Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

random idea about communism : MEXES

20 posts, 1293 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
sort
12 years ago
I had the idea, that - if ppls with the highest elo get 2 coms - we can share the metal of mexes elo-dependent.

For example godde ( > 2200 elo ) and stromgrid ( < 1200 elo ) get's balanced together, then godde will get nearly 2 times of the metal of stromgrid.

Formula:
(eloSum

2200 + 1200) / (eloPlayer

2200 or 1200)

(incomeRatio

0.65 or 0.35)
+0 / -0

12 years ago
I had this idea a long time ago. It was shot down.
+0 / -0

12 years ago
lol... its not up to commander number... But to have 2 commanders would be cool, hope there is a structure for PW allow this~
+0 / -0

12 years ago
Also, I hope death of commander is permanent set weapon unlock still but charge Credit to have a new commander~
+0 / -0
Skasi
12 years ago
I oppose IonStorm's idea. I usually can not handle this much metal and will always have 1k metal in storage that my team can not use.
+0 / -0

12 years ago
I proposed this one, its not a bad idea actually and it ensures that people wont deliberately tank their elo to get better allies.

One problem is it seriously reduces the power of a player whose skill is undervalued (a new player from another RTS, or an old player with no elo) to effect the outcome of the game and thus increase their elo. It may also serve as a disincentive for new players to take mexes, etc. But i seriously do think its worthwhile (but then, i would..).

I dont know what you mean by cannot handle this much metal, skasi. What happens late game on large maps, or in smaller games, or when you get the reclaim economic kicking? If you cant handle that much metal then you need to learn how...
+0 / -0
Skasi
12 years ago
I cant handle it early game because of lack of apm and I can't handle it late game efficiently because of lack of fps. It's that simple, nothing "to learn".

Of course this feature would be no problem if storage was rewritten. Remove the structure, set player storages to infinity and always automatically share storage metal between allies.
+0 / -0
12 years ago
If there was only a general metal storage pool, then you'd have to keep it from turning into "whoever grabs first, gets", making lots of extra build points to suck up more of the metal. With individual storage, you can apportion it evenly.

--Dave
+0 / -0

12 years ago
ultimate metal is fun. then every time a team will have an arti commander and gunship transport! instead of building arti unit.
+0 / -0

12 years ago
I feel like its kind of artificially enslaving low elo players to high elo ones. I already spend lots of time yelling at teammates to take all these uncapped mex spots but then I would be doing it so I could get their mex metal.

Sure, it's better for the team in the long run, but I prefer the 'capitalist' method where players get their own mex income because they 'earning it' by capping and protecting the mex.
+0 / -0
Skasi
12 years ago
That's not how it'd work, KILME]AbuseMagnet. I said "share storage metal". There's usually 0 metal in storage.
+0 / -0
12 years ago
Metal income based on ELO ensure:
1. Pros got the income to build the appropriate units
2. Newb is motivated to defend mexes for team's wellbeing
3. Pros do not blame Newbs for being a newbies
4. Newbs is not ostracized from any Pros' game
5. Pros can use strategy with consistent result
6. Newbs can learn how to be efficient with units

It will work in this situation:
1. 8 player Chicken game; "Defenses is under attack by lobber and no one has any units to counter them, fortunately one player saw this a-mile-away and has already deployed an appropriate countermeasure".
2. Normal team vs team game; "Everyone is having a headway pushing enemy team away from the frontline and they are slowy loosing ground, but suddenly the enemy came with dante and all our units fail, fortunately one of our player has seen this coming and build a countermeasure".
3. Small team vs small team; "A frontline guy glimpsed at a gunship but somehow decided not to queue AA, but another experienced-player in the team knows what is happening and decided to hoard AA".

Private owned mex is like FFA, but a shared mex is more like a team play, but giving extra metal to the pro player in the team is much more teamwork and not communism (communism is where everyone, even noob, get equal metal share).
+0 / -0
12 years ago
If your pro-ally can build a Krow because he has 5k metal in Brawlers surviving at the time, the noob can still build mostly berta without having any units...

It's still communism, because noobs share a small part of their metal to pros and 'buy' protection for themselves.

Also my presentation was a bit extreme.
In normal games the elo difference is only about 1800-1400, and noobs get still 66%.
+0 / -0


12 years ago
I think this idea would have very bad consequences. Low elo players could get to the point where they barely affect the game so there is not way to show improvement.

The situation in which it is a race to win against your opponent's weak area before they win against yours (henceforth known as the Tablua Effect) would become more prevalent.

In short in teamgames you should work with your team. If you feel your team is holding you back you are free to play 1v1 in which you have complete control over resource spending.

"Of course this feature would be no problem if storage was rewritten. Remove the structure, set player storages to infinity and always automatically share storage metal between allies. "

This doesn't fix anything and creates grabbing problems.
+0 / -0


12 years ago
Elo based metal distribution would be horrible. Not only would it hurt newbies, it would also break elo itself.
+0 / -0


12 years ago
Also from context it seems you misunderstand elo...

1400 elo is not a noob, it's someone with 100 less elo than average.
+0 / -0
12 years ago
Noobs don't play 1v1-games - they would not have enough metal to play too much SimCity. They become noobs if they see, that there is so much metal that we can make a "...".

The perfect balance - also for noobs - leads to too much averaged elo, ( even godde would lose much elo-points in PW games instead of 1<->1 )
It is elo-breaking that noobs are balanced with good teams and take too much profit from the skills of all players.

I don't think that all 1400 ppls are noobs, but I think there are many noobs which have 1400 instead of 1300 only because of team games.

If we would only allow elo differences of 500 anything would be fine.

1. If one of two players can't play, spec one and he get a spec-point.
2. If one of this two players have more spec marks than the other one spec this player instead.
3. Throw a message into the battle room that ppls should switch to the second PW server

If all ppls get nearly equal elos this way, my idea would be useless and you can forget this thread.
+0 / -0
Skasi
12 years ago
>> Of course this feature would be no problem if storage was rewritten. Remove the structure, set player storages to infinity and always automatically share storage metal between allies.

> This doesn't fix anything and creates grabbing problems.

It solves the problem of me excessing metal and doesn't create any problems other than me not being able to horde metal. Same applies to other players.
+0 / -0

12 years ago
Basically already done in BA as players can opt in the lobby before the game to coop, which means they share storage.

Which is cool; I'll make lots of buildpower and set everything of mine to high priority.
+0 / -0
12 years ago
lol - lucky if others don't have the same idea, because then it would reduce your options through priority...

If you can't manage so much metal, a slider would be nice to share all metal above this slider you would store.
But if your allies can't take the excess, it would be stored in your own storage.
Other mods already have this feature.

I would support priority sliders too.
* You can place up to 3 sliders on each storage bar, if you click, the nearest slider will move itself.
* The first part is a storage where low-priority things can take ressources from - it excesses to the medium-priority part.
* The second part is a storage for medium-priority tasks and excesses to the high-priority part.
* The third part is the high-priority part and excesses to the team part.
* The forth part is the team part, it will share all ressources to the team, unless they can't take it.
+0 / -0