Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
karast

Underdogs: Keeping Outnumbered Players In The Fight

Recommended Posts

One of the problems you can run into with a PvP game, especially ones with open / factional pvp is population balance. Crowfalls campaign design does a lot to reset and redistribute players after a match up and helps to keep the game fresh.

 

But it doesn't completely deal with the very real population issues the game will face.

 

To be clear when I say, "population issues" I am largely referring to situations where one faction or factions vastly out number their enemy factions. This can happen for a multitude of reasons, a lack of morale / community / organization on a particular faction, faction demographics, does your faction have a lot of Russian players? a lot of German players? a lot of oceanic players? Even if the overall populations of the factions are near equal, 24 hour coverage, and peak play times can differ greatly.

 

If your gaming window is 10:00-12:00 and your stuck in a lull for your faction, it can really dissuade you from playing. With Crowfall locking characters to a campaign till completion this can become a very sore spot, and drive people to other characters, further depopulating a faction.

 

The problem is not just limited to the overwhelmed faction either, those on the overwhelming side my not get much enjoyment out of the situation, if you play to fight, but have no one to fight, then you'll lose interest as well. For competitive guilds and players they need a competitive environment, and being in a one-side stomping doesn't help all that much.

 

Other games have in the past tried to rectify this problem in many different ways, and there are a plethora of ideas out there for ways of potentially dealing with it. My favorite was so far has been Warhammer Onlines AAO system. Which drastically increased renown (pvp experience system) gain scaled to enemy population. You could make more renown in a mismatch, than in a balanced match, and it drove people out to claw, scrape, and steal every kill possible, but such a system might not work well with Crowfall.

 

Does the ArtCraft team have any ideas on how they want to tackle the problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somebody has to win.  Somebody has to lose.  In an age when everyone gets trophies for participation people are going to flock to the winning side (regardless of what that means).

 

The fact that the campaigns have set end dates will clear the pieces of the chess board quicker.  But it will also bolster recruitment and potentially make the next round worse off.  Saw it in GW2.  Henge of Denravi was stomping in WvW and other servers didn't step up to the plate (for the most part); players just took free transfers to the winning server instead.

 

We have too many unknowns to know what all that means in this game, but I myself will be playing in the Shadows and Dregs.  Let the players create their own factions as sandboxes should.  At this time I don't have an interest in the gods or chaos/order/balance campaigns for many of the reasons you describe.  More so because the person I want to stab in the eye is usually the one mouthing off in general chat not the random red name player running by me that can't talk to me for some arbitrary game lore reason.


mael4.jpg


Been around the MMO Block...


Sardoni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are going to be winners and there are going to be loser.

 

The population issue is more about how can you incentives the weaker faction / under populated faction to stay in the fight.

 

In essence to fight a losing battle. 

 

There really isn't much to keep people there if they are losing, especially if it's a one sided slaughter. There is not much on the line for them should they lose.

 

It's easier to just leave and go someplace else where you join a winning team, or where you have a more even balance.

 

The last thing you want is to have campaigns simply turn into resource farms, when one faction gains the upper hand. Which is something that is likely to happen in guild matches, in faction battles, and even in the dregs. 

 

Example,

 

(X guild has 50 members on A dregs map, coordinating together, let's go to map B it's a better mix.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are going to be winners and there are going to be loser.

 

The population issue is more about how can you incentives the weaker faction / under populated faction to stay in the fight.

 

In essence to fight a losing battle. 

 

There really isn't much to keep people there if they are losing, especially if it's a one sided slaughter. There is not much on the line for them should they lose.

 

It's easier to just leave and go someplace else where you join a winning team, or where you have a more even balance.

 

The last thing you want is to have campaigns simply turn into resource farms, when one faction gains the upper hand. Which is something that is likely to happen in guild matches, in faction battles, and even in the dregs. 

 

Example,

 

(X guild has 50 members on A dregs map, coordinating together, let's go to map B it's a better mix.)

I think the campaigns will be large enough and the join cutoff will be early enough that you won't see a runaway winner by that point.  I could be wrong though who knows. 

 

I understand your concern though, it happened in shadowbane where a lot of guilds avoided the dangerous servers and opted for other servers where they could have an easier go of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to say as someone who enjoys small scale pvp over large that while pvping as a small group and beating up on a larger group ( even if u dont win ) but killing more then u have is always fun... Zerg guilds play alot FOTM classes as well and dont even know what have the other ability do.. i just spam 3,2,1 and the mob is dead... pvp comes to be a whole new set of numbers..... but numbers do win most of the time unless we have some good CC anti CC in this game, but no one wants long CC either so /shrug its red its dead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the under populous just join together in alliances then take out the overpopulated side. Well call this population control. It should work great.


etDenA9.png
Camaraderie ~ Loyalty ~ Honor ~ Maturity ~ Integrity ~ Duty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They just need to make player skill matter a ton so that it doesn't matter how many you bring to the fight, but who you bring to the fight.

 

And ladies & gentlemen, the correct answer of the day.

 

Make the skill-ceiling so rigorously high that a 10 vs. 100 fights can be stomps for the underdogs, if the 100 aren't as skilled as they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And ladies & gentlemen, the correct answer of the day.

 

Make the skill-ceiling so rigorously high that a 10 vs. 100 fights can be stomps for the underdogs, if the 100 aren't as skilled as they are.

I think 10 of the absolute best players should be able to take on 100 newbies in an ideal world, but I think that may be too steep for ACE's liking.  I'd be happy if 10 could take on 30-40. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://youtu.be/DFrYEpShzF0?t=23

I had high hopes for this one,unfortunately...

"leading your squads" is an important one .so we need to have categories of units with strenghts and weaknesses

Where a siege unit could kill plenty of untactful players for example

Archers weak vs wall,strong vs mounted players (think this was the case in age of empires)

Here we need that "swing factor" J .Todd mentioned in the video about siege

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Collision Detection

 

Friendly Fire

 

Skilled Combat

 

Alliances and Politics (hopefully)

 

That should help fix the underdog situation unless it is extreme. Specifically for the faction servers, play 12 faction rather than 3 and this becomes less an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My idea (has it´s flaws) would be to have ques onto the campaigns. Say the maximum player base in a campaign is 2000 people, if there are 300 online on one side there can only be 250-350 on the oppisite. So if the difference between factions is more than 50 players there is a que to get into the campaign. There would have to be a lowest point as well at maybe 200 but this indeed has its flaws. The first one would be ques, no one likes ques, this can be solved by having multible characters in multible campaigns and being able to que on your main for the campaign you want while still being online on another character in your EK or what ever. I think this can be tweeked to a good point and than outnumbering will be almost impossible and than the battle will be decided by who you brought to battle with you not how many .

 

Arro


Arrogance diminishes wisdom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recruiting and diplomacy are parts of the game. If you fail to play them adequately well you deserve to lose. Play better next campaign.

 

I would like to see a system in which numbers were not the only factor in determining victory. I would not like to see a system in which players who failed to bring numbers were buffed for their failure. If your 10 can beat my 20 in a fair fight then you deserve your win. If they can't, then you should have brought more than 10.


Official "Bad Person" of Crowfall

"I think 1/3rd of my postcount is telling people that we aren't turning into a PvE / casual / broad audience game." -

Tully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They just need to make player skill matter a ton so that it doesn't matter how many you bring to the fight, but who you bring to the fight.

 

 

Anything you can do to the zerg, it can do to you.

 

CN war on vindication, FTP throws their lot in with the uh, well CN...basically just to piss folks off. Regardless of them being mostly asshats in game, they we're/are a pretty highly skilled unit, especially when their leadership structure was in tact. The addition of 2 groups of FTP to the 8-10 groups of CN was a force multiplier, as the CN hordes now had someone to follow/show them what to do.

 

I know it's common mmo wisdom that, "yo, the zerg sucks man, all the good players run small..." This does happen from time to time. What typically happens is good players, that win, attract players...and unless they are hell bent on staying small, see their core group, double triple, quadruple in size as everyone 'wants to be a winner. Does the general skill level (potentially) diminish as the numbers grow? Maybe. But not where you're going to (consistently) be able to take them out if you're outnumbered significantly.

 

any type of queue is stupid. that concept (gw2, aa, etc)...omg is for the lose. You bring what you bring. If you don't like what the other guy is bringing you can try to bring the server down on them via the global political system (ie. the game forums), or you can recruit/ally up to ge tthe numbers you need to compete.

 

As much as i hate the zerg, any type of 'coded solution' will fail...This is an area where the players need to police themselves. 

 

And if you want to be/stay in a small guild, that is your choice, your playstyle...in a meta sense it's no better or worse than the zergophiles...jjust a different choice...you can express yourself by making them pay for it one scalp at a time (or in bundles of 6).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And ladies & gentlemen, the correct answer of the day.

 

Make the skill-ceiling so rigorously high that a 10 vs. 100 fights can be stomps for the underdogs, if the 100 aren't as skilled as they are.

 

As long as "player skill" doesn't equate to "I've been playing the game longer than you and have every skill maxed therefore I win".

 

10 vs 100 should be possible to win if the 10 are more skilled vs the 100 in the same manner that 2v1 for noobs vs a veteran should be possible if the noobs are much more skilled than the vet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the whole idea behind a MMO that people are social and make sure they aren't outnumbered?

Or atleast have the skill to compensate for it.

 

Being an underdog is all up to the players themselves to fix.

Nothing the devs should do there.


"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power." - Abraham Lincoln

A solid quote, I'd say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with lots of stuff in this thread (I wont be specific)

 

What if someone like DMBrandon comes along with all his follower and pwns us all in every campaign?

That would suck, since I am banned from his twitter and stream :(


 

This game looks like a larger scale version of marvel heroes so far with forts.  - nephiral marts 7 2015

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the whole idea behind a MMO that people are social and make sure they aren't outnumbered?

Or atleast have the skill to compensate for it.

 

Being an underdog is all up to the players themselves to fix.

Nothing the devs should do there.

This really doesn't make much sense think about it the next time you see a ballgame.  In pretty much all pvp sports competition the outright zerg is prevented in some way by the rule set moving the competition from quantity to quality. The Yankees never bring twice the players to a game with the Red Sox -- if they did they would be tossed out by the referee and rightly so since it would be viewed by all observers except maybe the home team as unfair.

 

This really gets back to if Crowfall is going to be some kind of a "semi-equal forces" strategy game between gods over dieing worlds resources or a zerg fest of "Uncle Bob" gangs vs the less established.

 

Human psychology being what it is if it is the later my guess is the outnumbered have little hope of fair/fun competition almost no chance at meaningful rewards and will just walk taking the hopes of extended pvp in Crowfall with them.. Ruining the fun for all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This really doesn't make much sense think about it the next time you see a ballgame. In pretty much all pvp sports competition the outright zerg is prevented in some way by the rule set moving the competition from quantity to quality. The Yankees never bring twice the players to a game with the Red Sox -- if they did they would be tossed out by the referee and rightly so since it would be viewed by all observers except maybe the home team as unfair.

 

This really gets back to if Crowfall is going to be some kind of a "semi-equal forces" strategy game between gods over dieing worlds resources or a zerg fest of "Uncle Bob" gangs vs the less established.

 

Human psychology being what it is if it is the later my guess is the outnumbered have little hope of fair/fun competition almost no chance at meaningful rewards and will just walk taking the hopes of extended pvp in Crowfall with them.. Ruining the fun for all.

You fail to realise two important things.

1. In competetive sports of any kind, there are rules in place to prevent a team from bringing in more players than is fair. Else sport would become P2W.

2. The developers have talked about not supplying too much information before entering a campaign. This would prevent people easily recognising what side is winning.

 

Also, though I speak personally in this case, I sometimes prefer to be outnumbered. The down sides of being with many is that the general amount of challenge drops plus you'd get way less action than whilst being outnumbered.

Edited by suckingdoge

"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power." - Abraham Lincoln

A solid quote, I'd say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...