New idea - XP vs Snowballing

[Nogen]

If these rewards were only applied temporarily as per my idea then surely this averages out to be less the the arnie powerups you so hate.

If its the magnitude of the rewards you dislike then why not scale them down. For example make the faster reload reward be only 10% faster rather than 35%. Or make the stamina bar recharge rate increase for lvl 2 battlesense only 20% instead of 60% and so on.

Changes like this might give someone a 1v1 advantage but only very very slightly.

[EagleReloaded]

At the moment, the competitions that still have XP and levels whatsoever have them so heavily nerfed they may as well get rid of them altogether, all with the aim to either levelling the playing field or aiding offence in setting fast times. In the grand final for the last season of our league, we saw sub 3 minute times from the two greatest teams in the ladder. With the exception of badly balanced maps like Stalingrad, I can't remember many full holds throughout that season. Do we really need to keep coming up with new ideas to try and change the balance of the game? I personally had no problems whatsoever with the settings we ran last season, which allowed most classes to reach at least level 2. In none of the matches I played did I see a distinct advantage given to defence, it simply came down to individual player skill and team strategy, and that's the way it should be imo.

Maps make full holds more than the teams playing and the restrictions affecting them do. If we spent half as much time helping mappers beta test their maps, suggesting spawn point and time changes and the position of key items like ammo/health racks as we do trying to come up with a new way to nerf whatever has become the new powerclass, we'd see better games and bani would be less bothered by people screaming about medic trains and the like.

About the only viable way to restore levels that I can see is to split the XP levels so you can set them individually for offence and defence.

I'm also surprised no one seems to have considered setting the XP levels to different values for different maps. Fops spam is more effective on Oasis than Secret Weapon for example.

[ouroboro]

the best reward is when your team wins a match because you worked well together, communicated, and made better use of the tools at hand.

skill upgrades are almost like hacks. reduced spread = better accuracy than an otherwise equal opponent. an extra clip = more resources than your otherwise equal opponent. these "skills" are software based. the truest test of skill is when you face your peers on equal ground. if both teams have exactly the same resources at hand, the superior team will win.

that's why we play multiplayer games - to face other humans, to pit our skills against our equals. in real life sports, not everyone can do this, because of physical limitations. in video games, almost anyone can participate on equal ground - assuming you can meet the base level of hardware requirements.

if i wanted to play against software, i'd play against artificial intelligence bots. it's for this same reason that cheating is so hated in multiplayer games - we all want some assurance that our opponents are our equals, and not using an artificial, software-based crutch.

all that said, it's true that all players are able to "level up", so it's essentially still fair. but for those of us who dislike the skill upgrade system, it just feels much more pure and relevant when you know that the only difference between you and your opponent is your skill - both individual and as a team. and that includes making wise decisions about things like class selection/usage. sure maybe one team can run 6 medics and in that sense have more health, but that decision is likely to bite them in the ass in the long run.

these things are all based on human decisions and abilities - and that's what makes them superior to anything based on some unknown variable (such as what skill upgrades the other team may or may not have earned).

but that's just my opinion

[Nogen]

Well said Eagle (ZOMG we agreed on something!).

I did think that the config we (Australia, New Zealand Comp - GameArena Ladder) use last season was pretty good in most respects with a decent balance between allowing upgrades and not letting them get out of hand. However, even in our competition we are to lose most XP levels altogether for the next season. And while we (rewards sympathises) would rather keep things as they are, we are forced to come up with compromises to satisfy people like ouroboro who essentially want to play a different game. I am happy to make these compromises but thus far it has always seemed like the thin end of the wedge. Each season we see things get nerfed and nerfed some more...then nerfed again for good measure. And each time a compromise is made the game shifts more and more towards some peoples goal of no XP or skill upgrades. I think there is a big place in the game for skill upgrades and they should be kept in in some form - whether it be temporary upgrades as I suggested here, or split axis/allied levels or even as eagle suggested map specific levels (great idea IMHO).

Ouroboro, your argument, while compelling, is based on the same set of flaws as most of your previous arguments down this line (such as discussing spam etc). Here you talk about people meeting on a level playing field. You assume that each time you encounter an opponent you each have the same class, same ammo, full health and the same upgrades. Your solution to this problem is just "well upgrades make it uneven and not an equal contest so nerf nerf nerf". But honestly in such a fast dynamic game how often do you meet someone who has the same health/ammo/class as you? ET headshot and thats about it. Your quest for the continual equal 1v1 contest is a total waste of time in an objective based team game.

the truest test of skill is when you face your peers on equal ground. if both teams have exactly the same resources at hand, the superior team will win.

The only time players are truly equal is from the first spawn at the start of the map. If one player earns a reward before another player and hence gains an advantage over that player then so be it. Over the course of the WHOLE map they have shown themself to be more skillful. You are trying to boil everything down to the 5 second encounter between 2 individuals and thats just not how the game is meant to work.

Having said all this I'll reiterate my position. YES I believe that the original XP system is badly balanced for competitive play. YES I believe that XP favours defensive teams and hence increases the chance of full holds which are the devils of competitive play. But NO I don't believe cutting XP completely from the game is the answer. There are plenty of solutions out there which can keep the rewards system intact while maintaining balance between the offensive and defensive teams.

[KingJackaL]

I'm also surprised no one seems to have considered setting the XP levels to different values for different maps. Fops spam is more effective on Oasis than Secret Weapon for example.

Are you REALLY?

(5 class skills + 2 generic skills) x 4 levels = 28 levels settings to tweak.

If your league uses say 10 maps (entirely likely), your league admin would then have to consider around three HUNDRED levels settings to tweak. Got waste of time? Even if there are similar patterns etc that you could use to speed bits up, that an obscene amount of tweaking. Not to mention, it would basically make the upgrades random from a players POV - they'll have no sense of when upgrades arrive as it differs all the time.

*shrugs*

My league doesn't nerf XP much at all. Will probably stay that way.

Full holds aren't even a factor anymore - I haven't seen a double full hold for what, 2 seasons now? Of course, we're now using a ton of custom maps, and no originals - but that just goes to show the massive effect the maps have. Map timelimits have crept down now to around 10mins, compared with 20-25mins back in season 1 days, yet we STILL get no double-full-holds, compared with altogether too many back then.


Back to the original posters' comments. Yeah, there are a ton of good/better ways to do XP in a competitive FPS. XP going backwards, XP that 'wears off', XP that each person/team gets a set amount of an can then 'spend' etc are all improved systems. Dunno if they'd be appropriate for ETPro though. Perhaps another mod? (hey, etmain's not such a waste of time anymore )

[Ragnar_40k]

If your league uses say 10 maps (entirely likely), your league admin would then have to consider around three HUNDRED levels settings to tweak. Got waste of time?

You wouldn't change all (or even most) of the skill levels. Usually only Heavy Weapons and Signals. So you have 2-3 more or less spammy configs. The remaning balance can be achieved by the XP "scale" for attackers and defenders (which should be fix for all maps imho).

[ouroboro]

@nogen: actually i specifically stated the teamwork aspect. skill as a team. communication. i think 1v1 d00ling is frigging retarded. and while i as a fieldops with 70 hp and 30 bullets may turn a corner and bump into you as a medic with 120 hp and a pistol, sure we as individuals are unbalanced, but somewhere i have a teammate just like you and you have one just like me...

as a whole, we are equal. the balance i mention isn't aimed at 1v1 balance. despite how you portrayed me, i don't care about d00lz. i'm talking about overall balance. it's like a soccer team (which i don't enjoy but it's the worlds biggest sport...). one team isn't awarded a second goal tender if their original goalie blocks several attempts in a row. or perhaps that's a weak analogy. let's look at counterstrike (sorry bani ). everyone starts out more or less broke. if you choose to buy a bunch of ammo for the first round, i'm likely to be able to afford a rifle before you - and then you're screwed. but it was still fair, because we were both presented with the same resources in our bag of tricks from the outset. i know you're not going to get a reward that makes you run faster or whatever. both our teams start out as equals, and it's our collective decision making skills that determine who can make the most out of what we have.

in et, both teams have the same class options at their disposal. both teams can choose 6 - choose wisely. if my team chooses 6 covert ops and yours chooses 6 varied and well rounded classes, it's still fair. your team made wiser choices, your team had more collective skill and intelligence. your team was better. but my team has no grounds to whine.

but if your team has better guns than mine, why should they be rewarded with skill upgrades that make shooting even easier? they have already demonstrated they are superior shots. what if my team is much wiser strategically? what if, while you have 6 rambo medics who can drop every opponent with three headshots, we have 6 varied classes who work together like a well oiled machine. we are smarter than you. where is our reward? you all get individual rewards, while we as a better team are not recognized as such.

and that's the basis of the problem. et is a team based game, while it's rewards system is an individual based one. you shoot well, so you get reduced spread. that's all about you. but if my team is smarter as a whole we are not rewarded as a whole. and it's obvious why - because it can't be done. how can you reward an entire team for being smarter and having better communication? you can't. we just assume that the smarter team will win based on those smarts and in spite of any individual crutches the members of the other team have been awarded.

it's like saying, "ok, your team is much better than the other. but individually any one of them would rage any one of you. so were going to up the stakes a bit. let's see if you REALLY are a better team. they now shoot straighter because of a software upgrade. let's see what you're made of now. can your communication overcome THAT?"

individual skill upgrades make no sense in a team based game. the xp system was implemented in an attempt to motivate players on a pub to try and work together as a team. "hey you, field ops. give that stranger over there some ammo and i'll make you more powerful" "oh, ok. if i stand to gain from it, i'll help my teammate"

in competition, teammates do not need this motivation. victory is the prize we're after.

[Decade]

It is not true that skill upgrades only reward individual skill. If your teamplay sucks compared to your opponents, you can be the most skilled lonely gunner, but you will barely be able to make an headshot to the first opponent you see before being killed by the enemy crossfire. The team with better teamplay gains more xp, that's a fact.

I believe that et is much better with the removal of the skill upgrade system, as per current clanbase config, but it would be cool to find a way to reimplement it without ruining gameplay, because it can make the game deeper! For one it encourages specialization, for example a medic can focus on reviving to get medic ammo as soon as possible, and the other one focuses in fragging to get the extra ammo clip, so it's like having sub-classes (medic-medic and rambo-medic) with different skills...
But it's hard to do that without causing the snowball effect.

[Nogen]

but somewhere i have a teammate just like you and you have one just like me...

Maybe at spawn time...

I can appreciate your point of view ouroboro and I don't claim that the basic XP system is balanced or suitable for competitive play. What I do believe though is that there is a place for it in the game if merely for strategic variation it brings. To take the heavy weapons example...there are many maps where a 1-shot stickcharged panzer is completely useless, but a lvl 1 (or whatever level the config gives fast charge to) would be useful. A strategic action might be to take an mg or mortar which aren't limited (as much) by the chargebar until lvl 1 heavy weapons is obtained. If a person on a team achieves lvl 3 light weapons then they become a powerful tool - it becomes in the interest of the TEAM to keep them alive and ammo'd up to maximise their upgrades.

let's look at counterstrike (sorry bani ). everyone starts out more or less broke. if you choose to buy a bunch of ammo for the first round, i'm likely to be able to afford a rifle before you - and then you're screwed. but it was still fair, because we were both presented with the same resources in our bag of tricks from the outset.

Actually its more or less the same issue as ET here. If you and your team play well you get more money and can buy better stuff for next time. In other words rewards for performance.

in et, both teams have the same class options at their disposal. both teams can choose 6 - choose wisely. if my team chooses 6 covert ops and yours chooses 6 varied and well rounded classes, it's still fair. your team made wiser choices, your team had more collective skill and intelligence. your team was better. but my team has no grounds to whine.

Why should your strategy consist of only the elements of what classes you choose and what direction you run? Why not dynamic use of changing player abilities as the game unfolds? I for one know that if you are facing a panzer who you have learnt has fast charge you approach with a lot more caution even after they just fired a shot. It forces you to evolve your thinking and your tactics when dealing with upgraded enemies and hance deepens the game.

but if my team is smarter as a whole we are not rewarded as a whole

Hmmm....interesting...what if you set team XP levels. Everybody gets an upgrade once the total team XP for that skill reaches a certain level. Like everybody gets an extra clip once the team light weapons XP passes certain point. Anyway just a thought. But in any case, although the rewards system is invidual - how a team uses its individual players/abilities MAKES the team.

in competition, teammates do not need this motivation. victory is the prize we're after

True enough...but its not about NEED.

Yes nerfing XP is the simplest solution to all the balance problems. But there are likely other more complicated solutions which can add (or prevent loss of) further depth in the game.

[[MoB]Seany]

I honestly don't like the idea that much.. if you get xp, you should hold on to that xp..in real war (though I hate the comparison) unless your beat over the head with the shovel, your gonna retain skills. I think it would just play be annoyin to have maybe fast recharge for ammo kits than outta nowhere your back down to slow recharge..as well as many other skills

[sponge]

how about rewards which dont directly affect combat ability. instead of increased agility/firepower/health, think of other rewards for xp.

Seems mututally exclusive, rewards that aren't rewarding.

The only thing I can think of is reducing the time for spread to calm down, something like that. But that is already implemented, and removed in leagues.

[Decade]

Ok here's another idea to avoid snowballing: instead of basing the rewards on something that always increases with time (xp), base them on something that shows the style and skill of the player.
Some random examples with random numbers: give reduced spread to those players that have more than 40% accuracy with smg (and have shot more than 30 bullets); if their accuracy decreases, they return to normal spread.
Give the extra ammo clip to the players who have caused more than 500 smg damage in the last three minutes; give faster reload to those with a kill/death ratio of at least 2:1 (and who have killed at least 6 people); give improved stamina to those who have walked at least 1 kilometer in the last 3 minutes, and so on.
This allows differentiation, which is the best thing in the reward system imo (players who play in different ways have characters with different skills even among the same class) and makes better players look cool (if I see someone with akimbos I know that he just killed 6 people in a row with smg and I run away).

[EagleReloaded]

Unfortunately that still snowballs XP - the awesome SMGers who can already get over 40% get rewarded with the ability to get over 40% way more easily and for longer periods of time, the people naturally good at surviving battles get rewarded with more ability to do so, and the net result is people wind up gaining and maintaining skills just like if they'd earned them with levels.

I like the idea of giving increased stamina to people who've run more than a km or so, that'd actually be a good way to boost offence. Axis would just have to go do a few laps around the objective to get theirs up which would look pretty funny.