@Amerika artillery spamming can still happen now regardless whether money is involved or not. Even with nader’s and her bombs, or anything really. You have to learn to aim with the fire support if you want to get credits and arty strikes, skyhammer strikes etc aren’t the hardest thing to escape. I highly doubt people would buy arty just to spam him for money, considering he’d do a pretty bad job at it.
And I don’t think it’s less problematic, I think it’s going to end up exactly the same, but with people being incentivised to do well and do the objectives and support others, which is what the game wants you to do anyway. If you want to play fletcher, then nobody is stopping you lol what? If you want to grind then grind with other mercs, and if you want to learn and play with another one then do so. As I said earlier, nobody is forcing you to use a certain merc, and you get 5 available to begin with if you don’t buy any at all.
I’m genuinely baffled. This post went from people calling me greedy and saying that what I’m saying wont have a point, to people saying that they’re going to be forced to play certain mercs, and now to spamming. Like, all of this isn’t affected by what I’m saying at all.
@Carniege The Arty spam was just an example of how word of mouth can negatively affect a game with a system like that. If people think that one merc is easier to get credits on the servers will be swarmed with those mercs whether it’s true or not.
Just because you say something doesn’t mean people won’t have good arguments, reasons and logic in response. There have been a lot of good counters to your proposal with sound logic behind it. Also, throwing us all into a blender and looking at the responses as a single person as opposed to individuals doesn’t help you debate your point very well.
@Amerika If it’s not true the people will simply reply it’s not true and then that would be the end of the post. If you can’t prove that arty will be spammed considering you simply listen to some unknown rumours then you won’t have an argument.
And yeah there are people with good arguments, for example you and like 2 more or something earlier, but the majority of the people comment things regarding only one section of what I said. For example, most of the early replies said that it is very easy to earn 50k for mercs in a week (@Jesus, @CamBrah, @Jostabeere as examples). Like, I understand, they may be good points, but they’re disregarding the fact that I stated that the only reason I want this system is to 1. incentivise me to do better and get better and 2. to make it more logical for people who do better to earn better. I don’t have an issue with this system, and I agree with the others saying that you can earn 50k a week, I’m just suggesting that a system where money is earned by skill rather than time spent would in my opinion seem to be more logical.
And also I tag people who I want to reply to specifically and blender in everyone else with pretty much the same argument as the other 50% of the people.
[quote=“Carniege;129028”]@Amerika If it’s not true the people will simply reply it’s not true and then that would be the end of the post. If you can’t prove that arty will be spammed considering you simply listen to some unknown rumours then you won’t have an argument.
And yeah there are people with good arguments, for example you and like 2 more or something earlier, but the majority of the people comment things regarding only one section of what I said. For example, most of the early replies said that it is very easy to earn 50k for mercs in a week (@Jesus, @CamBrah, @Jostabeere as examples). Like, I understand, they may be good points, but they’re disregarding the fact that I stated that the only reason I want this system is to 1. incentivise me to do better and get better and 2. to make it more logical for people who do better to earn better. I don’t have an issue with this system, and I agree with the others saying that you can earn 50k a week, I’m just suggesting that a system where money is earned by skill rather than time spent would in my opinion seem to be more logical.
And also I tag people who I want to reply to specifically and blender in everyone else with pretty much the same argument as the other 50% of the people.[/quote]
Btw. I am pretty sure people who did better in games already get more credits.
There is no need to reward people who are better than others even further than now. Better people finish their missions faster and get slightly more Credits. Combined with the overall fast credit-earnings it’s very un-grindy.
@Jostabeere the only way for better players to get more is to finish their missions faster, and I understand that. But why don’t we want to reward better players with more credits? Every other game does that and it usually pushes people to strive for more, cause we’re all greedy, it’s human nature.
The only point that I agree on is the fact that without the need to get better and simply by being in the game and getting as much as everyone else, one is eliminating the worry of not playing one’s favourite merc cause one isn’t good at it or it supposedly doesn’t gain enough xp (in this case), but that’s basically because one isn’t good at it.
I know it’s not grindy and you can earn money quicker.
[quote=“Carniege;129123”]@Jostabeere the only way for better players to get more is to finish their missions faster, and I understand that. But why don’t we want to reward better players with more credits? Every other game does that and it usually pushes people to strive for more, cause we’re all greedy, it’s human nature.
The only point that I agree on is the fact that without the need to get better and simply by being in the game and getting as much as everyone else, one is eliminating the worry of not playing one’s favourite merc cause one isn’t good at it or it supposedly doesn’t gain enough xp (in this case), but that’s basically because one isn’t good at it.
I know it’s not grindy and you can earn money quicker.[/quote]
You did not read my comment, did you? Get a good friend, play a game with him, compare the round end credits without missions. You probably wont get the same number and if he is better than you, he probably will get more.
I did read your comment. But how will that make sense? If the money is earned at 12 credits a minute, but better plays somehow get more, then that just backfires the whole topic considering what I based it on is how the money is earned.
[quote=“Carniege;129162”]I did read your comment. But how will that make sense? If the money is earned at 12 credits a minute, but better plays somehow get more, then that just backfires the whole topic considering what I based it on is how the money is earned.
[/quote]
The base-fee is the same for everyone. But there seems to be an earning apart the base-fee.
Killing also gives you a lot of exp. If player is even a little bit good, then he can rack even more frag point than some Proxy who repaired her arse off, yet at the same time he can do absolutely nothing in terms of advancing objective. There is a reason why people dont like snipers, in most cases those are “lone wolves” who do little to none to help the team.
Unless they do some kind of proper dependency calculation, that account for amount of mercs of each type per team(like if there is just one medic per team of 8 players, then he would get multiplier of x1.8 or something, while covers and assault categories cannot get higher than x1.1), then amount of score they made in each category(like game points count as x3, support points x2 and frag points only x1, in terms of calculating final credit score), current basic system that accounts purely for time is far better than point -based.
A team of 8 Naders running around and racking kills, ignoring downed teammates(since they are competition in terms of farming frags) and EV(who cares about it), both teams, is exactly opposite of what this game needs. Sure, its an exaggerated example, but still, players who only play for themselves are opposite of what this game is supposed to be.
Again, what is “better” ?
While it may sound all nice and tidy and everything, this whole “better” thing would probably cause a lot greater negative than positive lasting effect.
Lets say we have a good sniper, who blows heads left and right and by the end of the game, he got like 20% more points than the next player of the team. Meaning than hel get 20% more creds as game ends… theoretically. But what will actually happen is that due to the fact that hes most likely the least useful player on the team from teamplay and objective perspective, yet will earn more than those who repaired/healed/ressed/carried and generally worked their arses off, there is a 90% chances that he will be simply kicked out. Its inevitable, both due to the nature of the class, game type and nature of the modern gaming community.
If only you truly cared about your skills getting better, you wouldn’t need any “additional incentive to get better”. WTF is this? You have either a competitive soul or not. You want to get better, get better. You want reward people for scores? Don’t be surprised when you see players farming 1 objective to get lots of credits in almost every match.
If you don’t care about your skills you simply play a game for enjoyment and if you are competitive you train to improve your skills. We already have incentives to play the game apart from our enjoyment. That’s enough. We don’t need to be rewarded for our scores. This would only harm the game in the long run. You want to be rewarded for your skills? Play ranked. You get ranks and rewards for your performance.
So far all your ideas would encourage players to only play with low levels “I’m so glad there is ‘incentive to get better’ aka let me stomp low levels to get lots of credits. Reward me for topping them. I don’t want to play with better players because I will get a worse score.”
@Dirmagnos Kills don’t get you as much xp as delivering the objectives, repairing and destroying and so forth. For example, I believe 1 kill is 100xp but for shooting the EV 5 times with my nades, I can get 900 xp for damage. And that’s only damaging it about a third of the way. The game is very objective based hence it gives you a lot of xp for it. With the system currently in place, you still get people who simply go out to kill rather than do the objective, and there is a lot of them, as they most likely thing it’s TDM or the others will do the job for them. The proxy who repaired her arse off will get so much xp for repairing the EV and then for escorting and guarding it, then repairing it again after it’s destroyed, that unless the other player who goes around only for kills gets like 20 kills in 5 minutes, I highly doubt he’d get any more points than the proxy would.
And this “better” is literally, “better”. When I say the word “better” I mean more understanding and more able to put a good fight up against the enemy. If you know that your job will pay you from the moment you come in to the moment you leave, then you have hardly any intentions to do a lot of work. This is how everything works though. The only reason people want to do more work is to either go overtime and get paid more, or by doing simply “better” (such as doing 5 times more surgeries a week or filling in 50 more papers per day whatever your job may be), which will in the long run earns them bonuses, promotions etc. Hence relating it back to my point, the “better” you are, the more you should get. Different footballers are paid differently as some play in the champions league and some in the 17th division. It’s even and strategic.
And technically speaking, the sniper you referred to, if he got the most amount of points on the team, then either he is a very good player and by getting so many kills he helped the team a lot more than spare ammo, or the rest of the team is pretty bad. Snipers aren’t the most powerful merc in such a fast wall jumping based game, hence you see hardly any vassilis in matches.
P.S. I don’t want to sound narrow minded or mean or anything whilst debating here, so I just want to say that it’s very interesting to read what you guys think (I really like debates aha)
If only you truly cared about your skills getting better, you wouldn’t need any “additional incentive to get better”. WTF is this? You have either a competitive soul or not. You want to get better, get better. You want reward people for scores? Don’t be surprised when you see players farming 1 objective to get lots of credits in almost every match. [/quote]
Firstly, I do care about my skills getting better, and I don’t need “any additional incentives.” What I meant was that players who aren’t doing as well, will see that they aren’t earning as much, hence they will try to improve their gameplay. They can play with friends, they can ask forums etc. The incentive here is simply earning more. I understand your point, in saying that money shouldn’t incentivise you to do better if you want to do better in your heart, but it might make players who aren’t as good try to get better. For me personally, I don’t need the extra money. But players who don’t care about playing in ranked battles or getting better and just play for fun, may think that they’re not earning as much as they would like, so why don’t they just go to the forum which is a very helpful place and ask questions. This would allow them to be more useful to the team systematically and get them more earnings.
I know you don’t have to, the topic isn’t me saying the current system is broken. I was simply offering another system which in my opinion would lead to more enjoyable matches. And also how would it harm it in the long run? Im very confused as to why it would.
You probably missed out when I said that that happens already. You already have level 60s playing with level 8s for example, which happened to me yesterday. “And whats the point in whining if you don’t have the solution?” I said to myself. So I stated that it would be a lot better if there were at least half the servers with caps on them, for example the max level 5 that already exists, followed by max level 15 or something, and then going into the big wide world. After I turned level 6, I was not ready playing with level 10s, let alone 20s and 30s. I understand your point and that does happen in like every single game, but in Dirty Bomb at least there is a chance to stop it.
[quote=“Carniege;129228”]@Dirmagnos Kills don’t get you as much xp as delivering the objectives, repairing and destroying and so forth. For example, I believe 1 kill is 100xp but for shooting the EV 5 times with my nades, I can get 900 xp for damage. And that’s only damaging it about a third of the way. The game is very objective based hence it gives you a lot of xp for it. With the system currently in place, you still get people who simply go out to kill rather than do the objective, and there is a lot of them, as they most likely thing it’s TDM or the others will do the job for them. The proxy who repaired her arse off will get so much xp for repairing the EV and then for escorting and guarding it, then repairing it again after it’s destroyed, that unless the other player who goes around only for kills gets like 20 kills in 5 minutes, I highly doubt he’d get any more points than the proxy would.
[/quote]
Sure, kill grants 100 exp, but then theres assist exp, finishing off exp, burn exp, exploding exp. Even simply firing off a MGL gives Nader combat exp. So, theres plenty to go around.
And there is no way in hell that 5 hits with MGL will net you 900 points worth of game exp. I believe you can get 1000 in total for disabling fully repaired EV, and 5 40mm nades do not do nowhere near that much damage.
Not to mention 2 extremely important factors. Firstly, while game exp is relatively in abundance, things like repairing and disabling generators net exp only to one player, who does the deed. While stacking frags in universal. Im absolutely sure, that net combined combat exp in any given match is far far far greater than game exp. And secondly, player must actually be able to perform game exp gaining tasks. Games where attacking team wont even get to reapair that EV in the first place are not that uncommon. While killing goes on constantly.
And i have seen Proxys who end up on the bottom on the list, regardless of the fact that they concentrate on objective, the same repairing and escorting part. there isnt that much exp to go around there. In fact, assault classes end up on top far more often than techs or supports.
And this “better” is literally, “better”. When I say the word “better” I mean more understanding and more able to put a good fight up against the enemy. If you know that your job will pay you from the moment you come in to the moment you leave, then you have hardly any intentions to do a lot of work. This is how everything works though. The only reason people want to do more work is to either go overtime and get paid more, or by doing simply “better” (such as doing 5 times more surgeries a week or filling in 50 more papers per day whatever your job may be), which will in the long run earns them bonuses, promotions etc. Hence relating it back to my point, the “better” you are, the more you should get. Different footballers are paid differently as some play in the champions league and some in the 17th division. It’s even and strategic.
Excellent example. Has nothing to do with situation, obviously. Gaming is not a job. Its supposed to be for fun. Working is what people do so that they could play games, not the other way around(with few exceptions). Btw, there is limits on how many surgeries per day/week/month surgeon is allowed to perform, its not a Burger Shack and he most definitely cant just take on x5 more out of the blue.
And again, you havent defined what would be “better” in this particular case. As i mentioned once - if you are hired as chef, then your skill as a lumberjack is irrelevant, no matter how good you are.
In objective -oriented game working towards objectives should always be most profitable, then teamplay, eg support points and then, at the very end, amount of kills.
And technically speaking, the sniper you referred to, if he got the most amount of points on the team, then either he is a very good player and by getting so many kills he helped the team a lot more than spare ammo, or the rest of the team is pretty bad. Snipers aren’t the most powerful merc in such a fast wall jumping based game, hence you see hardly any vassilis in matches.
Problem with that logic is that he did rack a lot of kills, but he cant do sh!t against moving EV. So wheres his usefulness on that point ? Since it will take just 1 tech, hiding behind EV, to get things done. Regardless on how good that sniper is.
And have you actually played this game ? Every time Vassily is in rotation, pubs are flooded with wannabe Zaytsevs. Its a horrible. Having 4 snipers in a 6-men team is far more common than could be considered average.
And youre not the only one with fondness for a good argument, i used to debate a lot back in the day, when i was younger.
My mistake, I didn’t pay attention to the little yellow markers. It gives me around 375xp as it’s like 150 for 2 nades, depending mainly on where they make contact.
I’m slightly confused by what you mean the net exp to one player and universal thing as I’ve never heard of this before. Can you pls explain it aha
And that is due to the unbalance of skills or amounts of players. If a merc doesn’t want to do the objective, it’s their problem, and as I said there are plenty of people not caring about it already. Plus referring to my previous point, if a proxy or whoever is good enough, they should be able to open a gap in the enemy defence lines or sneak around to do the objective. Or at least tell the team to cover them or something. (If that’s what you meant)
I don’t know what level in game you are but I assume you’re quite high. I’m only level 10 and I really do not see where you’re coming from. In most of the games I’m in, the objective people always get more, especially in stopwatch. Of course, there is that 1 fragger who gets like 20k exp for killing as he’s level 40 in a level 10 game every now and again but in general he’s followed by the engineers who done most of the work and only then the other mercs. For example, I got 47 or so kills and like 35 deaths. I got around 12k points or something along those lines, but that’s along with me doing secondary objectives and stuff like that. There was a proxy with about 12 kills and like 48 deaths, who got around 18k exp because the gamer was planting, diffusing, repairing, planting more, delivering, undelivering, everything tbh. And that happens a lot more often in my games than the other way round. But again, that may be due to different levels and people behaving differently in them, I don’t know.
[quote=“Dirmagnos;129521”]
Excellent example. Has nothing to do with situation, obviously. Gaming is not a job. Its supposed to be for fun. Working is what people do so that they could play games, not the other way around(with few exceptions). Btw, there is limits on how many surgeries per day/week/month surgeon is allowed to perform, its not a Burger Shack and he most definitely cant just take on x5 more out of the blue.[/quote]
It was just to show what I meant by people being incentivised to do better. I know people play for fun and stuff, but there are others who want to do well and are limited by their teammates. These teammates, might think however that they’re not doing so well and stuff. If they realise that the more they get the more they earn, they might try to become better, thus allowing the better players to do better in games systematically. I know it’s quite stupid logic but oh well. My main reason for this was to just reward the better players with more rather than time based.
And the surgery thing was just an example not to be thought about that deeply if you get me. I of course am not a surgeon and I obviously didn’t know that, but I didn’t think of other jobs so just used that as a very basic example of what I meant.
[quote=“Dirmagnos;129521”]
And again, you havent defined what would be “better” in this particular case. As i mentioned once - if you are hired as chef, then your skill as a lumberjack is irrelevant, no matter how good you are.
In objective -oriented game working towards objectives should always be most profitable, then teamplay, eg support points and then, at the very end, amount of kills. [/quote]
What I meant was that people would hopefully become better players in general. In terms of knowing when to rush in to repair the ev, where to sneak around to plant or steal objectives, where to aim to kill and allow the engineers to repair safely, you know, get better in the game, depending on what merc you’re playing.
[quote=“Dirmagnos;129521”]
Problem with that logic is that he did rack a lot of kills, but he cant do sh!t against moving EV. So wheres his usefulness on that point ? Since it will take just 1 tech, hiding behind EV, to get things done. Regardless on how good that sniper is.
And have you actually played this game ? Every time Vassily is in rotation, pubs are flooded with wannabe Zaytsevs. Its a horrible. Having 4 snipers in a 6-men team is far more common than could be considered average.
And youre not the only one with fondness for a good argument, i used to debate a lot back in the day, when i was younger.[/quote]
If he is a good player then he took out the enemy snipers and other mercs in general so they don’t interrupt the engineers repairing the ev and other mercs escorting it. What more does one expect from a sniper?
And yeah it is very annoying but then again at my level there are hardly any players after the first day of vassili being out on rotation as most of them realise how rather not useful he is unless you’re very good with him.
Good points though. I understand that kills get a lot of exp too due to the whole finishing exp, support and so fourth, but if the game is so objective based then why did they introduce mercs like fraggers and naders to begin with? Because if you’d say that they’re there to protect the engineers, well, that’s what they do already, even if it’s not by standing directly next to them and body shielding, they’re still preventing the enemy from attacking by killing them.
The fact that tech mercs can also stack kills doesnt mean that combat exp should be valued on the same level as game exp. Means to an end.
I’m slightly confused by what you mean the net exp to one player and universal thing as I’ve never heard of this before. Can you pls explain it aha
I meant combined combat exp vs game exp, per game, team-wide. Total amount of exp across all players.
And that is due to the unbalance of skills or amounts of players. If a merc doesn’t want to do the objective, it’s their problem, and as I said there are plenty of people not caring about it already.
And that indifference shouldnt be reinforced by feeding those ppl increasing amount of creds simply for killing.
I don’t know what level in game you are but I assume you’re quite high…
Im 33(or 34), but i do play general pub matches and i do see, from time to time, games lost(or won, depending on the point of view) simply because some lonely Proxy is trying to repair/plant and fails, again and again, because teammates are 2 busy frag farming. And it would be ok, if they would try to clear out objective area or support that proxy. But they dont. There are plenty of players who will simply ignore any type of objective or teamplay, so that they could maintain positive KD.
It was just to show what I meant by people being incentivised to do better…
Point taken.
What I meant was that people would hopefully become better players in general. In terms of knowing when to rush in to repair the ev, where to sneak around to plant or steal objectives, where to aim to kill and allow the engineers to repair safely, you know, get better in the game, depending on what merc you’re playing.
Ideally it would be best outcome, but its so easy to sink on the level of basic DM and then ppl tend to just get used to it.
If he is a good player then he took out the enemy snipers and other mercs in general so they don’t interrupt the engineers repairing the ev and other mercs escorting it. What more does one expect from a sniper?
Problem is not what to expect from a sniper, but how does that particular sniper(or several of them) fit into team performance. Generally recon classes are the least useful from perspective of teamplay. Techs adavance objective, supports make sure that team stay healthy and fed, even assault mercs provide muscle; while mercs like Vassili are hanging back, or Phantoms, who tend to run around like rabid kangaroos. And Redeyes smoke in the wrong place can screw game in so many different ways(its good for him, he can see thru it, but rest of the team will just get location markers, that are not at all that useful).
Meh its easy to farm credits. I have 7 mercs unlocked with 24hours game time on my other account (no good bronzes, but basic cards are good as well) once you get the mercs you like you’re gonna see a bunch of credits laying around.
@Dirmagnos Quoting is too long in this forum but I get what you’re saying and I do agree with you, that kills get usually more exp than objectives. But would the system work if we were to give half the exp for the killing, finishing and so forth?
@K-smooth that’s impossible mate. Take away the 2 for skyhammer and aura, so you unlocked 5 apparently. That’s lets say you buy all 3 of the 30k mercs and then an additional 2 for 50k. So that’s in total 190k.
In 24 hours, it’s possible to only do 9.6 missions, so lets say 10. That’s because every mission is renewed once every 2 and a half hours.
So those missions, assuming you get the biggest bonus in total which would be 2750 credits per 2 and a half hours, would get you 27.5k.
Then, lets say you get 500 credits for 10 minute matches. There are 1440 minutes in 24 hours, meaning you had 144 matches in that time. 144 x 500 gives you 72k.
72+27.5 = 99.5k. You’re only 90.5k away.
First win bonuses and all that lot would never give you that much in 24 hours.
(I really like debates aha)