(12-02-2018, 10:33 AM)oZoneRanger Wrote: You guys should chalk this event up as a TEST run. Play like it never happened and redo the event next weekend. Now that the issues and glitches for this kinda thing are known, steps can be taken to make the next event better. Kudos to the people who put time into organizing this.
Exactly this. The idea itself seems nice, but there were so many issues. Redo this event please.
And if possible, make the same kind of event twice. Once Gallia attacks a convoy, then Allies attack a convoy.
(12-02-2018, 02:09 AM)Durandal Wrote: The event was a draw. This is not something we planned for as the possibility did not originally exist. The reason for this is that Bretonia won, but I roleplayed one of the cruisers being disabled to make up for the miserable first wave. This turned out to be a mistake as we later elected not to count the first wave of the fight.
-SNIP-
As stated previously, we are still discussing the consequences of a draw, as we had originally planned for an odd number of ships (9, 3 per wave). The only thing I can assure anyone of at this time is that this result will NOT result in story stagnation, and that everyone did have an impact on the progression of the war.
Please, do not discuss. Do not count the event at all and remake it next weekend.
(12-02-2018, 12:31 AM)Antonio Wrote: Edit: Also very happy to see the server full again, we're gonna have to increase the max amount of slots in the future.
I was happy about that too. Was almost worried I would not be able to connect if I switched account.
110 slots are apparently not enough. Can the server handle that though?
(12-02-2018, 10:33 AM)Piombo65 Wrote: *If the player lives would have been more "precious", there could be more coordination and decent tactics. I proposed the possibility to respawn ONLY when the current wave finished.
Yes, and give a bit more time between waves. Maybe clearly defined starting times for all waves.
(12-02-2018, 11:14 AM)Greylock97 Wrote: Not being able to select a lot of the novas also caused a lot of problems.
Can you please enlighten me how can you even select ANY novas in that mess of 30+ (or how many there were) lagging people? I only saw novas when they blew up. (Me once or twice.)
(12-02-2018, 12:31 AM)Antonio Wrote: You'll see that happening somewhere in the future where devs will have to literally beg players to join the Gallic side.
(12-02-2018, 11:29 AM)St.Denis Wrote: Not everyone who sided on the Bretonian's behalf want to 'delete Gallia', but possibly don't want to see Bretonia 'burn'.
Likewise not everyone who sided with Gallia want to see Bretonia 'burn'.
The allowance of the 'Freelancers' to participate in the 1st part could be seen as the 'Dunkirk spirit' that was seen in WWII when Britain's back was against the Wall.
SNIP
EDIT: Also, throughout the Event 1/3 of the Players, on the Server, appeared not to have a vested interest in being involved in the Conflict.
Im not sure what it would take for me to join the side I do not want to play on. For me Gallia is even bigger antagonist, than Nomads. They must not be allowed to win. Im perfectly OK with Gallia existing, no need to delete it. But it needs to get a hard slap for what they have done to Sirius. I actually like to fight against Gallia. And yes, I would love to see Gallia burn, just a little.
I was considering making a Gallic bomber to help the balance and to see the battle from the other side. But if then Gallia had won this event, I would be cursing myself for helping them. I guess this is the trouble with story line affecting events, like @Auzari mentioned.
I like the idea of 'Dunkirk spirit' but the battle was already such a mess. Allowing Freelancers, where you do not see clearly which side they are on is not that nice idea game play wise.
To be honest me and my friend logged off after the first wave. Then I came back for the 3rd wave or whatever it was.
My conclusion is there were simply too many people. Targeting someone was almost impossible for me. Like my friend mentioned "You cant see ships, just a sea of white name, you cant even read.". Most of the time I had no idea where the cruisers were. No idea whether it is just my low snub skill or lags or what. But I had the feeling of constantly shooting a bomber and all I managed to do was to de-shield it. (If that was actually done by me and not someone else.) So I felt kinda useless apart from harassing the bomber (Even this part seems a bit questionable.).
Which is why I think our events should steer away from a PvP focus. Reflecting on this event, and other events, my best moments in them were encounters and roleplay created by the event but outside of the main objective. Instead of shooting at NPCs/Players for 4 hours, I would have rather logged in every half hour to shoot at haulers trying to (i.e) run a blockade to repair damaged capital ships, and then fought whatever defence fleet cropped up.
Posts: 3,192
Threads: 196
Joined: Nov 2009
Staff roles: Systems Lead
This wasn't a PvP event, it was a PvE vs PvP event. One side shooting NPCs (or players posing as NPCs), the other shooting players.
A PvP event can be balanced if you just control both sides and know the members attending. How do I know it works? I did countless events like that where I always make sure it's as balanced as possible and surprise surprise a good amount of them turn out to be balanced. If the dev team wants to make an official event that will be only PvP and actually decide the outcome, they must do 2 things: first is list all the players attending which is a hassle but a necessary job to make sure you know what you're working with, and second you must know skill of each member attending, or at least the majority of good PvPers, so you can distribute them evenly on both sides. Is there a person capable of doing that? Yes, we're still a small community and good pilots are known. I'd be the first willing to help balance such an event since I know most people's potential.
If you do that, an official event with PvP deciding the outcome can definitely happen. It's very possible, you just have to be willing to do it.
With all respect, but a PVE event would consists of players vs npcs. It was PVP event, in which one side was to defend the NPC ships and the other had to destroy them. Been there. Saw that. GRN-side tried really hard to down these fat cows and the fact someone decided to add fourth siege cruiser is far from balance, if Gauls had serious issues to down even two of three them.
But that's my impression from what I have seen in-game and read on the forums.
(12-02-2018, 01:15 PM)Antonio Wrote: A PvP event can be balanced if you just control both sides and know the members attending. How do I know it works? I did countless events like that where I always make sure it's as balanced as possible and surprise surprise a good amount of them turn out to be balanced. If the dev team wants to make an official event that will be only PvP and actually decide the outcome, they must do 2 things: first is list all the players attending which is a hassle but a necessary job to make sure you know what you're working with, and second you must know skill of each member attending, or at least the majority of good PvPers, so you can distribute them evenly on both sides. Is there a person capable of doing that? Yes, we're still a small community and good pilots are known. I'd be the first willing to help balance such an event since I know most people's potential.
If you do that, an official event with PvP deciding the outcome can definitely happen. It's very possible, you just have to be willing to do it.
And the biggest problem with this is, that you will have the same Group of PvPers deciding the outcome of any and all Player Decided Outcomes.
Look at most of the 'Organised' PvP Events and you will find the 'Usual Suspects'.
I have seen some of these organised Events and yes, some of them end up whitewashes.
If we leave it to these people to decide the outcome, effectively it will be no different from the Devs making the decision, just a different Group.
As for Trading Events deciding an outcome, it will still be decided by which side has the biggest Player Base/following.
Whichever way you look at it, no way is acceptable to everyone and one side or the other will get upset.
'I would like to be half as clever as some people like to believe they are' Life is full of disappointments, it is how we handle them that helps to define us, as a person
The difference is that Antonio is actually balancing the teams by skill and numbers other than most people who just look at the numbers. Evidentally, Antonio's events have never been as disasterous as any PvP events organized by anyone else. In the last six months I was able to predict the outcome of any player-organized PvP event just by looking at the participants. The idea of making these events is to balance them, not just by making sure both sides have the same numbers. Exactly because of that reason it requires someone like Antonio who actually knows the skill levels of the participants and how to distribute them over both teams.
Posts: 3,192
Threads: 196
Joined: Nov 2009
Staff roles: Systems Lead
(12-02-2018, 01:37 PM)St.Denis Wrote:
(12-02-2018, 01:15 PM)Antonio Wrote: A PvP event can be balanced if you just control both sides and know the members attending. How do I know it works? I did countless events like that where I always make sure it's as balanced as possible and surprise surprise a good amount of them turn out to be balanced. If the dev team wants to make an official event that will be only PvP and actually decide the outcome, they must do 2 things: first is list all the players attending which is a hassle but a necessary job to make sure you know what you're working with, and second you must know skill of each member attending, or at least the majority of good PvPers, so you can distribute them evenly on both sides. Is there a person capable of doing that? Yes, we're still a small community and good pilots are known. I'd be the first willing to help balance such an event since I know most people's potential.
If you do that, an official event with PvP deciding the outcome can definitely happen. It's very possible, you just have to be willing to do it.
And the biggest problem with this is, that you will have the same Group of PvPers deciding the outcome of any and all Player Decided Outcomes.
Look at most of the 'Organised' PvP Events and you will find the 'Usual Suspects'.
I have seen some of these organised Events and yes, some of them end up whitewashes.
If we leave it to these people to decide the outcome, effectively it will be no different from the Devs making the decision, just a different Group.
As for Trading Events deciding an outcome, it will still be decided by which side has the biggest Player Base/following.
Whichever way you look at it, no way is acceptable to everyone and one side or the other will get upset.
No one said that "the best pvpers" have to decide the outcome. You can limit the event to average pvpers as well, but the lower the skill level is the less consistent they are and more prone to errors which can make luck decide an event. For instance, say someone forgets to regen and gets instakilled, feeding the enemy snub that was the target. Suddenly not only did he give away his life but he also gave another life to the enemy, drastically changing the odds.
That very rarely happen with good PvPers which is why you need them to be the deciding factor - consistency.
(12-02-2018, 01:40 PM)Sombra Hookier Wrote: Exactly because of that reason it requires someone like Antonio who actually knows the skill levels of the participants and how to distribute them over both teams.
Antonio may be able to 'balance' the Teams with the top PvPers (if it is truly balanced, then tossing a coin might as well decide the outcome). With those that he doesn't know, then he would have no idea how to balance the Teams (best guess would be his only solution).
So, once you take it away from the 'Top Tier Usual Suspects' you are back to square one.
Therefore, are we back to allowing one Group to decide the outcomes or do we allow the side the with biggest Player Base to decide or.....as is at present, we allow the Devs to decide.
None of the above will please everyone.
'I would like to be half as clever as some people like to believe they are' Life is full of disappointments, it is how we handle them that helps to define us, as a person
There are only three tiers of snub PvPers, though, and these are easy to predict, especially if you spend some time in Conn, where the upper two show themselves. There are the ones that don't PvP frequently, those that try to do it frequently and those that are knowing what they do. It's really not hard to put people into these categories if you watch them fighting a few times, and those you don't see fighting are often the ones that are at the bottom of PvP skill. Skill comes from training.
I feel this is a different line of discussion at this point but yes, Antonio and Sombra are absolutely right in that a relatively balanced story deciding PvP event could be arranged this way. My big issue with this however is the fact that setting up slots and forcing artificial balance completely locks certain people out of a chance to participate, which is not something I think is ideal for server health? The compromise for this in the event yesterday was the unlimited respawns and teleports near the GRN/Corsair bases, all of which worked fairly nicely to allow everyone to stay in the fight.
I'm not saying this format of event won't be considered, but you also can't expect to see that sort of event format produce nearly as high a player count or catch the interest of nearly as many members of the community.
![[+]](/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Signature:
![[Image: Lythrilux.gif]](https://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/Lythrilux.gif)
![[Image: BMdBL0j.png]](https://i.imgur.com/BMdBL0j.png)
