Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 31 of 31

Thread: Revamping the Renown System

  1. #21
    Developer raven2134's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Manila, Philippines
    Posts
    1,061
    6 for kills 1 for win for 7 guaranteed on victory.
    Win streak is conditional, for +1

    Win or lose people have access to daily login bonus of +1
    Expert timer for +2

    The bottom 2 bonuses I included to come up with 10 for winning. 11 when on a win streak.

    Also promotions now cost 40 renown. You can promote 1 unit within 2 hours...even if you didn't win those matches.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by raven2134 View Post
    Hi Vexbane, some interesting ideas you proposed, and some which have been suggested also during beta, who's to say the renown for doing stuff in battle won't be coming at some point (I suggested that before too).

    Just to note some things though:
    1. No Elo is recorded now for teams under 6 power.

    I realize this was just implemented and I like it. Still has nothing to do with renown gain.

    2. Most people can earn 10 renown total per win, while the defeated party walks away with about 5-6 renown. (Meaning the accumulated bonuses from winning, besides the win bonus itself is +4 renown: +1 for win+1-2 for full 6 kills, +1 for win streak).

    I would say my average for a win is about 9 imo as win streaks are not a guaranteed thing or common enough to include as auto. This also assumes you play on expert. While I have no issue doing it, it should not be considered an auto for base calculations. A bonus is just that, extra. So really a win nets you 7 renown (with no bonuses) and a loss is anywhere less than that all the way up to 5. This is really the bread and butter. You can consider all bonuses etc.. and can earn 10 for a win, but that is not necessarily going to happen. IMO no bonuses should be taken into account for win vs loss renown gain comparison except what you get for winning. So in reality the difference is much smaller. I have walked away from a loss with 8 renown, with my opponent getting 10. My point is 1 renown for a win is too small and it feels cheap to me.

    3. The units alive and horn willpower to renown is something questionable because these may create unwanted player behavior or conflict with the main objective of winning the match.

    How so? I would say about 85% of my losses were with my opponent having 1 unit left. Another big chunk after that is 2 left. So on average a player will earn another 1-2 renown per match, but as much as 6. This will be a very rare occurrence (with a match maker that is working right) and your opponent should get something big for dominating your team. I do not see how earning extra renown for the wp left in the horn changes anything either. If anything it makes the match harder if you want to farm, which it should be. Again with balanced units and a match maker this will cause no issues. Right now though it is not that way so I can see some hesitation in this area. It will also make surrendering much harder for an opponent to consider as their opponent will gain a lot more renown. Win-win imo.

    4. I think bonus renown for playing at, with, and against higher tier/power teams is planned to be implemented, but in the resolution screen instead of per unit-rank killed.

    Playing against a higher tier team should be a rare occurrence imo so having a decent incentive to win and finish the match against being an underdog is a good thing. Right now being an underdog is common in the matchmaker and it should not be. So again in a balanced world having a decent bonus for beating a more powerful bg will have minimum impact most of the time.

    5. It is probably better to keep the gap of renown between winning and losing moderate, because while we do want tor reward a player for winning, we want the experience to be fun, and fulfilling for both parties, not just the winner .

    I agree with this sentiment as well. My suggestions imo would keep it that way most of the time. It just scales up the amount of renown you get, which is the point I am trying to make. Scale the whole system up.

    Just my 2 cents.
    Mine in red.

  3. #23
    Developer raven2134's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Manila, Philippines
    Posts
    1,061
    The red, it burns my eyes! D:

    Anyway

    Nice replies.

    I suppose the bonus for winning could increase, but really Vexbane, I don't think it should increase by more than 1 or 2 more points. Even 1 or 2 more points adds up per game and over time. So yes, while the bonuses shouldn't factor into the difference between a win or a loss, bonuses mean additional renown earned either way...which raises the question, if we have a number of bonuses, and possibly more coming, do we really need to give more bonus for winning? Maybe for now, but again I'd only be comfortable to increase the bonus by 1-2 points.

    How might horn/surivors influence behavior you ask, people suddenly become conscious when the objective of the game changes or when more are added. It's not all about what's in front of you, sometimes it's about what's in the back of your mind. We've had many discussions of elements in the game (such as kills for promotion) which may possibly be encouraging sub-optimal play (for reasons I won't elaborate here but I think you can fathom why). I'm not saying kills to promote really does so...but do we really need more game mechanics that could introduce conflicting objectives into the game? We want to spend willpower from the horn, not give it a second thought on the willpower you could save to earn more renown (and this is especially crucial for newer players who can build pre-conceptions/misconceptions). Additionally, the game already lies on maim/kill weighing scale...do we really want to be creating dynamics and complications where in we DONT want to get rid of a unit costing us turns, or creating this mindset again...just for that extra point of vital renown?

    Last, I was not speaking of the underdog bonus. I think, and I'm not sure, I just also read in the chatbox, that stoic has in mind to have higher level matched teams earn more renown...ie team power 10 vs team power 10 earns more than team power 6 v team power 6. That should be alright , right?

  4. #24
    My point is not to just raise the renowned earned in game, but also raise costs a bit too. This way you keep the game going at the rate you want. It is a psychological change, or lateral shift that I feel will help the game in the long run. Getting 1 renown for a win seems trivial, while say 10 ish sounds more reasonable. The actual values do not matter. The point is People are more apt to play and spend $$ on a game where they feel rewarded better. Gaining more renown will make people feel more rewarded. Even if you raise the prices on stuff.

    Let's say I have 2 items that both cost the same. Let's say 1 to make it easy. Product A has a price of one marked on it. Product B has a 1 marked on it with a sign that says "Sale 25% off". Which product is going to sell more? People always want to feel like they are getting deal B, even though they are paying the same.

    Many people (myself included) feel the renown gain is too slow. I think a majority of people would rather the overall renown gain go up even at the cost of some prices going up (even if they do not think so) to keep the game leveling rate the way you want it.

    Another example.

    Someone gains 10 renown. Someone else gains 25 renown. Who is going to feel like they got more? Regardless of the costs of items? Someone who gains 10 renown and sees that the cost to get what they want is 100 is going to feel like that is a lot more than someone who gets 25 renown and sees the cost is 250. Even though they are the exact same in value. People like to see bigger numbers.

    Anyway I am rambling now and made all the points I can. Raise the amount of renown gained and the cost of some items if you want. Just increase the amounts people get in general.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by raven2134 View Post
    3. The units alive and horn willpower to renown is something questionable because these may create unwanted player behavior or conflict with the main objective of winning the match.
    Using this arguments the expert mode needs to be dropped! I made more than one sub optimal move because of the reduced timer (and probably lost games because of it), but I still use it to make the game faster and earn that extra renown.

    (I don't want the expert mode to be dropped! Just wanna say that your argument here is probably not the best one... )

  6. #26
    Backer KRD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    #worms|irc.gamesurge.net
    Posts
    53
    Oh, oh, oh. Yeah, let's get rid of the tournament timer.

    Too late now, Bloodaddict, the cat's out of the bag!

  7. #27
    Developer raven2134's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Manila, Philippines
    Posts
    1,061
    Hmm, seems I'm being misunderstood.

    The tourney timer is a constraint, you do not consciously/intentionally make bad plays because of the timer. You end up making a bad choice because you're pressed for time.

    Horn usage is another matter. The incentive of renown may cause someone not to use the willpower. When the objective in the game for this stat and mechanic is to use it.

    Well, that may just be me. I would however expect that IF horn willpower-renown was introduced, or units alive-renown was introduced...you'd get new players making posts about how the mechanics conflict with winning the game.

    "WTF. Why do I get less reward for using up my horn. I can't play the way I like and earn maximum renown." Etc.

  8. #28
    Backer KRD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    #worms|irc.gamesurge.net
    Posts
    53
    On a serious note, I totally see where you're coming from with that and I agree that we can probably come up with renown bonuses that aren't conflicting in that regard. More achievements anyone?

  9. #29
    Raven, I fully understood what you meant but I was talking about the expert mode in Versus, not Tourney. There is is no constraint but an option, similar to the option to use the horn or not...

  10. #30
    Superbacker netnazgul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Belarus
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by raven2134 View Post
    Well, that may just be me. I would however expect that IF horn willpower-renown was introduced, or units alive-renown was introduced...you'd get new players making posts about how the mechanics conflict with winning the game.
    Still receiving more renown by having more characters standing alive at the end of battle is understandable and logical... but the issue with it is many players will try abuse it by protecting their characters, running circles, hiding maimed ones in corner etc, thus increasing total game time, which is not good.
    If you don't know where to put it - put it in the pillage

    Steelhammer Tribune issues collected here
    Some of my Factions games can be observed here
    Also possible streaming at http://www.twitch.tv/netnazgul

  11. #31
    Developer raven2134's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Manila, Philippines
    Posts
    1,061
    Indeed, it's hard to say how people will be influenced.

    Ah good point Bloodaddict. Still, there has to be some practical way to practice with a quicker timer. Also, a faster timer does not consciously or intentionally inform the way a player will play or choose, unlike how game mechanics can and will do so. Constraints tend to work subconsciously.

    I do concede that you do make a point about expert mode in versus though and my own argument about conflicting mechanics.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •