The Energon Pub

by **CheshiredaCat** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:28 pm

Id also like to see an increased frequency of G1 missions as most of the time there are two or fewer maxis in any of our missions. I do like the fact that when the missions came up they were 4v4 as opposed to 6v6. also i have seen maybe one or two completely full missions in the preds vs. maxis so it may benefit both if those turned into 4v4 as well.

News Credits: 2 · by **Wingspan** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:39 pm

<post>
<recommendations>
-- Increase Beast/G1 frequency somewhat (e.g. 1 in 10)
-- Leave Beast/G1 at 4v4
-- Leave generation of Beast/G1 to be by Beast only
-- Modify Beast/Beast to have some 6v6 and some 4v4
</recommendations>
<questions>
-- When tournaments are run, can the Beast/G1 be dialed up further?
</questions>
</post>

News Credits: 1 · by **Absolute Zero** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:24 pm

The best way to handle the beast v g1 missions would be to set them so only beast factions can spawn them and set them at a higher frequency.If Half our missions are against G1ers, we get the benefit of missions with more opposition, and if they can't spam-spawn them, then we also get the added benefit of not having 8-10 missions to try to fill at a given time.

by **Raphael Prime** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:39 pm

I would agree on turning up the Beasts vs G1 missions a bit. I didn't mind fighting the Bots and Cons at all. The part that originally bugged me was the amount of Con missions that would be there ready for me to join at any given time of the day, which was usually a good two or three times as many bots as i was allowed to have active. And turn up the 2-4 leveled missions as well. I don't believe i've seen a single one yet.

For me, the missions against the Preds seem to be going well though. I have seen more green logos on my homepage recent, which is a good sign.

I'm also wondering. When might the other missions get put in? for example the 0 only, 0-1, 1-2, 1-3? those sort

News Credits: 2 · by **Wingspan** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:46 pm

Raphael Prime wrote:For me, the missions against the Preds seem to be going well though. I have seen more green logos on my homepage recent, which is a good sign.

Dumb luck fuzz butt

Raphael Prime wrote:I'm also wondering. When might the other missions get put in? for example the 0 only, 0-1, 1-2, 1-3? those sort

Seconded.

News Credits: 3 · by **Name_Violation** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:53 pm

Wingspan wrote:
Raphael Prime wrote:I'm also wondering. When might the other missions get put in? for example the 0 only, 0-1, 1-2, 1-3? those sort

Seconded.

mee too boss

also I dont like the idea the beast missions ONLY being 4vs4. maybe some but deffinately not all. but maybe it would get the maxi's involved in more missions.

News Credits: 5 · by **emeraldbeacon** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 10:23 pm

Greater mission variety is GREATLY needed. 0-1, 1-2, 0-2, etc. My low level bots are getting slaughtered by Cons every single time, due to the fact that I've only got high-1s that have to face high-2s and 3s... and that I'm usually accompanied by 0s.

The game is currently built to make the experience gap between factions ever greater, and the disparity will continue to exist (and grow) until something is done to create a degree of parity...

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 11:37 pm

emeraldbeacon wrote:The game is currently built to make the experience gap between factions ever greater, and the disparity will continue to exist (and grow) until something is done to create a degree of parity...

Got an idea on how to manage that?
'cause really, I don't.

News Credits: 1 · by **Absolute Zero** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 11:42 pm

Any way to fix it would either break the game and/or piss people off.

News Credits: 2 · by **Wingspan** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 3:03 pm

Burn wrote:
emeraldbeacon wrote:The game is currently built to make the experience gap between factions ever greater, and the disparity will continue to exist (and grow) until something is done to create a degree of parity...

Got an idea on how to manage that?
'cause really, I don't.

Absolute Zero wrote:Any way to fix it would either break the game and/or piss people off.

So long as they don't stop playing, pissing people off isn't a bad thing necessarily.

Mission level variety should be the priority. 0-1, 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, 2-4, 1-3. I'd request an equal probability to generate the missions (e.g. a Level 1 has 33% chance to generate 0-1, 33% chance to generate 1-2, 33% chance to generate 1-3, etc.) so spread out the gameplay.

How quickly can mission variety be expected? This is no longer just a Beast concern so the larger community would benefit best from this.

by **Raphael Prime** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 3:36 pm

Burn wrote:
emeraldbeacon wrote: until something is done to create a degree of parity...

Got an idea on how to manage that?

Call Gary Betteman :lol:

.

I'm going to agree with Wingspan on the equal probability chances on the generating missions.

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:03 pm

Wingspan wrote:How quickly can mission variety be expected? This is no longer just a Beast concern so the larger community would benefit best from this.

It depends on how much we poke OS as he's the only one who can fiddle with missions.

Time to go poke him then.

News Credits: 1 · by **Redimus** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:06 pm

It wont help us now, but coem v2 ,the easiest way I can see for giving some form of equality of faction numbers is to offer xp incentives to new starters if a faction or factions starts to lag behind.

(Ie. Say the Maximals end up particularly under populated, maybe all commanders joining them from a certain date get x amount of xp, so the choice becomes, join the faction with the back up, or join the faction with the extra xp to play with. I'd only say one or 2 stats worth of xp, nothing extravigant.)

Of course that it a long term way to fix things, if large iniqualites start apearing higher up the ladder, well we all know how to fix that. High level defections for the sake of evening out the game have been a part of this game for as long as I've played, and I see no problem with keepign it that way, there's always someone higher up looking for a new challenge, it's why I orignally joined the preds.

Burn wrote:
Wingspan wrote:How quickly can mission variety be expected? This is no longer just a Beast concern so the larger community would benefit best from this.

It depends on how much we poke OS as he's the only one who can fiddle with missions.

Time to go poke him then.

It could be a co-incidence, or good timing, but I've noticed the current mission format has arived at the same time as a surge up the table from my team (and no I havnt been playing any harder), so right now I, not too fussed who I meet, as they are givign me xp. Of course, come tournie time, that's when it needs fixing.

News Credits: 7 · by **Chaoslock** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:00 pm

Can we expect the increased base payout for bigger levels to return?
Most bots stay in the lower mission bracket because they're afraid of lv. 3-4s and can bug the lower cons. A higher base payout should benefit the usage of the newer missions. (plus, the empty mission-using of G1s against beasties has been reduced to almost zero)

News Credits: 42 · by **Psychout** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 7:37 pm

Fearless Echoes wrote:It wont help us now, but coem v2 ,the easiest way I can see for giving some form of equality of faction numbers is to offer xp incentives to new starters if a faction or factions starts to lag behind.

Come HMW2 and there will be a lot more to take into account when balancing than just the current player numbers and energon, all of which has been planned for in advance. Defections will have an in-game mechanic and shouldn't ever be required for 'balancing' either.

News Credits: 2 · by **Wingspan** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:46 pm

Psychout wrote:... shouldn't ...

Sir, aka mini mod, you have spoken a variation my most and least favorite word as a software engineer - should.

For you see, there are quite a many things that "should" have worked and "shouldn't" have broken; there were quite a few systems on which I depended that "should" follow their manuals. Of course there was also many "should" be done on time.

This word, should, communicates the greatest intentions with less ability than you want to ensure those intentions are realized. In HMW II, we should have so many problems fixed; sir, aka mini mod, to this I will agree. It seems so different, HWM II will likely have a whole new set of problems never anticipated.

On last thing, when "should" the mission tweaks occur?

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 9:25 pm

Wingspan wrote:On last thing, when "should" the mission tweaks occur?

When (if) they happen.

News Credits: 5 · by **emeraldbeacon** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 9:56 pm

Burn wrote:
emeraldbeacon wrote:The game is currently built to make the experience gap between factions ever greater, and the disparity will continue to exist (and grow) until something is done to create a degree of parity...

Got an idea on how to manage that?
'cause really, I don't.

Well...

How about instituting an XP bonus for missions, relative to the percentage-difference in average XP on the two sides of the mission? For example, say you had 6 Cons versus 3 Bots. The Cons have a sum total experience of 1,200,000, while the Bots only have 450,000. The average Con XP would thus be determined at 200k, versus 150k for the Bots. Because the Bots are 25% lower in base experience, all of their XP totals for that particular mission should be given a 25% bonus. 200xp would become 250, for example.

This would greatly benefit level zeros and ones walking into a suicide mission against level threes... provided they could get a hit in. It wouldn't penalize the already strong twos and threes - rather, it would give the underdogs a fighting chance to get back in the game.

Though perhaps there should also be a +100% cap on the XP gain, just so a zero-experience warrior doesn't walk into a suicide mission, land one punch, and walk away with infinite XP. Gotta love dividing by zero!

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Sun Jan 25, 2009 10:41 pm

That looked complicated, and while I may not have understood it I can safely say that such a thing more than likely will not happen as it'll require a change to the code, which, with HMW2 in development, is simply not going to happen.

News Credits: 42 · by **Psychout** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:07 am

Wingspan wrote:stuff

You'll just have to wait and see, wont you. :wink:

News Credits: 2 · by **Wingspan** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:02 pm

Psychout wrote:
Wingspan wrote:stuff

winked at me *shivers*

Well nerf to you too.

So Fuzzies, is American EST Afternoons your strong suit? I just had 4 losses because of being outnumbered and just entered members to full Maximal opposition? Any way you roll this, I'm liking the opportunity chew-off some limbs.

Might Maximals have a conscious and only play from work when their work is done? *GASP!*

edit: Good fight. Gotta what one more Maximal Level 2 would have done.

News Credits: 3 · by **Name_Violation** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 4:12 pm

Wingspan wrote:
Psychout wrote:
Wingspan wrote:stuff

winked at me *shivers*

Well nerf to you too.

So Fuzzies, is American EST Afternoons your strong suit? I just had 4 losses because of being outnumbered and just entered members to full Maximal opposition? Any way you roll this, I'm liking the opportunity chew-off some limbs.

Might Maximals have a conscious and only play from work when their work is done? *GASP!*

edit: Good fight. Gotta what one more Maximal Level 2 would have done.

they're also running amuk at 6-7 am est time. i normally go to bet about that time(3-4 am my time) since most other preds aren't on then anyway.

News Credits: 2 · by **Wingspan** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:05 am

Name_Violation wrote:they're also running amuk at 6-7 am est time. i normally go to bet about that time(3-4 am my time) since most other preds aren't on then anyway.

Seem to be rolling through 10am today - snow day increasing play?

Oh yeah, one more thing, RNG FAIL; that one ticked me off.
*Shakes fist at unknown adversary*

Is there some logic that always gives the underdog the advantage?