Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Seeing as I'm on a roll with pissing people off today, I figure I may as well keep going!

With the topic of defecting still on-going, and will most likely be resolved for one player in a few days, I wanted to talk about the cost of defecting. It shouldn't be easy, it should cost.

So this is what I've thought up. It's not concrete, it's all open for debate and if you have suggestions, by all means, put them forward.

THE COST
Loss of alt-modes - You switch? You lose the alt-modes, that includes any you won in tournaments
Loss of energon - 50% of what you have. I'm sure some people will just donate it to someone, plus once you swap sides you'll no doubt have someone donate some to you anyway, so probably not a big thing.

I will stress this, at this point I do NOT believe people should lose XP over it. If people feel otherwise, then put your argument forward but it'll take a lot to convince me, and I'm sure a lot of others as well.

So over to you guys, comments, suggestions, have at it.

Hrm.

Loss of alt modes wouldn't mean much to me. If I switched to a Bot tomorrow the first thing I'd do is reset my guys anyways as it'd require different setup than I'm running now. Seems like kind of a kick in the teeth to people that care about such things though. It used to be one of the fun things when people switched in the past, seeing a enemy with a "stolen" mode. It also became like a prize alt in that they had to be careful how they upgraded since they couldn't reset.

Loss of Energon...
As you said it'd be easy enough to get a donation after the switch as both sides are pretty generous with it. Seems that it hurts the side accepting the transfer as a) the transfer is in less of a position to spread the wealth they had accumulated and b) that side could be put in the position of using funds that could have allocated to new players to bail out said transfer.

Considering that in the current situation the switching from one side to the other is only on the table because of an imbalance of players the "cost" would be losing the advantage of practically guaranteed mission support and possibly floundering until they adapt to the new conditions.

But hey, you make the rules. Those conditions are far easier to swallow than xp loss! Though I just can't understand why this insistence of a "cost" unless this is going to be a process that can be done by anyone at any time and not just a limited thing to boost up a side. Is that what we're talking about here?

Shouldn't defecting only be possible with good reason, namely an unbalanced game? The cost should be moving onto the disadvantaged side which incurs an energon flow problem and lack of backup. For that same reason, switching sides should only be offered when desirable for the player base as a whole and only in the direction which benefits it.

For instance and using the current imbalance as an example:
Needed:
4 players with teams L4 and over to switch from Con to Bot.
2 players with teams L2 and below to switch from Bot to Con.

Have it be first come, first served, without any energon or alt mode penalties. I don't want to switch to Bot and don't really want to see my buddies do it either but it sucks not having anything to shoot at in missions. On the other hand while it'd be great to have Wingz on team purple, that would suck for the game as a whole.
Imposing penalties such as those you propose seem counterproductivly punitive without any demonstrable benefit.

As I think more about it, loss of alts and loss of 50% Energon seems like a double whammy to anyone that uses a lot of armor.
You would have to re-equip and repay for it all. That could wipe some people out!

Those both seem reasonable to me. I also agree it should be somewhat limited in who is allowed to go. Maybe start with you can't defect a second time, or at least for some time period (say 1 year). You can add you need to move in a direction that improves balance, though this could be a little harder to prove.

Bun-Bun wrote:Seems like kind of a kick in the teeth to people that care about such things though. It used to be one of the fun things when people switched in the past, seeing a enemy with a "stolen" mode. It also became like a prize alt in that they had to be careful how they upgraded since they couldn't reset.

Fair point. Let me elaborate on my way of thinking.

Any changes at this particular point in time are manual. Your reasoning for switching is to balance the game. A move which MAY have very little impact. However, there may be others who want to switch for more selfish reasons but instead give the "balancing" excuse.

By adding a cost, I hope (and I'll probably be wrong) to deter the selfishness.

Down the track if it becomes more of an automated feature then things may be different as other hoops may be needed to jump through.

Loss of Energon...
As you said it'd be easy enough to get a donation after the switch as both sides are pretty generous with it. Seems that it hurts the side accepting the transfer as a) the transfer is in less of a position to spread the wealth they had accumulated and b) that side could be put in the position of using funds that could have allocated to new players to bail out said transfer.

Fair point, one I didn't consider.
But given that I dumped a "1" in front of Wingz's energon the other day (strictly as an experiment to see if it would work and to see how long it would take her to notice), there's no risk of energon shortage.

Considering that in the current situation the switching from one side to the other is only on the table because of an imbalance of players the "cost" would be losing the advantage of practically guaranteed mission support and possibly floundering until they adapt to the new conditions.

ehhhhhhh I get where you're coming from, but I think this may be at the far end of the scale in terms of problems. If you switch, Wingz will give you energon, you'll armour up in no time and be out fighting within 24 hours or so.

You have to look at the long term of "defecting" as well. It may end up an automated feature so consider yourself a test bunny.

But hey, you make the rules.

Oh the sarcasm is strong in this. I'm asking because I want feedback from the players. We've already had one guy in charge with his own ideas that he never bothered to tell anyone about, and now Ryan's cleaning up a **** tonne of dodgy code because of it.

Those conditions are far easier to swallow than xp loss!

Yeah, XP loss is absolutely off the table. I will argue until I'm blue in the face (and then some) to ensure that NEVER happens.

Though I just can't understand why this insistence of a "cost" unless this is going to be a process that can be done by anyone at any time and not just a limited thing to boost up a side. Is that what we're talking about here?

It's planning for the future yes.

But I don't see why you seem to have the impression this is detrimental to a person changing "to balance things".

You change sides. You retain your XP. You may just need an energon boost and 24 hours (or so) to armour up.

Why shouldn't there be a cost?

sprockitz wrote:Those both seem reasonable to me. I also agree it should be somewhat limited in who is allowed to go. Maybe start with you can't defect a second time, or at least for some time period (say 1 year). You can add you need to move in a direction that improves balance, though this could be a little harder to prove.

Thank you for the reminder! I was leaning towards it being a one-off thing but a time period would be fairer.

Bun-Bun wrote:As I think more about it, loss of alts and loss of 50% Energon seems like a double whammy to anyone that uses a lot of armor.
You would have to re-equip and repay for it all. That could wipe some people out!

Not a dig at you, but I see a lot of people chopping and changing armours which chews through energon as they try to work out what's best.

That should already be known. Chewing through energon for the sake of research seems kind of pointless these days as pretty much everything is known.

Plus again, donations. I'm more than willing to give energon out in exchange for certain tasks being met (e.g. collecting certain alt modes, beating players etc).

ENERGON SHORTAGE IS A NON-ISSUE

I think the alt mode loss and energon cut is reasonable, do agree with sprockitz though... maybe a 6 month to 1 year thing where you can't switch after you've made your choice.

All the above which I'm willing to have to go through... though I severely doubt I will ever switch again.

Good points be made.

A time limit sounds like a good idea rather than making things final. The energon reassurance souns fair. Shame about the alt modes still but I guess that's up to people who want to switch if they're happy to go with it. Personally I wouldn't want to lose mine but I wouldn't switch either so may be the wrong one to ask.

Mmkay you ask for comments and concerns, I responded with what came to mind.

I'm fine with these and even if I weren't would it really matter? Don't get me wrong, I VERY much appreciate being asked instead of being told but in the end it's your call and usually you can be counted on to do what's best for the game.
You've been reading too much into my throw away comments lately.

That being said...
Did I miss the part of the help page where the armor coefficients are listed for everyone to see? (That one was sarcasm)
Best thing about this game is anyone can play how it works for them, even if that way is to analyze it. Not everyone's goal is to be at the top of the game scoreboard.

But anyways, WAY off topic...

After your response to my concerns I understand the reasoning better and have no problem with those "costs".

Bun-Bun wrote:I'm fine with these and even if I weren't would it really matter?

I don't expect decisions about this game to go over well with everyone, that's life really.

Don't get me wrong, I VERY much appreciate being asked instead of being told but in the end it's your call and usually you can be counted on to do what's best for the game.
You've been reading too much into my throw away comments lately.

Because it's you. You've said it yourself that you like to stand up to authority. And when you say things like this (and previous comments) you make me sound like a Dictator.

Nah mate, I, and others, suffered under the Dictators when they ran this site. I won't do that, even though the way some people push me I feel like banning them outright.

But for the benefit of the game, I work with you. If I need someone else to test things, I'll use you (and then ask for permission later ... probably should work on that) because I know you like to do that stuff.

I could have simply said "no" to this defection idea, but I have gone out of my way to make sure it's done as right as it can be done, because it's needed for the game.

Did I miss the part of the help page where the armor coefficients are listed for everyone to see? (That one was sarcasm)

See? You couldn't help yourself. Would it appease you if I just gave you the numbers? Because I can see them now ...

Best thing about this game is anyone can play how it works for them, even if that way is to analyze it. Not everyone's goal is to be at the top of the game scoreboard.

Leaderboards are like post counts. Pointless. Oh to do away with both ...

But as I've said, none of this is concrete. If the majority feel like an energon cut is harsh, then we lose it. If the majority feel like an XP cut is harsh, then I abuse my power and overrule everyone.

Heck, I can even throw on a custom forum rank of "Defector" for six months or so. It doesn't have to be limited to just in-game.

My only thought with the time frame is,... if something happens to Burn or Wingz, and defector's time is up how is the new if any going to know how long it's been?

Just curious.

Sustain wrote:My only thought with the time frame is,... if something happens to Burn or Wingz, and defector's time is up how is the new if any going to know how long it's been?

Just curious.

Make a thread in the HMW Staff forums. Not a biggie.

Sustain wrote:My only thought with the time frame is,... if something happens to Burn or Wingz, and defector's time is up how is the new if any going to know how long it's been?

Just curious.

Sounds like she's planning a coup against you Burn

Because it's you. You've said it yourself that you like to stand up to authority. And when you say things like this (and previous comments) you make me sound like a Dictator.

Emphasis on the Dic?

I've told you this in private but I will go on public record as saying you are easily the best Admin the site has had in my playing history.
(And for the sake of your ego I'll leave off the part about how oh so very low that bar is)

But for the benefit of the game, I work with you. If I need someone else to test things, I'll use you (and then ask for permission later ... probably should work on that) because I know you like to do that stuff.

Permission is overrated. You keep throwing that sweet experimental stuff my way whenever the fancy strikes you.

See? You couldn't help yourself.

Replies the scorpion: "Its my nature..."
It's not personal Burn, you can ask the RDD, I'm a sarcastic ass to everyone.
Lighten up a bit, it's all for the craic.

Would it appease you if I just gave you the numbers? Because I can see them now ...

You tempt me good sir!
Though I do so enjoy trying to figure them out...
My TAG cohorts maybe not so much when I'm ordering them about to do it and frequently getting things wrong.

Maybe just one though... like Iron or Steel so I can check my work on it....

Heck, I can even throw on a custom forum rank of "Defector" for six months or so. It doesn't have to be limited to just in-game.

As long as it's written in scarlet letters

Bun-Bun wrote:

Heck, I can even throw on a custom forum rank of "Defector" for six months or so. It doesn't have to be limited to just in-game.

As long as it's written in scarlet letters

Think I've worked out how to do it. Have to create a separate group, add whoever to that group (making sure the colour is set) and then change their rank.

So yes, scarlet is do-able, and quite frankly, is a good idea.

So is it only Bun who's crossing over then? Presumably after his and Wingz war

ZeroWolf wrote:So is it only Bun who's crossing over then? Presumably after his and Wingz war

Nothing is for certain yet.

The only thing I can think of to add is to scale the energon loss relative to level. Personally I care less about loss of alt mode since I have no prize alt modes floating around. In a lot of ways, there isn't any real difference in the alt modes except exp cost for tactics and even then a few of them. As you mention before, energon loss isn't much of a big deal unless their is a donation cap in the near future. I do agree with the time factor and even like the idea of the defector label.

As for my scaling idea, let us say it starts at 5% at level 0 and goes up 5% per level. This would be team level btw. So level 1 would be taxed 10%, L2 15% so forth up to 60% for L11. Switching tax = (level+1)*.05*energon

sumowrestler wrote:(level+1)*.05*energon

Fixed
*edit: D'oh you fixed it yourself as I was typing!*

Though that could be manipulated by some pre-switching upgrade shenanigans. If this were to be implemented it should probably the team level as calculated when all members have been sent back to protoforms (since that's gonna happen anyways) so that the level cap system in in play.
Of course the level system currently only goes up to level 7 so that would mean the penalty would only go up to 40%...
What about: Energon*(.5*[(level+1)/8])
Breakdown:

Level 0 = 6.25%
1 = 12.5%
2 = 18.75%
3 = 25%
4 = 31.25%
5 = 37.5%
6 = 43.75%
7 = 50%

I wouldn't call it a tax as much as I would call it "defecting with as much as you can carry on your back while dodging fire from former allies". Or maybe "bribe money for suspicious guards". Resetting alts would be like unto going undercover (more recognizable as a robot in disguise rather than as a generic space robot).

The problem of a formula is how easy the player can change the variables. If we want one which is somewhat stable is team exp. This will probably require a set range but even then players can forgo playing to stay within a certain bracket. Maybe a flat rate would be best. Sadly, this is sounding like talking about the mess of the US income tax system.

I will put this out there, some people build massive bio's about their character and their alt-mode. Losing the alt-mode can be a BIG thing for them.
I am all for first come and first serve for a balance switch, but punishing people to help balance the game seems...wrong. If you want to make it so that anyone that STILL wants to change sides LATER on has to lose Energon and maybe a 1% XP penalty, that would work better. Leave alt-modes out of it ...but that is just me.

I know for me changing alt modes is sometimes an expanse of character background. One of mine been changing up due to research purposes. I will simply add in her bio of becoming part of a limited cross factional research with very trusted associates. Sometimes people reset because the build isn't working and need a different form. The big thing is vast majority of the alt modes do come back into rotation eventually. It is the prize tourney ones which never in the rotation system.

With the new control panel that's been shown, we could have the old 'hunt yourself a custom alt' thing Psych used to run... if one is that concerned about specific alt modes.

Burn wrote:

Sustain wrote:My only thought with the time frame is,... if something happens to Burn or Wingz, and defector's time is up how is the new if any going to know how long it's been?

Just curious.

Make a thread in the HMW Staff forums. Not a biggie.

This should all be programmed and built into the game. I think all of you are getting ahead of yourselves with this, though seeing thoughts and opinions about what the penalties should be is good to read to help me figure out how I want to program this functionality at some point. None of this should be done manually, with the exception of right now just trying to balance things in the game.