Forum Discussion

UnrealVH's avatar
6 years ago

Ranked Worlds/Elite Worlds Idea

I want to suggest something new and something cool, Ranked Worlds.

A year ago i suggested to give penalty to players who destroyed the fortress, now i have a better idea.

The idea behind "Ranked Worlds" is, that after player gets the fortress badge, it will be deleted from the server and teleported to a new ranked server, which you can join only with badge after destroying the fortress. There should be no other way to join ranked server, but to destroy the fortress and get the badge.

Let's say:
There are 5 Basic Europe servers. 40, 41, 42, 43, 44
And there are 2 Ranked Europe servers: 1, 2

All alliances from 40, 41, 42, 43, 44 who will get the badge first, will be deleted from these servers and will be teleported to a ranked server where real battle between the winners starts. Players just continue to play NOT from the beginning, but with all their resources and same level on this server.

35 Replies

  • Interesting discussion here !
    Sounds like a good idea, all for removing or teleporting badged players to the next world, and making that next world more interesting. If this ever gets implied, I would lower the level of the fort every time it is shot, since usually, the lower ranked alliances, are smaller then the higher ranked ones. Then no high level helpers would be needed. Since they have moved to the 'elite world', they will not be available to help anyone.
    Till that is implied, a suggestion to the points / badge system: the helper teams that stay on a world to help other alliances badge, should get a different kind of badge, whith allocated points to each fort they help shoot. I would use a reverse rank system here: the first one gets less points than the 2nd, 3rd, 4th , ... they help kill in the same server of course ! e.g. 1 st fort they helped: 1000, 2 nd 2000, 3 rd 3000, etc .
    And why not create a 'Sandbox server', a place where you can go and practice as much as you want? An elite world for the best or badged, and a sandbox, free for all, to practice , grow, reset your lvl , ...
  • All these ideas do not fix the fundamental problem here. The game is one-note. If you PVE really well, it will cover up the lack of PVP skill. The game has completely nixed PVP. It's secondary to PvE. The best PVP players in the game are the best PvE players because the game is based on a power law progression.

    Since EA dev's refuse to fix PvP because of problems with cheating, an artificial fix must be added. Reverse morale for PvP. The game checks to see the largest of either defense or offense in the defending and attacking base. If the difference between max levels is 4 then zero morale. For every level higher than 4 levels, morale increases by 10%.

    < 4 Levels: 0 % Morale
    +5: 10%
    +6: 20%
    +7: 30%
    +8: 40%
    +9: 50%
    +10: 60%
    +11: 70%
    +12: 80%
    +13: 90%
    >14: 100%

    Also, make SW more impactful. The easiest way is to make SW cost cheaper by player score. This will allow weaker players to increase SW with up to a 50% discount.

    These artificial PVP morale additions are needed since PVP has been severely reduced in the game.

    Sandbox server not needed. PTE server accomplishes that goal, and helps devs out.

  • jbl3ck's avatar
    jbl3ck
    New Spectator
    5 years ago
    @SpeirFein

    This is nice in theory... would only work as intended if the "multiple account" problem is fixed.
    Allow only 1 or 2 logged in players at one time from a single IP. Make a 1 hr "loading screen" for new sessions :tongue:
  • Idea was dead before it was ever born, thread is a year old. Please stop beating the dead horse.
  • elite world idea or teleporting fortress killing alliances to a new world was being discussed with even a bit of interest from developers. to have this soixie person come in and just say dont beat a dead horse and close the thread is an insult the the very idea of sharing thoughts with others on the improvement of the game state. i would have like to share my thoughts on that particular thread but since it has been shortsightedly locked i thought id share my idea in a new thread. 1 fort kill only per world on a specific rule set type world. this would not take away from the diplomatic aspect of the game at all because most of the players already know each other or teams and alliances between them have mostly been established. this server type should be accessible to all but i wouldnt rule out some exclusivity based on prior experience. 1 badge only on a server would help team building out a bit and take away some of the early advantages gained by larger groups of coordinated players by encouraging a competitive game state. perhaps this could be achieved by making teams smaller or larger than the current count to suit the preference of the other players or established teams. this is where i think some people can come together and maybe even create a poll. how hard is it to test these ideas? could we pick a low extreme of both choices and try? say 100 player teams 1 fort kill and need to control all hubs? or 25 player teams and control 2 hubs. if we arent going to talk about the game evolving then lets at least acknowledge its the dying horse and not just our ideas and thoughts about it. i have been playing almost 3300 days this game and i love cnc very much. i also dont like using capitol letters or these things'''' so i apologize for that.

About Tiberium Alliances General Discussion

Talk with other players about what is going on in your Command and Conquer: Tiberium Alliances game.1,191 PostsLatest Activity: 21 hours ago