Will Enemy Territory: Quake Wars have Experience Points (XP)

(Turbo123) #21

Ok ive read everything in this thread and would have to disagree with you on the points that XP saving is BAD…It is in fact a good thing.i personally don’t like Battlefield series after BF2 it literally is awful.BUT i will say the 1 thing they got right were the stats.Its fun in my opinion getting ranks.BUT making those ranks erase and making it so where you need to redo them is a bad idea.Because then it ticks off the people who likes stats.Now SD is a business and as much as i believe they are here for there customers i will say without a dought a business is a what??? a BUSINESS, & doing something fatal like taking ranks out (that practically any new fps has) customers will go else wear so my opinion is have both.Make ranked servers where you keep your rank & make rank servers where you have to keep remaking rank.

Rank is an important thing.You don’t want a new guy coming in and grabbing the best gun do you??No,So let the people who have played play with the best guns and let the new person earn his gun.

Just my opinion agree or not its what i believe ive been in way to many FPS’s to believe otherwise “the majority of gamers like ranks” which is why a big company like EA sees that (even though i don’t like them" ill back them up there right ranking is awesome. & why make people work harder then they need to.

On another point making ranks makes it to where you can have lots of guns to unlock.

(Nail) #22

doing something fatal like taking ranks out (that practically any new fps has) customers will go else wear so my opinion is have both.Make ranked servers where you keep your rank & make rank servers where you have to keep remaking rank.

Rank is an important thing.You don’t want a new guy coming in and grabbing the best gun do you??No,So let the people who have played play with the best guns and let the new person earn his gun.

there is no best gun in these games, it’s team based
there are no unlocks
like I said before, xp reset is a feature, not a flaw

(Flesh) #23

It seems that a lot of ppl enjoy haveing permanent ranks, unlocks and all that stuff. Do you suppose that this growing trend will result with haveing all future fps made with some sort of ranking system and unlockable items?
If ppl like it then compaines have no choice, they have to stay competitive.

(Ifurita) #24

If I recall from Quake 3, which seems to be still going strong, is that any new player could have the “best gun” if they managed to win to fight for it. I’d prefer to have a long slow XP advancement scheme, that reset after every map or 3

(Gringo) #25

There are people who like stats and people who dont. I dont know were all this nonsense talk about “having to stay competitve” and other ridiculous arguments are coming from. Innovate rather than imitate.

Couldnt have said it better myself. Not everyone likes ranking systems so hopefully QW will cater for such people. I can say with a fair degree of certainty that this would be a considerable amount so im sure the “business” will be just fine.

And as the game team based it would make sense to stay away from such incentives which would promote stat whoring/rambo mentality.

(DarkangelUK) #26

Quoted for good measure.

(Sauron|EFG) #27

The big problem isn’t the stats and ranks, it’s the promotions that comes with XP in ET. The more XP you have, the less skill you need.

(SubstandardJones) #28

I know there’s nothing I like better than gaining ranks. I created my own private military just so I could promote myself at least six times a day. When I started it I was just Private Jones, but after almost a full year of six promotions a day I am now Grand General God-King Jones. Soon I’ll be Grand General God-King Emperor Jones. I can’t wait.

Cause you know, it’s not the earning of the ranks that’s fun. Simply gaining ranks is apparently inherently fun. That’s why going onto an xp-save server is so much fun. You simply go onto the server, gain your XP at your leisure by accidentally killing an enemy amongst all your rifle-grenading teamkilling and voila, fifteen days later you’re a Brigadier General running around with adrenaline and tricking new players into believing you know what you’re doing.

You know what else is inherently fun? Unlocking things! Man do I love going through my house unlocking doors. I just have to remember to lock them when I’m done laughing with delight so that I’ll be able to unlock them again later. Whee! Rank gaining and unlocking, could there be anything more fun than that?

–Grand General God-King Jones

(kamikazee) #29

Quoted for truth because it’s funny.

Wonders

Or was it the other way around?

(MuffinMan) #30

of course xp’s are a feature - yet I still don’t like it.

for me the xp system is the one big flaw of ET - it’s not about adrenaline and the other upgrades, what bothers me is the weapons accuracy. I really hope that in QW I will be able to set the server up to give a player a static skill on light weapons.
apart from that I fear that with big maps and long rounds almost everybody will be maxed out pretty soon and this ends in artillery / mortar / grenade /whatever spamming, reducing the skill involved.

xp’s imho are a very welcome feature to low skilled or fun players, for more serious competitive play it sucks

(Ifurita) #31

I think one of the disconnects I’m hearing is that people like having a long term level up/unlock system to enhance replay value. The XP system in ET (and presumably would extend to ETQW) however, is designed to let people level up reasonable over the course of a 3-map campaign (max 90 minutes of play), then reset everything. This would seem to mean that for people who are looking for something with more replay value, persistant XP would be a negative because you could probably max out everything after a serious day of game (if they were persistant/saved and it would take most of the challenge out of the game if you showed up on day 2 and simply had everything.

(meisterbrau) #32

:stroggbanana:

i hope you are right :drink:

(Hakuryu) #33

Actually XP save is a good thing… in certain circumstances.

Playing the stock maps that come with the game is better without XP save since the maps are tweaked to current skill levels (revives, etc). Using ET as an example - have you ever played Fuel Dump in a stock campaign with fully upgraded players? It’s hell to build the first allied bridge with multiple lvl 4 field ops spamming artillery on it.

However, most servers run more than 3 map campaigns and most of them are custom maps. XP save is a good thing in these cases because most mappers don’t release a 3 map campaign, but one at a time that are not tweaked to a certain level of players. Take the Temple map for example- if the Axis all start as lvl 1 in their respective classes, then the Allies can push through the first parts easily (not enough artillery to cover both build spots effectively- the map was designed for lvl 4 players imo).

I enjoy playing on both regular and XP save campaigns depending on my mood.

(Nail) #34

I’m not totally against xp save, xp save over a 6 - 10 map campaign can be tremendous fun for a bunch of buddies playing, we do it on lan all the time. It’s the persistant rankings and weapon unlocks I find annoying in the games available today, that’s why I play ET

(Strogg) #35

That would suck man. Thats why I dont play BF2142 as much. IMHO if a user that has alot of weapons and a new user joins the server has only 1 or 2 weapons that is too much of an advantage. Also when you have a setup like that you get alot of stat padders just so you get your weapons. Thats why I dont like 2142 and I have all my weapons. Just too much BS in 2142 just to get your weapons. Everyone should be able to have 'ALL" weapons at the beginning of the game. Thanks But No thanks man. I’d drop Quake Wars in a heart beat if they did that kind of a setup like they did in BF2142 just to get your weapons.

Cya :wink:

(jkr266) #36

Exactly, i hate the unlimited save servers. but on the other hand 3 map campaigns were just too short imo. We allways ran a 6-8 map campaign with normal xp reset on campaign end, excpet your xp would be saved for 2min in case you got disconned for some reason. That seemed to work best for public play.

(Turbo123) #37

That would suck man. Thats why I dont play BF2142 as much. IMHO if a user that has alot of weapons and a new user joins the server has only 1 or 2 weapons that is too much of an advantage. Also when you have a setup like that you get alot of stat padders just so you get your weapons. Thats why I dont like 2142 and I have all my weapons. Just too much BS in 2142 just to get your weapons. Everyone should be able to have 'ALL" weapons at the beginning of the game. Thanks But No thanks man. I’d drop Quake Wars in a heart beat if they did that kind of a setup like they did in BF2142 just to get your weapons.

Cya :wink:[/quote]

I would say i disagree with you.

Main reason being it shows someone that has played and know what hes doing.not only that ranking is a good thing and is being in alot of new FPS’s and ranking i KNOW will be in ETQW (not sure about unlockable weapons) But i know ranking is in,

Q8 - Can you tell us more about the announced persistent global ranking system? Battlefield2 has such a system and I liked it a lot just to compare my skills (or lack of) with my friends

It’s going to be great! :slight_smile: The persistent system includes a wide array of achievements you can attain and the military ranks you’re promoted to as a result. Each achievement requires the successful completion of a set of teamplay tasks (such as completing objectives, or supporting teammates) that relate to one class, and these in turn result in promotion.

This approach works really well because you can’t gain military rank simply by repeating actions (such as sniping from the top of a hill for six months), any more than you would do in the real military. You can certainly get promoted through the early ranks through combat alone, but to make Commissioned Officer status and above, it will take success at teamplay across the game.

The result is that your military rank actually demonstrates your teamplay ability. We think that’s important - when you see a high military rank, you know the guy deserves respect for his achievements.

So thats a definate now im in a blank here is there a difference between XP and Ranks?? I mean ranks you get to keep of course but XP dosnt show anything does it??You keep it for a few maps and it goes away.Does it show you have played the last few maps??or what.I only like XP because it gives me 2 pistols. and thats it.

(Nail) #38

I have a feeling that skills upgrades via “XP” will be less than ET but more than zero, ie: very limited skill upgrade in weapons, more likely in deployment times, fix/break times etc. and more likely team based than individual. Just speculation though.

(kamikazee) #39

Please add more detail to your posts, or which term you are really talking about. For others: lots of common W:ET sense ahead, be free skim trough for incorrect wording.

Since I didn’t spam so much in this topic, I’ll give an explanation of what XP is, and what ranks are in the ET legacy:

“XP” (Or “eXperience Points”) is what you gather during one campaign. You get it for killing, doing objectives or being close enough to the battle. (Battle sense.) All of these points are stored in their appropriate category. For continuous killing, your “Light weapons” XP category would fill up, for blowing up objectives you’d get XP in “engineering”, etc.
Filling those categories unlocks weapons and increases your title based on your previous promotion. Titles in W:ET go from Private to General, or from Schutze to General for the german titles.
Default W:ET saved the XP categories and thus your titles for as long as one campaign.

All this categories can be summed up to get a total amount of earned XP. This total amount would result in a certain ranking in each level’s end screen, those with the most XP got on top. (Medics mostly got higher than engies because medics continuously get XP for reviving/healing.) Of course, this is a doubtfull ranking system, but it is one way of doing it. This ranking system does not equal one’s title, because you can only become “General” if you filled up all categories and thus played as all classes. Players playing as a medic for a whole campaign could thus have the highest amount of XP, but still be Captain whilst others could have promoted to Colonel. (Just do the math in a very long campaign.)

Enter “XP Save”. Hated by players from the ETPro crowd, loved by ETPub server admins and players. It saves all XP points in all categories, and you get them all back when joining the server. This also means you’ll fight with your extra weapons and advantages, which is about how BF did it. If you do some math again, you can clearly see that those playing the most have most of the benefits, apart from being trained. New players haven’t played, thus aren’t adapted to the server’s policies and got no special abilities on top of that.

A (possible) better way to make an “XP Save” system would be by saving the total amount of XP and/or one’s titles without the weapon unlocks. Improvements could be made to the XP gathering as well so that it’d take longer to promote to General.

The last option is what ET:QW’s ranking system should be about: a fingerprint of how much you have been playing recently, without influencing the game in any way. XP points stay for a campaign, but no longer than that to level the playing field at the start of a new campaign.
At this level, you can compare ranks because players will start from scratch on each new server. The only thing they do carry over is their title and personal skill, the latter being the one thing you can’t simulate by ranks, XP save or other mumbo jumbo.

So enjoy XP as long as you can on one server, but don’t see it as a goal: the main objective is to show you are better than your opponent and that you will prove it to him by fulfilling your objectives.
The only time you would look at ranks or XP is in bragging contests or when you are unsure whether a certain Anansi pilot is good enough to stay clear from the nearest forest.

Thanks to all reading this heap of text, you must be brave if you read it all.

(Ifurita) #40

IMO (one lemming’s opinion), at the start of each new campaign (assuming we’re talking campaign mode) every player should start out at ground zero, regardless of how long they’ve been playing on the particular server or the game.

The way I understand XP, players will gain abilities and weapons over the course of a campaign, but after the series of 3 maps, everyone goes back to zero. I’d hope that XP rewards are incremental enough so that really focused players start maxing out ranks near the beginning of the last map in a campaign.

If the persistant ranking system is simply stats accumulation, XP, and/or title, then it sounds good to me. It rewards people who care about that without giving them extra goodies they can take from server to server. Not entirely sure how persistant ranking will be calculated though - simple XP, time in game, % on winning team, # times a given XP level is reached, or some mystical combination. That should be an interesting revelation.