Messages

481

Community Events / Re: The Cogs Season 3: The Clocktower of Edgar Lusse

« on: September 30, 2013, 07:50:43 pm »

we've got the same problem for rank 5/6 as well. K-D or a matches for rank 3/5 sound reasonable to me.
How to fill the rest of the cogs? - Qualifier Tournament outcome?
What about the bidding system?

482

Community Events / Re: The Sunday Rumble #8 Signups (9/29/13 @ 4pm EST)

« on: September 29, 2013, 01:44:55 pm »

we will not be able to participate on our own. In case someone is interested in a partnership for this week - we should be able to field a ship

483

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: The Bounty Board

« on: September 28, 2013, 02:08:47 pm »

I might be wrong because there was a bug earlier about points value and we fixed it so I don't know what it ended on, but I believe it can change, but for it to change they'd have to gain 3 levels to make themselves worth 10 more points.

what happens if the value of a bounty raises mid-season? Do those hunters who got that head already get extra points on their bounties lvl up? If not can we hunt the same bounty again to get the point difference?

484

Community Guide / Re: Parkour Content

« on: September 28, 2013, 11:17:30 am »

grabbing the mobu weapon from the railing still work fine. I've used that spot even prior to the patch in case the gun needed a rapair.

"jump onto the tank behind the hull and jump up to grab the helm from underneath." does this goldfish trick still work? I didn't know it so far and just gave it a try. I wasn't able to grab the helm.

485

Gameplay / Re: Chem Spray needs a buff

« on: September 27, 2013, 07:03:30 am »

I like your idea, Squash.

486

Community Events / Re: The Cogs Season 3: The Clocktower of Edgar Lusse

« on: September 27, 2013, 06:50:30 am »

I think we should really clarify the purpose of the bidding system here.
do we want some sort of gamble system allowing teams to raise the value of their matches to their favor or do we just want a less random solution for side-picking conflicts ?

If we want the latter we should seriously consider to search for an entirely new alternative.
Frankly I'd rather like to see the bidding system cut out entirely than to see fixes like granting teams 10 points from the start (which is more than a team staying in the Transition gear for the entire season can collect). Keep in mind that the bidding system has been introduced as a fix for a rather minor problem in the OP - a method to decide who picks which side. It has been pointed out that this system can severely influence the outcome of the entire league and it furthermore comes along with balance issues. In my opinion those drawback clearly out-weight the benefit(?) of having less random determinations for who plays which side.

487

Community Events / Re: The Cogs Season 3: The Clocktower of Edgar Lusse

« on: September 26, 2013, 08:49:15 am »

Wundsalz, looks like you've brought up another good point.

Seems like there should be a cap on how many points you could bid.  Perhaps it could dependent on how many points the actual match is worth that you're playing in.

I see 3 viable options here:

1.) introduce bidding caps  (2-3 points or the match value would probably be reasonable caps).
+ This would add an interesting meta-game to the cogs described in my previous post. Clans would have to estimate their odds against their opponents and bargain deals with the enemy teams if they want to play most efficiently
- the teams scores would not work as a pure indicator for the clans performance on the battle field.
- it's likely that only a fraction of the participants will get involved into the whole bidding thingy, as bidding decisions will probably be made the the teams captains.

2.) introduce a bidding cap of 1 point. If only one team bids they match value is raised by 1 point. if both or no team bids, they play with the default match value and the sides are determined by a coin toss.
+ This would allow both teams to clearly indicate that they really want to play for a side.
o Teams can't enforce sides by spending a lot of points
o the impact on the score integrity would be minimal
- no bidding meta-game.

3) cut the bidding system. Sides will be determined by a coin toss
+ fair - no advantages can be bought
+ team scores would indicate the clans performance in the cogs
- no bidding meta-game.

As I think there is no obvious best choice, it might be a good idea to start a poll allowing all participants of the upcoming season to state which system they'd prefer.

488

Community Events / Re: Anvalan Conflict Signups (Closes Oct 3rd)

« on: September 25, 2013, 12:18:12 pm »

TEAM:
Sky Invading Rhinos
Captain:
Wundsalz, Phelan
Contact info:
Steam ID = Wundsalz __Phelan__
Team emblem:

489

Community Events / Re: The Cogs Season 3: The Clocktower of Edgar Lusse

« on: September 25, 2013, 10:56:11 am »

When does season 3 start? - it's stated nowhere, is it?
I personally wouldn't mind a break of 2-3 weeks.

Would that kind of hubris leave them vulnerable if an upset happens and the over-bidding team loses?

Uncapped bidding allows clans to use the system for "the winner takes it all" encounters at the end of the season. No one talks about rank 3 and 4. If 2 clans which have roughly the same amount of points at the end of the season encounter each other it's a very tempting option to bet a shit ton of points to allow the winner of the encounter to win the league. The bidding system shouldn't be usable to completely alter the outcome of the cogs. In my opinion the cog scoring should reflect the performance of the team and on that scope the bidding system is very well capable of harming the scores integrity.

While I like the idea of the bidding system in general, you have to be aware that it can very well be used for a total different purpose than deciding who plays which color - even with bidding caps. Teams could either secretly or openly agree on setting bids - for the sake of raising the match value. E.g for the B1/TBA1 engagement: B1 is a new team, underdog of the engagement and TBA1 confident to win the match. They'd like to get the 1 point B1 already earned. B1 is aware that the odds are against them but would they refuse to bid their point if TBA1 was willing to toss in 3-4 points of theirs in exchange?
I'm not saying the bidding system is a bad idea, in fact high risk-high gain engagements as the one described above are probably more thrilling for all participants. However it'll likely draw quite some focus from the teams performance to an (interesting) meta-game and I'm not sure whether that's wanted for our official league.

490

Community Events / Re: The Cogs Season 3: The Clocktower of Edgar Lusse

« on: September 25, 2013, 09:00:20 am »

Thank you Qwerty!
Regarding the bidding: Did you consider to introduce bidding limits (eg 3 points or value of the match)? As is the system could be abused. Especially at the End of a season its tempting to go all-in for 2 chasers who don't have a chance of winning the season with pure match-outcome points anymore.

491

Community Events / Re: The Cogs Season 3: The Clocktower of Edgar Lusse

« on: September 25, 2013, 08:32:36 am »

●   The Dust Tier
○   Winner +1 Scrap
○   Loser -1 Scrap
●   The Tower Tier
○   Winner +2 Scrap
○   Loser -2 Scrap
●   The Roof Tier
○   Winner +3 Scrap
○   Loser -3 Scrap
●   The Sky Tier
○   Winner +4 Scrap
○   Loser -4 Scrap

I strongly oppose this point system.
I think the score should indicate the overall performance of teams during the cog season. Negative points prohibit this and roughly 2/3 of the cog will most likely accumulate negative points in the long run. If a team manages to stay in the B-League they will accumulate -3 points ( = -2 + -2 + 1)/cog turn. If they manage to stay in a transition gear they will accumulate -1 point (-3+2)/turn. Only teams who manage to stay in the A League +2 points ( = 3+3-4) and the champion gear +4 points will be able to get a positive score in the long run. The system suggest by design that any late joining rookie team performs better than 2/3 of the established cog teams.
Furthermore it renders the bidding system useless as 2/3 of the cog teams won't have any points to bid. Furthermore the system might work as a point transferal to the top leagues - Transition league teams are encouraged to invest the few points they've got for a minimal advantage as they'd loose the points anyway in case they don't win the match.
I suggest to simply cut the negative points as there really isn't any need for them in the first place - you either gain points if you win or get nothing if you loose - like in most other sport leagues. As a result we could establish a more or less representative score board indicating the overall performance of every single cog team.

492

Gameplay / Attaboy!

« on: September 23, 2013, 04:36:24 pm »

I'm just here to adulate the devs for their latest patch. I really enjoy the changes so far. Apparently you've managed to eliminate the deadly gat+mortar/flak combo we've seen way too often for the last months without crowning an obvious new meta build. Judging based on my ingame experience since the last patch, there seems to be a way richer diversity of ship builds now and I think it's safe to state that we've currently got more viable fleet setups than we've ever had before (at least since may, when I started to play this game). So here's an attaboy to whoever is responsible for the latest balance changes - keep up the good work!

493

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: The Bounty Board

« on: September 23, 2013, 03:20:31 pm »

I really don't like the first come, first served principle of the current bounty signup system.
What I'd like to see is a system which favors people who
- they actively participate at the bounty system
- are "skilled" (I want to hunt worthy opponents, not prey)
- are very active and hence available in case I want to hunt them.
Also I'd like to see the number of bounties to be very limited. Being a bounty should be considered a privilege.

What about this signup system:
- allow people to signup for the next season once a season starts.
- grant the top 3 bounties and the top 3 hunters a guaranteed spot in case they sign up for the next bounty season
- fill up the remaining slots with people from the sign up list using a point system similar to this: (bounty hunter points)*(1+ (highest class rank lvl)/15)*(1+ (average number of games played per day played during the last bounty season)/10). The people with the highest 'score' are the bounties for the next season

An entirely unrelated request:
please introduce another menu point to the bounty board where you can keep track of targets one already hunted down.

And a question regarding the value of bounties:
is the value set and fixed at the beginning of a bounty season or can it alter during a season?

494

Community Events / Re: The Sunday Rumble #7 Signups (9/22/13 @ 4pm EST)

« on: September 22, 2013, 11:23:19 am »

Beware! Horny animals will pester any participants they encounter!

495

Community Events / Re: "The Cogs" Week 9 Championship

« on: September 22, 2013, 10:36:01 am »

Congratulations to the Paddling for winning the cogs. And thanks a lot to you gentlemen for pausing the game those two times my client crashed during our engagement. You guys really live up to your name.