Improved Safety Net

[saidha]

Hello to all,

This must have been suggested or hinted at before, but I would like to make the following proposal for an Arena and Battlegrounds adjustment in order to contribute to player retention.

On my main character's server (S26) the player level curve is about 38 now for those who are still active, by then most have a complete PVP set and are able to compete to some degree. However more casual players are left behind, not mentioning new blood barely trickling in.

The powers have congregated, for all intents and purposes, and anyone out of that system cannot hope to obtain the necessary equipment to breach into it without spending 2 weeks trying to find teams that will not outright give up after a few sour loses. Another factor is people maintaining level 39 in order to farm the lower ranking Battlegrounds, basically rigging the matches and causing people to give up either on the activity or the game all together.

That's the situation in a nutshell, here is my proposal :

Arena :

1 - Teams should be limited by a 5 level +/- rule, meaning you cannot join a team with a player 5 levels either lower or higher than you;
2 - Teams should only face other teams within these brackets also;
3 - Lower the 'default' bot team appearance to 20 seconds;

The intent is to give more evenly matched plays, a better return on insignias for less crowded servers and an overall more enjoyable experience. Other tweaks might fix the core problems further, but theses should be a good base.


Battlegrounds :

1 - Change the segmentation as follows : 30-34, 35-39, 40-44, 45-49, etc...;
2 - Build teams by pooling players BR and dividing them accordingly*;

* Current system would not allow for that (i.e. pool 30 people then allocate), a retention period of 30 seconds then release would allow a better fit without too much development during the 5 minutes waiting period, with a switch back to round-robin once match has started.

The intent is to prevent power shifts from acquired equipment or troops dictating the match. The current system's biggest fault is provoking a no win scenario for a team resulting in either behaviors of going AFK (on either side), dropping out,etc... Closer matches will be more enjoyable overall and keep frustration to a minimum or of the healthy competitive kind.



Alright... sorry for the wall of text, but I'm seeing this trend on my Main's server and seeing it developing as well on another server where I keep an Alt afloat (still inside the curve though),I'm sure it's happening on other servers as well.

If you have anything to add, I'd like to hear your input, links to previous discussions on this, etc..


Regards,
- Saidha, BlackIce Guildmaster, S26

[Hyorinmaru6]

if any change needs to be implemented in the BG i suppose this is how it should be

35 to 44
45 to 54

the BG will only be available after level 35
it will extend to level 40s area
since the 40s can only get the level 45 PVP equipment after 45 (which will put them in 45s group) hence reduce the unfairness


BR can be manipulated

Arena match up is good
i like it

[saidha]

Hmm let's see :

35 to 44 BG, aren't you forgetting the troops bump?
That doesn't seem like a good progression scheme for closer matches, if the intent is to avoid one-sided conflicts this doesn't contribute much;
Also you still want it open as soon as possible to actually get the equipment before going into the upper brackets (or the first in this instance);

I'm not too sure what point you were making with the BR manipulation, yes this has been done, but there are simply no longer any 'lowbies' teams left anymore, they either get a carry or they don't participate at all. The Arena team brackets kind of lessens that possibility, it won't prevent massive cashers with fully maxed gems though;

If you were referring to the BG distribution something like this would be close to what I have in mind :

Blue Team total BR : X
Red Team total BR : y

for each player in pool

xIsHigher = x > y
xHasSpace = x.Count < 15
yHasSpace = y.Count < 15

if xIsHigher and (yHasSpace or Not xHasSpace) then player goes to y
else if xHasSpace then player goes to x
else ChangeMacthingPool(player)

loop

1st Premise : a mini-pool of 5 persons join in, enough spot for 3 in each : 20K, 19K, 17K, 15K, 14K
2nd Premise : team Red already has a 21K BR advantage
Result : first 2 would go to Blue team, last three to Red and so on...

It wouldn't be perfect but we're not talking statistical prevision grade algorithms here either (it could be done though since there are no unknowns, it's not like a 21K BR player will suddenly sprout after last server database synch.)

Thanks for your input though, I'm just throwing ideas at the wall, hoping something will stick and help the game actually build it's community instead of seeing shift and shift and go away.

Regards,
- Saidha, BlackIce Guildmaster, S26
edit: Noticed a boundary case.. ^_^;

[Hyorinmaru6]

Hmm let's see :

35 to 44 BG, aren't you forgetting the troops bump?
That doesn't seem like a good progression scheme for closer matches, if the intent is to avoid one-sided conflicts this doesn't contribute much;
Also you still want it open as soon as possible to actually get the equipment before going into the upper brackets (or the first in this instance);

I'm not too sure what point you were making with the BR manipulation, yes this has been done, but there are simply no longer any 'lowbies' teams left anymore, they either get a carry or they don't participate at all. The Arena team brackets kind of lessens that possibility, it won't prevent massive cashers with fully maxed gems though;

If you were referring to the BG distribution something like this would be close to what I have in mind :

Blue Team total BR : X
Red Team total BR : y

Let's say a mini-pool of 5 persons join in, enough spot for 3 in each;
20K, 19K, 17K, 15K, 14K

for each player in pool

xIsHigher = x > y
xHasSpace = x.Count < 15
yHasSpace = y.Count < 15

if xIsHigher and yHasSpace then player goes to y
else if xHasSpace then player goes to x
else ChangeMacthingPool(player)

loop

Let's say team Red already has a 21K BR advantage then first 2 would go to Blue team, last three to Red and so on...

It wouldn't be perfect but we're not talking statistical prevision grade algorithms here either (it could be done though since there are no unknowns, it's not like a 21K BR player will suddenly sprout after last server database synch.)

Thanks for your input though, I'm just throwing ideas at the wall, hoping something will stick and help the game actually build it's community instead of seeing shift and shift and go away.

Regards,
- Saidha, BlackIce Guildmaster, S26

errm just to point the top factor of the reply off

troops bump is really unnecessary'
and the reason i have the 35 to 44 thing off is because this is make the level 35s to aim for the PVP set and gain more
as well as reduce the people who slow their leveling at level 39
by the time a person hits level 45 he/she should have already achieved level 45 PVP set
so the level 44s can go to level 45 group with a carefree attitude


and also my intent is to not reduce the one sided conflict
but to merely maintain the balance of power
so if there is weak there should be powerful players to pawn on them

if the weak get pawned they will resort to spend money = good business
also will try to beat the ones who beat them = long lasting players

so by giving a bad side there will be a good side (pretty sure R2 already thought of such a tactic cause its basic for anybody who has played chess)

so my intent is to not reduce the weak vs strong = hopeless defeat
but to make sure it doesn't die out when the good ideas get implemented

[saidha]

Hmm I'm not sure if it is as insignificant as you make it sound (the troops)

I'm not in marketing or business, but that model you described seems to catter to only one brand of impulse buyer, most people would just leave against a negatively rigged game;
And that's also assuming somehow that you have a high 'sore loser' demographic that aren't already cashing in (that's pretty slim).

I think a model where matches and strengths are closer would generate less revenue per buyer but would yield more through wider scale appeal (that 5$ grab-bag for instance), since the scenarios created would have a slight slant in favor of one team, having closer groups of people would also help create a stronger community which leads to long term clients and a growing player base (without a community, no one will come)

Also, most successfull F2P models do not alienate their free player base, simply because it brings in more money than a rigged system as you proposed.

Let's keep this discussion going ^_^

Regards,
- Saidha, BlackIce Guild Master, S26

[Hyorinmaru6]

Hmm I'm not sure if it is as insignificant as you make it sound (the troops)

I'm not in marketing or business, but that model you described seems to catter to only one brand of impulse buyer, most people would just leave against a negatively rigged game;
And that's also assuming somehow that you have a high 'sore loser' demographic that aren't already cashing in (that's pretty slim).

I think a model where matches and strengths are closer would generate less revenue per buyer but would wield more through wider scale appeal (that 5$ grab-bag for instance), since the scenarios created would have a slight slant in favor of one team, having closer groups of people would also help create a stronger community which leads to long term clients and a growing player base (without a community, no one will come)

Also, most successfull F2P models do not alienate their free player base, simply because it brings in more money than a rigged system as you proposed.

Let's keep this discussion going ^_^

Regards,
- Saidha, BlackIce Guild Master, S26

actually i am against a rigged game play
due to the fact the players (not me) pay to have fun which is not happening
so i only like to see both R2 and the players happy
R2 wants player cash
Players want Fun
both are available
thats what i vote

so i support R2 for quest of money just make sure that we the players(not me i am not a cash player [YET])


also i didn't say troops are insignificant nor do i sound like that
i mean like u don't need to boost the troops they are good as they are

cause my level 33 angel (yes my angels not knights) beat level 39 angels do more damage

they can be powerful only as long as the master is good

play per knowledge and not through sheer experience (i am not saying outer world experience is bad just trusting it 100% is bad thats all)

the BG and arena is good
just need to be solved with the BR manipulation and the annoying lag also increase of attack and cast speed for knights and mages cause its just plain wrong that archers can do 2 shots in 1 turn and 3 when we use delphic

[saidha]

OK, I misunderstood your intention when you said to have strong players to pawn off on weaker players, I thought you meant to create that scenario intently. So basically you wouldn't change the current BG system.

The troops aren't a big deal past 40 to other level 40s, but it is a big deal against a pack of gryphons, that might cause hard to circumvent advantages in a 35-44 bracket;

I think balancing issues are better left to another topic, I think all are able to shine if played properly. On my server there's a healthy mix of archers and mages at the top, knights are a bit under-represented, but the one that's there is a true monster (nothing hurts him and he dishes quite the hits);


I'm not sure I understand you perfectly to be honest, but I think both our intent is to see the game flourish.

Happy Halloween,
- Saidha, BlackIce Guild Master, S26