do you guys ever feel that sometimes the game is totally fucking lost, and yet you sit there for long enough to come here and post about it?
The problem is, is that victory is decided in the first 10 minutes of a round, with a chance for a comeback, the last 30 minutes is the victorious team trying to kill the enemy commander.
Surrender feature I was thinking of a surrender option that the commander can do. As the commander you click surrender and the game does some checks like: < 500 resources? 0/1 spawn points left? no vehicle factory and no vehicles? enemy controls 90% of refineries? enemy has medium/heavy tank researched? Basically these checks are to make sure that surrender can only be used when you actually have no chance of winning. If all those checks pass then the team gets to vote whether or not to surrender (server-side setting defaulting to 50% or so). Then finally the surrender happens and the CV blows up or something. This is really really really low priority though because there are literally dozens of things that still need fixing or improving. I don't think this will get past the concept stage but I just wanted to get the idea out anyway.
Nice idea Jephir, but I think it can be done by allowing a concede vote after 20 minutes. Every player on the team but one voting yes would instantly kill the command vehicle.
And if anyone leaves without the team conceding gets leaver status and a guy with a thick russian accent yells "Ragequit!".
No surrender. Never ever ever surrender. Die in glorious battle. Kill as many as you can. Some of the most enjoyable rounds I have ever played have been ones in which my team has lost but could hold our heads high.
1. What A-z-K said. 2. Why don't think about the other way. Empires is offensive atm and a good defense can only increases the time to lose the exact round instead of giving more chance (apart from superlucky epic APC rush) to come back, take over and win it. 3. If a fast paced game is decided by one main clash beetween the opposing forces is okay, but Empires is "battlefield" like which refers to more and longer battles (infantry beginning or jeepzerzing, light tanks, med tanks, then arty or heavy etc.) it shouldn't be decided in the first 5-10 minutes, but with constant, hard and tactical battling to the last or being lucky with a desperate rush against the CV.
We could boost the power of t2 and t3 weapons massively (like 3-5x the current dose) that would kill a losing team faster and result in amazing destructive games, if both sides are equal (and not nerf armors like trickster is trying to do).
That may work better than reducing armor, as armor is way too weak early and too strong late, but it's limited by the drawback of leaving grenadiers out in the cold. I guess a certain blend in between would work wonders, and I'm confident you devs can find it.
The reason games last too long is because the winning team is toying with the losing team, being asshats, rather than just ending it within 2 minutes by getting Artillery and nukes.
Well there was this idea ( gonna let them forum trolls search for it and link me to it) where this guy kind of fixed the snowball effect with ref points and schtuff. That was a pretty genius idea allthough never imlemented, it would help a lot imo.
I think it was Trickster, it's called diminishing returns, and that would slow down the game faster because it gives the losing team more of a chance to make a comeback.
Yeah, I love those games where something goes wrong early, but a bunch of clanners join the server (and the losing team) as the round is winding down. It's too late to win, but you get some epic last stands. I've seen it happen a lot on Forest. You get pinned into the corner, but some engies keep walls up and grens rape all the tanks that get too close. We got that? Bitchin!
i have been saying this for like 2.5 years now, also posted a lot of ideas on how to fix it best one yet personally is to give any commander in play a 50% or so free res bonus of total resources from all refineries on the map as long as he holds at least 1 refinery so if the total res income of all refs is 20, then each commander, be and nf get 10 resources as long as they at least hold 1 refinery of course resource gain as a whole has to be scaled down a little to not make every map money this will make the slippery slope far more horizontal but once you start losing your last refinery on occasion it will end VERY fast diminishing returns sure will help, but it wont be a "one fix fix all", and i do think together with what i just posted for the XXX't time would work perfectly once balanced out
This should be done anyway. With wages and cheap barracks' both teams are usually rolling in the dough at most points in the game.
I got the player multiplier fixed a few versions ago, but I ruined resource rates by getting it fixed, so I'm trying to think of a way to fix it. Effectively, every 12 players, it used to add +1 on to every ref. Which meant areas where double refs are balanced against 2 single refs, i.e. Mvalley, north vs dam, after 12 players, the dam got +1, but the 2 north refs got +1 each, which started to ruin the balance. Now it just adds on the original value, so Dam goes 2, 4, 6, and north refs go 1, 2, 3 each. Realistically, I think the best thing to do will be to lower the increase, so they go 1, 1.5, 2, etc.
