but this IS impacting gameplay. and pretty much in a way where i think the measurement of a ranking system wont work for a game which didnt have one for 10 years. you even capitalized ANYTHING. sorry i thought thats because its an important point.
Ah, I see. Yea, but not in the way YOU are saying it will impact it, IE the comm vote. Sorry, I see the confusion now, I didn't mean to imply it as all gameplay shouldn't be affected, I meant it as your specific worries shouldn't be an issue. I think impacting gameplay by hindering the team who is stacking is the best bet here to achieve balance. Everyone hates a stacked game, some measure needs to be taken to prevent it or nullify the stacks. I am against ranks for comm votes, unlocking weapons/classes, and forcing an ELO system for Empires. Edit: Clarified a bit more.
thats what you quoted in your reply tho. its not solely about commanding and id figure that a significant impact on gameplay.
So you'd rather have stacked games that are unfun for everyone and depopulate the server? I'm curious then, what is your way of fixing it?
i dont think it will fix stacked games. but on the other hand its cool, since my rank will always be low - probably lower than relative newbies - i can stack with whoever i want. why do i even complain.
So, again, what is your solution to fixing stacked games? It's a serious problem and this method provides a serious solution. You can't balance a system around the people who may or may not come back. You just can't.
its not solving stacking in the meaning that a whole team is put into a disadvantage just because 4 people with high rank decided to join one side - or hell, even ended up on the same side by simply autoassigning. there are only this many real stackers, not everyone is guilty. even tho i made it a habit to just press autoassign, i also sometimes end up on the team with the better players and dont switch again afterwards. imo you try to solve one issue by createing another. on top of that, how do you know it wont promote stacking? because it now puts the stackers in a seemingly worse position and fully justifies their actions - you dont really need resources to win a truely stacked game, ive seen more than enough won by infantry alone. and now the excuse isnt "we want to play with friends" anymore, its "we want that challenge". but i cant tell you how to fix players. forced autoassign is unwanted and already lead to an uprising the two days it was tried out. spec (= late joiners) also seems to be a crucial part of the game so i dont think you could remove that either. i think a lot could be done by evalueating and redesigning the slippery slope, games just dont end fast enough once the point of no return has passed. that wouldnt directly effect stacking, true, but it would mittigate the impact of stacked games.
You are taking the literal worst possible outcome of this and justifying it as use against the entire system. In NO other game I have played that had some sort of punishment for the winning team have I EVER seen people wanting to join the winning side. Verdun is a prime example. I have had up to 30 second respawns in that game and I was so bored of waiting that long when I died I joined the other team. It's suppose to deter stacking with punishment, it's not a justification. Yea it happens. It does when you click auto-assign, and when you click auto-assign it should assign you based on rank, but you should still be able to freely choose if you want. Also, I'm not saying 1-2 vets more on another team, I'm saying that when people are clearly stacking it should be set off. When it's 10v10 and one side is full of noobs who would be ranks 1-10 and the other side would be ranks 50-60, this system would help. Not only would it allow everyone to clearly see who is a noob and who plays often, it would also allow noobs to see it's stacked and just sit the round out until it balances out.
I don't believe in the extinction of stacked games without the help of an advanced ultradimensional galactic match maker. I only care to be able to identify the skill of people sometimes.
Of course with that attitude. But vets coming back and people liking the punishment so purposely joining a stacked team because they like the punishment is extremely unlikely so.. I think it may just work.
I dont understand why you guys bitch about how it might not work or might work. Someone is working on it and its going to be implemented if theres support. Then why not support it? What is it going to do if it fails? NOTHING. What is it going to do if it succeeds? Give better games So why are you so opposed to this flasche? Because your internet ego wont be big because your number is small cause you dont play the game a lot? Who the fuck cares. Even if this system only works 50 percent of the time, thats still good enough to give 50 percent less stacked games. also lets not implement the system because we might have 1 super stacked game every once in a while cause 20 vets that havent played the game in 13 years come back for 1 game and play all at the same time and all join BE making them seem like noobs. also flasche nothing personal but you keep commenting a shit ton about how your rank will be low and what ever. But why are you having such a vast interest in this system that is ment to balance games with players who DO PLAY OFTEN. Its like you are saying I dont play this game often so this system that is for players who do play often doesnt work for me. Nooooo shit dude
why do you assume it cannot have a negative impact? even to you insinuated i only provided extreme examples, i did not. 4 people are not that many, if you suffere 2seconds increased respawn time it might not sound that much, but lets wait for the players reactions.
to begin with, clear stacking already is the exception. a system based on time played says absolutely nothing about individual players skills, a system based on points also says absolutely nothing about it. the whole assumption is skewed.
Yea, that happens in Verdun. People balance the game because they hate it so much, almost like it was intended to work.
I wonder what has/would have bigger negative effect on the game. You breaking suggestions, or the rankings ?
