IconJade wrote:Better idea. Shut down the arena.
_Anshin_ wrote:I am sorry, but I disagree with this statement. It may be better to shut down the missions instead. At least in arenas you are guaranteed a payback for your times. With Missions you can get wiped out in the first round by a few bots with Strafe/Ram before you even get to participate. If your team looses there is no pay out and a complete loss. For people that are trying to capitalize on time and on maximum efficiency then doing that would just put some people at a greater disadvantage.
Psychout wrote:These are good ideas that have oft been discussed in the past, but unfortunately there can be no changes to the game for the moment as our current stand-in admin Mkall is still encountering technical diffculties with the database.
On point, I know how you feel Anshin. At the lowest levels its a widely accepted fact that one faction will stack the missions and the other will stack the arena leaving the latter to wait whilst the former make miniscule gains against minimal opponents. This gets people nowhere, but some people play the game for social enjoyment, others for personal gain, meaning that there will always be those who dump their team in the arena and leave their allies to rot if they see they will be outnumbered and others who will cheerfully hurl their minions into outnumbered missions and certain doom.
This is why the removal of the arena would balance out the game more, removing the option to hide, meaning that less missions would be inbalanced - but will likely never happen to allow for that 'other option' as not everyone plays the same. I'd advise persevering with the missions though, they will always be the core of the game where the biggest gains are to be had, and as the Potentato says above: nothing ventured, nothing gained.
_Anshin_ wrote:I often think the cons purposely stack the missions when they can to dissuade the other side from joining.
_Anshin_ wrote:There is no stacked deck. Its other your build is good, or your lucky.
_Anshin_ wrote:With the Missions, you can have a stacked deck and no reward. Without a reward what is the point for punishing my faction with a lower score?
Interesting point. But, arguably, punishing them by leaving them alone to die can be worse. How will your allies develop if you leave them to be slaughtered? At the very least you can use the brave soul as a shield whilst you score a handful of points..._Anshin wrote:With the Missions, you can have a stacked deck and no reward. Without a reward what is the point for punishing my faction with a lower score?
Burn wrote:And some people said it was the RDD that caused the most problems ...
Of course we all know that was just Alpha Strike trying to cover his own arse.
Burn wrote:_Anshin_ wrote:I often think the cons purposely stack the missions when they can to dissuade the other side from joining.
Yeah, because Autobots NEVER do that._Anshin_ wrote:There is no stacked deck. Its other your build is good, or your lucky.
Because strafers and avoiders fare so well in the arena against rammers.
Stun factor? If a rammer's first move is to ram and it's successful the arena battle is over there and then. At least with missions there's more chance for the stunned to recover._Anshin_ wrote:With the Missions, you can have a stacked deck and no reward. Without a reward what is the point for punishing my faction with a lower score?
The mission win bonus was implemented to encourage people to participate in missions more.
The initial basis of the HMW game was to be centred around missions. Programmers and staff members over the years have tried to ensure that happens. However people are of two mentalities. They either enjoy the arena more or they prefer the arena as they're scared about lack of backup. In all the years i've always been amazed that if someone sees a lack of backup in missions they automatically go to the arena and ignore all the other commanders sitting there waiting. Why not contact them and say "hey, we seem to play at the same time, let's work together in missions".
Seems pretty simple to me.
Burn wrote:Because strafers and avoiders fare so well in the arena against rammers.
Stun factor? If a rammer's first move is to ram and it's successful the arena battle is over there and then. At least with missions there's more chance for the stunned to recover.
Burn wrote:The mission win bonus was implemented to encourage people to participate in missions more.
The initial basis of the HMW game was to be centred around missions. Programmers and staff members over the years have tried to ensure that happens. However people are of two mentalities. They either enjoy the arena more or they prefer the arena as they're scared about lack of backup. In all the years i've always been amazed that if someone sees a lack of backup in missions they automatically go to the arena and ignore all the other commanders sitting there waiting. Why not contact them and say "hey, we seem to play at the same time, let's work together in missions".
Psychout wrote: But, arguably, punishing them by leaving them alone to die can be worse. How will your allies develop if you leave them to be slaughtered? At the very least you can use the brave soul as a shield whilst you score a handful of points...
Absolute Zero wrote:The autobots out number the Cons. The problem you're having with missions, where there simply aren't any bots joining the missions and backing up other bots is pretty much how the game has always been. You may feel that the cons are purposefully stacking the missions, but I don't see how there is a problem. If the other autobots got out of the arena, then you would have full sides in the missions, and you would see a larger XP pay out.
Absolute Zero wrote:Now, the reason why a side gets the energon/xp pay out for victory in missions, but not in the arena is pretty simple. If you send a group out to go and secure a facility or something, they're going to be paid for it whether or not someone actually resists them or not. Or, if you're a RPGer, when you complete a fetch quest, you still get your XP and money for completing the quest. The reason you don't get it in the arena for timing out on your wait is because you're not doing anything. You sat their on your duff waiting, not doing anything, for two hours and didn't contribute anything to your faction. It's kinda like sitting in a room, not doing classwork, or working, just sat there doing nothing. Should you be rewarded for that? Probably not. People don't generally get paid for doing nothing, but soldiers get paid for doing their job, whether they shoot people or not.
Absolute Zero wrote:Now, I know those missions stacked with cons can be daunting, but really, if you join them, suddenly they're not 1 on 6, they're 2 on 6, still more than likely a loss, but you can earn a bit of XP (with a good build, you can earn a lot) and if it looks better to the next person joining missions, so they might join, making it 3 on 6, and much better odds. Suddenly, you have a better chance at better XP than you could get in the arena, and instead of hanging other players out to dry, you're providing much needed back up, and helping out the other autobot players. That should be part of being the "heroic" autobot, but it has always tended to be the mentality of the con players, which is why you see cons in missions, because they're more willing to back up their allies and not say "well, I might not do well here, so screw it."
_Anshin_ wrote:You would not release a new recruit into the battle field.
There is another way to look at it though. Lets take your example of 2 on 6. Yes there is a chance to earn a bit of XP, however what I am really doing is strengthening the enemy.
_Anshin_ wrote:Absolute Zero wrote:The autobots out number the Cons. The problem you're having with missions, where there simply aren't any bots joining the missions and backing up other bots is pretty much how the game has always been. You may feel that the cons are purposefully stacking the missions, but I don't see how there is a problem. If the other autobots got out of the arena, then you would have full sides in the missions, and you would see a larger XP pay out.
I agree with you 100%. However I am trying to find a solution to a problem that obviously hasn't been corrected yet.
Absolute Zero wrote:Now, the reason why a side gets the energon/xp pay out for victory in missions, but not in the arena is pretty simple. If you send a group out to go and secure a facility or something, they're going to be paid for it whether or not someone actually resists them or not. Or, if you're a RPGer, when you complete a fetch quest, you still get your XP and money for completing the quest. The reason you don't get it in the arena for timing out on your wait is because you're not doing anything. You sat their on your duff waiting, not doing anything, for two hours and didn't contribute anything to your faction. It's kinda like sitting in a room, not doing classwork, or working, just sat there doing nothing. Should you be rewarded for that? Probably not. People don't generally get paid for doing nothing, but soldiers get paid for doing their job, whether they shoot people or not.
Again, I understand however having the Energon/XP payout, however please understand this. If you want good troops you pay them to get the training they need as well. You would not release a new recruit into the battle field. You would pay to train them as well as pay them for their time in service. Trust me, even after you reach higher ranks in the military, you are expected to go into training. So why not treat the arena as training?
Absolute Zero wrote:Now, I know those missions stacked with cons can be daunting, but really, if you join them, suddenly they're not 1 on 6, they're 2 on 6, still more than likely a loss, but you can earn a bit of XP (with a good build, you can earn a lot) and if it looks better to the next person joining missions, so they might join, making it 3 on 6, and much better odds. Suddenly, you have a better chance at better XP than you could get in the arena, and instead of hanging other players out to dry, you're providing much needed back up, and helping out the other autobot players. That should be part of being the "heroic" autobot, but it has always tended to be the mentality of the con players, which is why you see cons in missions, because they're more willing to back up their allies and not say "well, I might not do well here, so screw it."
There is another way to look at it though. Lets take your example of 2 on 6. Yes there is a chance to earn a bit of XP, however what I am really doing is strengthening the enemy. While I may earn a hundred XP and 50 Energon, they will probably earn 200 XP, 100 Energon and a bonus of 200 XP and 150 Energon. If I am to think this is a war, then I need to think what is it that I can gain from strengthening my enemy's troops? While I may take one out and stop them from gaining more than the 200 XP, the rest will surely profit. To quote Sun Tzu,
"The primary objective of every state should be to weaken enemy states without actually engaging in armed combat"
So by fighting in Arenas, I am not strengthening a group of cons, I may be only strengthening one.
Burn wrote:People may look at the missions screen and see 1 vs 6 and run. But if they see 2 vs 6 they may be more inclined to think "if I join, it'll be 3 vs 6, that's better chances". And someone else may come along and think the same thing and suddenly it's 4 vs 6.
_Anshin_ wrote:Its ok, I joined a mission (the only one available at the time this morning to try to give what everyone was saying a chance. I normally stay away from 1-11 missions, but what the hell everyone can't be wrong.
http://www.seibertron.com/heavymetalwar ... _id=259295
0/0. I think I'll take the 1hr in the CR to think about my mistake.
People wrote:zombybunnie: N_V scares me...I no longer wish that my pants transformed
Burn:Anyone notice how much of a boring party pooper N_V is? He doesn't join in the fun, he's spent the last few years with dodgy builds feeding XP to the Autobots, and he sure as heck doesn't spam.
disruptor96: I forgot how insane you were.
I think you meant missions, but you're absolutely right.Name_Violation wrote:and for the record, getting rid of the arena makes repaiers unusable.
Psychout wrote:I think you meant missions, but you're absolutely right.Name_Violation wrote:and for the record, getting rid of the arena makes repaiers unusable.
maybe one day you'll post here when sober - then we're all in trouble...:-p
People wrote:zombybunnie: N_V scares me...I no longer wish that my pants transformed
Burn:Anyone notice how much of a boring party pooper N_V is? He doesn't join in the fun, he's spent the last few years with dodgy builds feeding XP to the Autobots, and he sure as heck doesn't spam.
disruptor96: I forgot how insane you were.
Name_Violation wrote:Psychout wrote:I think you meant missions, but you're absolutely right.Name_Violation wrote:and for the record, getting rid of the arena makes repaiers unusable.
maybe one day you'll post here when sober - then we're all in trouble...:-p
right on both accounts
Aerialbot Commander wrote:Burn wrote:People may look at the missions screen and see 1 vs 6 and run. But if they see 2 vs 6 they may be more inclined to think "if I join, it'll be 3 vs 6, that's better chances". And someone else may come along and think the same thing and suddenly it's 4 vs 6.
Sadly I have tried this quite frequently and it doesn't always work. The down side tho is that at level 0 it is not easy to win outnumbered matches so I can see why some people would run from them. My biggest issue with the arena is that people will leave their 'Bots there (or 'Cons) when there are plenty of mission that can use their help. Even worse they will load up in one mission, giving it 1 vs 6 odds, instead of jumping in on a mission that could actually use their help.
Absolute Zero wrote:Aerialbot Commander wrote:Burn wrote:People may look at the missions screen and see 1 vs 6 and run. But if they see 2 vs 6 they may be more inclined to think "if I join, it'll be 3 vs 6, that's better chances". And someone else may come along and think the same thing and suddenly it's 4 vs 6.
Sadly I have tried this quite frequently and it doesn't always work. The down side tho is that at level 0 it is not easy to win outnumbered matches so I can see why some people would run from them. My biggest issue with the arena is that people will leave their 'Bots there (or 'Cons) when there are plenty of mission that can use their help. Even worse they will load up in one mission, giving it 1 vs 6 odds, instead of jumping in on a mission that could actually use their help.
Sadly, that is the unfortunate side effect of our Autobot faction. For the most part, we wouldn't know teamwork if it jumped out and bit our collective arses. But I wont give up! I will argue for joining missions where your brothers are out numbered. If you die, it is better to die together then to let them be slaughtered alone, for that is what will undoubtably happen, if we don't support each other. Dieing alone.
Return to Heavy Metal War Forum
Registered users: -Kanrabat-, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Lexomatic, Sabrblade, triKlops, Yahoo [Bot]