BLUFOR/REDFOR win ratio ...

Morganan
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat 4 May 2013 08:36
Contact:

Re: BLUFOR/REDFOR win ratio ...

Postby Morganan » Sun 18 May 2014 18:27

You need to be able to give breakdowns of nation/coalition before this data means anything.

Gneckes
Warrant Officer
Posts: 482
Joined: Fri 10 Feb 2012 16:48
Contact:

Re: BLUFOR/REDFOR win ratio ...

Postby Gneckes » Sun 18 May 2014 19:22

Morganan wrote:You need to be able to give breakdowns of nation/coalition before this data means anything.


No. They need to decide who they want to balance the game for: pub games or top competitive level. Again, I hope it will be the latter.
Why?
I'm not a top competitive player, but if they balance the game for that level of play, then I actually have an incentive to try and get there. More arguments in favor of this have been supplied by much more eloquent people than me on previous pages.
Common sense shall thus be referred to as rare sense.

MENTORImage

Alcorr
Master Sergeant
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon 5 May 2014 23:47
Contact:

Re: BLUFOR/REDFOR win ratio ...

Postby Alcorr » Sun 18 May 2014 22:57

Gopblin wrote:As for the claims that unit that's useful in 1v1 is gonna be just as useful in 10v10, that's blatantly false. Due to higher income, availability constraints play a larger role, and so do micro requirements, whereas cost-effectiveness becomes less important.

Best wishes,
Daniel


Balancing around casual game modes such as 10v10s and whatnot (anything larger than 4v4 really) just means that units will end up being vastly underpowered or overpowered for 4v4s and smaller. Whereas there is not obviously not as much of an issue the other way around.

I'm not a top competitive player, but if they balance the game for that level of play, then I actually have an incentive to try and get there. More arguments in favor of this have been supplied by much more eloquent people than me on previous pages.


Exactly, I'm not even a competitive player or have many games played in ranked, but I want the game to be balanced for that so that there is always room for self improvement with a high skill ceiling, and my interest in the game is maintained.

If they pander to casuals just learning the game, the skill ceiling will constantly be lowered, who actually wants this? The beauty of this game is it's depth and complexity, lowering it to command and conquer levels isn't really in anyones best interest other than the noobs that want the game to be easier.

User avatar
MajoorHokie
Master Sergeant
Posts: 166
Joined: Sat 25 Feb 2012 20:30
Contact:

Re: BLUFOR/REDFOR win ratio ...

Postby MajoorHokie » Mon 19 May 2014 07:08

This is interesting and I'm glad to see that the win ratios are basically even. It definitely lends some actual statistical evidence to counteract the "WARSAW PACT IS SO BAD Q_Q" crowd. However, I am concerned about matches that end and count as victories without actually being played, like when a team chain quits before a match even starts) is there any way to control for that?
Image

Gneckes
Warrant Officer
Posts: 482
Joined: Fri 10 Feb 2012 16:48
Contact:

Re: BLUFOR/REDFOR win ratio ...

Postby Gneckes » Mon 19 May 2014 11:59

MajoorHokie wrote:This is interesting and I'm glad to see that the win ratios are basically even. It definitely lends some actual statistical evidence to counteract the "WARSAW PACT IS SO BAD Q_Q" crowd.


Except, it's been pointed out two dozen times that no, it proves nothing of the like.
Thanks for being condescending though.
Common sense shall thus be referred to as rare sense.

MENTORImage

ziizii
Master Sergeant
Posts: 177
Joined: Thu 13 Feb 2014 15:32
Contact:

Re: BLUFOR/REDFOR win ratio ...

Postby ziizii » Mon 19 May 2014 14:36

meaningless data, the good data should survey the win ratio and using ratio in same level palyer. like the top player.

User avatar
BlackBeret
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue 21 Jan 2014 00:26
Contact:

Re: BLUFOR/REDFOR win ratio ...

Postby BlackBeret » Mon 19 May 2014 14:50

Balance the game for ranked?

Sure, why not, lets balance the game for a minority crowd to get their leaderboard kicks. :roll:
"Watch out below!"

Gneckes
Warrant Officer
Posts: 482
Joined: Fri 10 Feb 2012 16:48
Contact:

Re: BLUFOR/REDFOR win ratio ...

Postby Gneckes » Mon 19 May 2014 15:07

BlackBeret wrote:Balance the game for ranked?

Sure, why not, lets balance the game for a minority crowd to get their leaderboard kicks. :roll:

I'll just leave this here:

Alcorr wrote:
Gneckes wrote:I'm not a top competitive player, but if they balance the game for that level of play, then I actually have an incentive to try and get there. More arguments in favor of this have been supplied by much more eloquent people than me on previous pages.


Exactly, I'm not even a competitive player or have many games played in ranked, but I want the game to be balanced for that so that there is always room for self improvement with a high skill ceiling, and my interest in the game is maintained.

If they pander to casuals just learning the game, the skill ceiling will constantly be lowered, who actually wants this? The beauty of this game is it's depth and complexity, lowering it to command and conquer levels isn't really in anyones best interest other than the noobs that want the game to be easier.
Common sense shall thus be referred to as rare sense.

MENTORImage

User avatar
BlackBeret
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue 21 Jan 2014 00:26
Contact:

Re: BLUFOR/REDFOR win ratio ...

Postby BlackBeret » Mon 19 May 2014 16:26

It doesnt matter what you want really does it?

Im stating the fact of all online multiplayer games. People will always find a way to maximise efficiency to fulfill some kind of desire to be at the top of a competitive gaming ladder, in any online player vs player experience, mostly at the cost of other peoples gaming experiences.

Ergo, if it gets balanced for ranked play, it will worsen the current situation and then the only way to actually play the game will be through cheese and gamey tactics. This goes for both sides.

This will effectively ruin it for some people and defeating the point of the game being originally aimed at the more "realistic side of computer wargaming" when it just turns into x beats y beats z unit combos, and you only ever see one or two types of deck.
"Watch out below!"

User avatar
guguku
Warrant Officer
Posts: 440
Joined: Fri 14 Feb 2014 16:27
Location: BW, Germany
Contact:

Re: BLUFOR/REDFOR win ratio ...

Postby guguku » Mon 19 May 2014 18:03

BlackBeret wrote:Balance the game for ranked?

Sure, why not, lets balance the game for a minority crowd to get their leaderboard kicks. :roll:



Thats exactly what i think!!!!
The game should be balanced to the majority of players.
I dont think the majority are newcomers but medium skilled players.

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests