 Eastern, 1 AM GMT [if you blokes are on daylight savings - if not, midnight]).This battle will allow for a maximum of four participants from each side (Zion, EPN, Machinist, Cypherite, and Merovingian) and will be both server and rank inclusive.
Synapse777 wrote:
Neoteny wrote:
As stated, this battle will happen this coming Saturday, April 11th at 5 PM MCT (5 PM Pacific, 6 PM Mountain, 7 Central, 8 Eastern, 1 AM GMT [if you blokes are on daylight savings - if not, midnight]).This battle will allow for a maximum of four participants from each side (Zion, EPN, Machinist, Cypherite, and Merovingian) and will be both server and rank inclusive.
As stated, this battle will happen this coming Saturday, April 11th at 5 PM MCT (5 PM Pacific, 6 PM Mountain, 7 Central, 8 Eastern, 1 AM GMT [if you blokes are on daylight savings - if not, midnight]).
This battle will allow for a maximum of four participants from each side (Zion, EPN, Machinist, Cypherite, and Merovingian) and will be both server and rank inclusive.
As you were told (both before hand, and during the battle) this is was a special case scenario, and thus, a rank inclusive battle. If you had a legitimate gripe, I think you would have realized before hand that most participants were ranked and had stat advantages. Most of the current players of the game do, which is something I mean to address.
That is not to say that you did not have a chance. You had enough drones on your team to account for a full team of rank 0 captains, which is considerable. If you had stayed around, you might have noticed that TekMon survived several rounds longer, and may have even lasted longer if you had remained. In fact, with two ships, you may have been able to launch a diversionary tactic and slip one ship through thus fulfilling your victory condition, as in those phases, there was a very open hole in your area of the map.
If you look at the last phase of the battle, the Machinists had a pretty good chance of succeeding, or at least getting one ship through. It was tough fought.
In any case, yes, the cap versus inclusion is an issue - not one which would have affected this battle (for this battle, and all special battles, ranks will be left alone and inclusion will be open, I even tried to compensate by adding drones), but one which seems to affect many of the regular battles.
I am considering using a sort of system similar to the "henching" system in other games and such - ships on a side outranked by another side would be permitted to assign temporary upgrades to its ships in order to balance out the odds.
For instance: 3 rank 2 ships against 3 rank 0 ships - the rank 0 ships could each choose two extra stat points to apply for the duration of the battle. In a more diverse allignment - say a rank 3, rank 2, rank 1 versus all rank 0, one could delegate 3 temporary points, one could delegate 2, and one could delegate 1. The poinst may not be mixed and matched across ships.
In a case where a ranked side outnumbers the unranked side, they may pick the top two ships to emulate. That is, if a rank 3, rank 2, and rank 1 ship go against a rank 0 and another rank 0, the two rank zeros may delegate 3 and 2 stat points, respectively. They may not pick up the difference.
This would be done to improve upon fairness and to increase participation, since at this point, most joining in are outranked almost immediately by others who have been playing for a longer time and stand virtually no chance against them.
What are thoughts on this?
I'd say a temporary upgrade point here and there could go a long way, else why even fight a ship with hull 4 and shield 3 it's suicide! and not doing something about the uber ranked ships won't really bring new people in (or might do but that'll only be for a one time as they're destoyed utterly and never comes back).
On a good note I like how the HovercraftBattleCoordinator .. eh.. coordinated. Very fine job at that, nothing wrong with any rulings or anything, done to the letter in trying to achive fairness. Too bad that rules didn't support that.
Oh.. and good sportmansship if you do own a big hunk of uberpwn would be a nice thing to see from Zion's captains... not the it's because we're uberleet lol lol untertones I was picking up from Omega.
Thank you.
I missed that Rank Inclusive meant getting my rear handed to me in a basket made from Neo's hair... my bad.
Well like I said, drones have no fighting ability. They have no ballistics et cetera, while we have full stats with upgrades. So when we shoot with a +2 on Ballistics and you defend with a +1 on shields we win more often then not, then when the crappy drone ships attack they have a +0, and we defend with a +1 or more. We simply out stat the Drones.Tis all about tactics and well, we had them seeing as how the bottle neck + wall tactic owns drones."when it did go down nothing you did would be able to win the scenario --- seriously--- don't waste my 2 am to 4 am GMT sleep another time, thank you."In the EPN colony Event, we took 6 drones through Mech and Cyph ships with full stats. we had no guns and barely anything but energy. You could have won, we did in our scenario and we had the same rules "Fly these crappy ships past these epic ones and reach the wall without dying" except we had to get 4 out, you guys only needed two. And that 2AM crap was nothing like the Locke Battle XD friggin 5 AM Eastern Time WOO!
I stand corrected on the time issue I see
Not all the Zion captains were like that and when one did try to apologize to you for that behavior you launched into a tirad against them.
Good sportsmenship goes both ways, I consider leaving your teammate in the middle of battle with two ships going after him bad sportsmenship myself.
(if I'm allowed to join another fight, if not - too bad)
<3
RedBindi wrote:
Synapse777 wrote:Oh.. and good sportmansship if you do own a big hunk of uberpwn would be a nice thing to see from Zion's captains... not the it's because we're uberleet lol lol untertones I was picking up from Omega.Not all the Zion captains were like that and when one did try to apologize to you for that behavior you launched into a tirad against them.Good sportsmenship goes both ways, I consider leaving your teammate in the middle of battle with two ships going after him bad sportsmenship myself.
That's basically what I was going to say. Actions speak louder than words, and out of all the battles I have been in (which is a lot), I have never left before the battle was over and abandoned a teammate, no matter how bad things were looking for our side.
Besides, you were using rank 0 ships to exchange shots with rank 3 ships, and you asked, "How am I supposed to win this?" So I answered, "You're not." How else was I supposed to respond? If you meant to ask how you were supposed to win the battle, then I could have suggested that you try to spread us out and go around while staying out of our firing arc. But if you did do that, you might have won, and I didn't want that to happen.
Lol and if you mean in the battle with my sportsman ship, if I didnt explain that enough ingame Ill do it again.I talk trash for the mental fun of the game. We're playing a proverbial D&D for 15$ a month, I figure a little "Suck it down M2" is just good psychological warfare >_< If I in anyway offended anyone with anything Ive said, let me know and Ill be sure to send you a Hallmark appology and attempt to stop... but in the end Im just having fun.
I can't really say that I'm in favor of the 'temporary upgrade' idea. Battles that high ranked captains actually get to participate in are few and far between. I can only talk for the Zion side, but we've worked our asses off to get our ranks. Despite people assuming that we only win because of our ranks, it should be noted that we earned every XP in a battle. We've never gotten points for another team not showing up, and we fought our way to the top against others who were the same ranks as we were. Good strategy, communication, and a bit of luck has been the key to our success.
Allowing rank 0 captains temporary upgrades kind of ruins the achievement of attaining ranks for your ship. The way a rank 0 captain can contend with higher rank captains are participating in the regular battles that happen, and earning ranks for themselves. There's the rules that prevent high ranked captains from engaging in battle with lower ranked captains already in place for the average battle. Being able to participate in major battles should be something that lower ranked captains should look forward to participating in the future. Kind of like how a level 10 guy looks forward to level 50 to pvp and participate in events.
That's just my input.
Fen wrote:
I can't really say that I'm in favor of the 'temporary upgrade' idea. Battles that high ranked captains actually get to participate in are few and far between. I can only talk for the Zion side, but we've worked our asses off to get our ranks. Despite people assuming that we only win because of our ranks, it should be noted that we earned every XP in a battle. We've never gotten points for another team not showing up, and we fought our way to the top against others who were the same ranks as we were. Good strategy, communication, and a bit of luck has been the key to our success.Allowing rank 0 captains temporary upgrades kind of ruins the achievement of attaining ranks for your ship. The way a rank 0 captain can contend with higher rank captains are participating in the regular battles that happen, and earning ranks for themselves. There's the rules that prevent high ranked captains from engaging in battle with lower ranked captains already in place for the average battle. Being able to participate in major battles should be something that lower ranked captains should look forward to participating in the future. Kind of like how a level 10 guy looks forward to level 50 to pvp and participate in events.That's just my input.
If I told you that the system of matching rank in normal skirmish battles would allow for the elmiination of the rank disclusion rule in those normal battles, would it change your mind any? (i.e. the max number of ships from any side may be fielded, regardless of rank)
I understand where you're coming from, but to be honest, at this point, the system promotes exponential growth on the side most favorably outfitted (right now, Zion/EPN) and makes it next to impossible for a newer participant to rank up. Being that there's no stake to the regular battles and that the comparative ranking (fair play rule, let's say) would be disabled for crucial battles, I'd say it might be more than fair to give the other side a fair chance to win.
Because if we continue the way things are right now, Zion/EPN's only challenge really comes from 5 key players who remain. Generally, however, since Zion/EPN vastly outnumber and outrank the other sides (and since the other sides to not consistently field ranked ships), the bulk of XP flows to Zion and breaks any chance of level playing field. With the level playing field, more people will advance at a more even rate. Having played for both sides under Vogt's system, I know quite well how hard fought the battles were to get those ranks but at this point, it's not 2 rank 0 EPN ships and 1 rank 1 EPN ship going against a rank 2 Machinist ship and 2 rank 0 Machinist ships and winning - It's 3-4 rank 0 ships going against 3-4 rank 2-3 ships. That's prohibitive to fair/fun play, which is the goal here.
Given the PvP analogy, the current system is like a level 30 punching out a level 5 and gaining 3 levels while the level 5 gains one for each time they fight. You know who's going to make it to level 50 rapidly and who's not going to make it there for a long time. Now, given how long these battles have been held and the current rank status of participants, I'd wager it'll be at least a little while before anyone hits that 50 XP bar, and under the current system, it'll be an even longer while before any of the newer players do.
Does this change any thoughts at all here? I'm just trying to make sure that everyone has a good time (this could even give you folks in Zion/EPN a challenge!) and that maybe things can balance out a bit more. Once again, this is not to say that the fair play rule would be in effect for special battles (like the one on Saturday night) but it would be used for normal battles.
And just to be clear, I'm not stating that this is going to happen. I just like the idea and am trying to work a persuasive angle for it.
