XP system

I think simply a ranking in the scoreboard (or by your name) would serve this purpose. At least enough for a start of some progression system.
Cosmetics? I mean why not....but I dont think its needed here. Or that it should serve any main purpose here...And, also..its a finite thing.
...you can make rank icons :D

Lets say you could have your long time rank in the scoreboard, and also some kind of short time rank which would dissipate on inactivity.
And then you could further implement/develop "rewards" from there. Either longtime rank or short time based.

First major one could be access to command vehicle, when you reach some longtime rank.
...or such. (Or achievements?)
or, come up with more.... :D

I just dont think the rewards matter as much here. Sure, its nice..but that for me would be...another idea.
I think this discussion became completely stale with cosmetics.

I would rather see this, as simply adding a link between the rounds that you play. A tracker. Other than your hours played in steam.
Subtle, maybe...but of course, not some 100% solution for longetivity of the game. You could improve it by adding more rewards or meanings.

EDIT: ...It doesnt mean that this has to now become the reason why people play...No.
Its there...floating in the background.
The grain of salt of your 2000 hours spend on the game.

Ranks being in the scoreboard and/or by your name would be one difference from the usual public plugin based rankings we had.
And other difference is (hopefully), that it might be easier to edit the feature if people would find some ways to abuse and so.
To this day, we only had public plugins poorly linked to the events of the game, that had to be accessed out of the game and had no meaning in the game.

I just dunno why talk cosmetics here

Iam just rather curious, if source can actually have some ranking and/or database like this globally? (which wouldnt be super hard to implement of course)
Or, it would be better server plugin based? (and then maybe somehow linked with the game)
I wonder how was the beerdudes thing supposed to work exactly...

 

Its like that in majority of rank systems.
Even the ones we had were like that.

EDIT: They either reset based (monthly or so), or your rank dissipates, and usually if you dont play for some days/weeks you will stop being displayed in the ranks.

Iam just saying it should be separate from longtime rank, if done like that.

I wonder how dystopia done it now :D

 

Yes and it's clearly saved their population...

http://steamcharts.com/app/17580

 

We need - To build - A Great Great Wall, around the noobs to keep them in the Empire illegaly!

 

I didnt know we were using exceptions now to argue our cases. 99 games have the system and are doing fine, but shit 1 game isnt, must be the sustems fault. Also vaccines cause autism

 

Fuck they do? God damnit. I just got a flu vaccine, that means I'm gonna develop autism...

Next I imagine you're going to tell me that wifi causes cancer...

 

It does... Thats why i alwayse use a lan cable to plug my phone to the internet

 

Its not like you can compare, what stats would the game have, if they didnt have such thing.
So, you can only guess what effects it has. The game could also be dead for many other reasons.

I also wonder if its only shown in their website...or its also implemented in the game, or how much it matters in the game.
Which is quite major factor here.
If its only on their website, then its pretty much no different to the rank plugins we had.


Its not like there should be some one magical idea that saves empires.
It should be number of ideas, which all individually add some percentage to it.

Thats one problem with ideas here.
Many get dismissed, only because "herp, derp..its not 100% solution"
So people rather argue with the reasons why not implement it, instead of why implement it.

And dont tell me about efforts, because even ideas that could take little effort often got dismissed, because people found usually pointless reasons of "why not do it", absolutely ignoring any possible positive effects.

Not saying that this idea would be easy, or anything like that.
But Iam just super tired with people only looking at negative things of ideas here and literally digging for the reasons "why not".

Too much fog here

 

To continue what Flasche and Vicki were saying earlier today, you both are creating something I am not suggesting.

This system is:
1. Not to determine who is a better commander and who isn't. It is simply to help determine a stacked game and determine who is actually new and who isn't. In the commander vote I don't want a "This person is X rank and this person isn't" because people who are GREAT commanders might come back or only come on so often (Hobbes), and therefore their rank wouldn't be high. People would obviously elect the better one, stupid system. What I am saying here is tie this into a mandatory Commander tutorial that takes around 5-10 minutes to do before you can command. For all the vets out there who would complain about this, I don't care. Complain all you want, this will stop games from being ruined from people who have literally no idea what is going on and make them at least have a slight idea of what is going on.

2. This system won't offer much in terms of incentive. Yea your rank and XP might go higher, but it's not like you are going to be auto balanced depending on the ranks of both teams. Instead, I would like a more ORGANIC balance in which people can CLEARLY see a "stacked" team and try to prevent it. Noobs have no idea when they are stacked against, making them hate this game because they just got their ass raped. Some way for them to see a stack would allow THEM to call out the stack and hopefully call for a balance. This would ALSO stop some arguments of "Well this game is stacked" "No it isnt" "Yes it is, we have 6 noobs on our team" "Well I dont even know who half my team is". A clear rank could stop this or at least prevent this.

If your counter argument to the above is one of the following, it is invalid. Those counter arguments are:
A. "What if old players come back? They will be rank 0 and thats unfair" - No it's not unfair. They left. They are coming back to a new system. Everyone starts out on the same level able to game the same amount of XP. Yea, if they start playing again they can rank up faster because they know how the game works, but you can't argue about the few exceptions of people who come back after not playing for months on end.

B. "It will drive people away, no one will like it" - Great. This game, once it hooks you, usually gets you to stay. Why have vets been leaving? Well a big reason there was a drop in population of vets was because of that year long period where you couldn't even play the game really, that and real life issues. Yea vets may complain about the game, but few truly leave because of "changes" and if they are leaving because they are ranked "0" they need to really evaluate why they were playing this in the first place. If a 0 next to their name, that they could EASILY rank up quickly with, discourages them from playing... that is just shitty on their end because it's not like anything is going to be restricted based on rank, it's just to give a general idea of team balance.

3. This system could provide the e-penis Empires lacks and hopefully entice people to stay. That is necessary and rewards players making them happy. Not saying it will work 100% that way on everyone, but an E-Penis to keep people around is a good way to do that.

 

Also if you use the argument it will drive people away you are clearly stupid.
An xp system doesnt interfere with the game system except to balance it. How does giving a ranking system matter at all to you if you dont like it.

In dota theres an xp system aswel, you get xp for every game you play based on the lenght.
You litterally get nothing at all in return. Im level 80 something and it doesnt do anything it just says im level 80.
But for low levels it does matter, you can only play ranked after level 20. But after that it does nothing and you just forget about it.

I dont get how anyone can oppose this system if someone is willing to put work into it.
It could potentially add a lot to the game AND it does NOT take anything away. So its a win win situation

 

The arguments are "Well if it doesn't do anything, why add it?" and "It will drive people away cause vets will be at the same level of noobs or some guy who plays it daily will be a higher rank"

 

Let me elaborate on some of these.

The commander tutorial would just be like a part of the XP system because then it could show up on your "rank" you are qualified to command IE, did the commanding tutorial.

It's not suppose to be "This is his rank because he is this good" it's suppose to be a general idea of how good a player would be. Generally, if you put 1000 hours in, you get X amount of XP to show you AREN'T a noob. Then, if a team has X more "vets" than another team there could be like a punishment for the stacking team like longer research, longer respawn, less res.. something like that.

Also, balancing based on the ranks is a TERRIBLE idea. This system prevents you from playing with friends... It hinders more than it helps. Plus, we dont have a big enough population for an ELO system.

 

That last one might work. We do need some way of balance, but I was thinking more along the honor system like other games. Punish the stacking team and give them a handicap to balance could also work like longer research, less res, less tickets etc.