24-03-2013, 03:25 PM
Hmm, interesting discussion.
I'll give my 2 cents on the ideas already presented and won't present any new ideas, because.. well I'm just a lazy git.
Putting a cap on classes is not a good idea, in my opinion. Everyone has their own idea of having fun, there is not one right way. One can have fun in a server with 16 archers, for example. Indeed, to get far on the current hard mode at least a good shieldwall is needed, but that's not the only playstyle there is. I for one can have fun without beating the game. It's not all about winning, and I disagree with your point about putting the team above your personal enjoyment. Sure, it is a teamgame and therefore you should contribute to the team goal. However, it shouldn't be restricted that the only way to contributing to the team is through the static playstyle I'm assuming you're suggesting - the shieldwall. I also think you're a bit overreacting to someone saying he plays games to enjoy himself. Even if he has different viewpoints than you do, it's not right to disregard his opinion and call him a troll.
If I join a public server with my commando I don't always feel like standing in a shieldwall or slashing behind it. Sometimes I just want to go bash in some Nordic heads and release some stress. I see nothing wrong with that, everyone is allowed to choose their own playstyle (as it says in the rules, you can ask someone to play according to your tactic but you may not force them). If you want to work perfectly in a team, all coordinated, join a house or official event. Everyone that joins such an event has the same mindset, trying to achieve a goal, while on a public server there is almost always a random doing his own thing.
To respond to Niezdara's points, I agree that it is the game mechanics that decide the player's decisions. A factor is also, as k4mi says, the community itself but then again the community is also initially forged by the game itself. So in order to change player's behaviour the game should indeed be changed first.
However, I don't agree with the way you suggest changing the game. If you give assisting more gold than killing, then the result would be leechers having more profit, or people not wanting to kill because they'd much rather get the assist gold or looting chance. The thing is, the game can't really see in what way the player is assisting. It just gives the assist xp/gold to everyone in the area, not depending on what they're doing. So they can either be a helpful shielder, or a leecher standing in the corner with his shield up.
The other point of giving supporters materials when a cade is destroyed is not doable either, since then you'd get players going to an empty server, deploying a cade and destroying it and repeating this endlessly for endless amounts of free materials.
And lastly:
That would certainly spice things up, nice ideas.
I'll give my 2 cents on the ideas already presented and won't present any new ideas, because.. well I'm just a lazy git.
Putting a cap on classes is not a good idea, in my opinion. Everyone has their own idea of having fun, there is not one right way. One can have fun in a server with 16 archers, for example. Indeed, to get far on the current hard mode at least a good shieldwall is needed, but that's not the only playstyle there is. I for one can have fun without beating the game. It's not all about winning, and I disagree with your point about putting the team above your personal enjoyment. Sure, it is a teamgame and therefore you should contribute to the team goal. However, it shouldn't be restricted that the only way to contributing to the team is through the static playstyle I'm assuming you're suggesting - the shieldwall. I also think you're a bit overreacting to someone saying he plays games to enjoy himself. Even if he has different viewpoints than you do, it's not right to disregard his opinion and call him a troll.
If I join a public server with my commando I don't always feel like standing in a shieldwall or slashing behind it. Sometimes I just want to go bash in some Nordic heads and release some stress. I see nothing wrong with that, everyone is allowed to choose their own playstyle (as it says in the rules, you can ask someone to play according to your tactic but you may not force them). If you want to work perfectly in a team, all coordinated, join a house or official event. Everyone that joins such an event has the same mindset, trying to achieve a goal, while on a public server there is almost always a random doing his own thing.
To respond to Niezdara's points, I agree that it is the game mechanics that decide the player's decisions. A factor is also, as k4mi says, the community itself but then again the community is also initially forged by the game itself. So in order to change player's behaviour the game should indeed be changed first.
However, I don't agree with the way you suggest changing the game. If you give assisting more gold than killing, then the result would be leechers having more profit, or people not wanting to kill because they'd much rather get the assist gold or looting chance. The thing is, the game can't really see in what way the player is assisting. It just gives the assist xp/gold to everyone in the area, not depending on what they're doing. So they can either be a helpful shielder, or a leecher standing in the corner with his shield up.
The other point of giving supporters materials when a cade is destroyed is not doable either, since then you'd get players going to an empty server, deploying a cade and destroying it and repeating this endlessly for endless amounts of free materials.
And lastly:
That would certainly spice things up, nice ideas.
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Spoiler