EA Forums - Banner

kOeGys wish for the WCS setting and balance stuff

Hello its koegy!

1. World settings of the WCS 2019

Ofc there shouldn't be buyable repairtime. Its a server of skill and Teamplay and not "I have much money, don't need repairbuildings, can afford 72h repairtime a day". This has nothing to do with competition and championship!

I would like to have the following settings for the upcoming WCS:
Moral with 7 level difference and forgotten attacks.
Why moral? Without moral the Gamebalance gets **** up. Tunnelexit will be ignored because you won't shoot any outposts. The production in your cashbases is below 40% of your overall production, due to the fact that you have such high pois which will give you enough bonus to ignore your own cry and energy production. 7 level difference is the perfect match, whether you farm outposts or kill forgotten bases.

Why forgotten attacks? Well it kinda slows down the game a bit, but it prepares your alliance for incoming PvP and it's a nice add-on where you have to improve your defence. In addition you have to dig as an alliance towards the mid because you can't stand alone in range of 50 bases. Only downside is that you can't test your defence, because how often and when you get attacked is to random.

Yes I know, world's with moral, you have to spent more time farming, simulating bases, improving your production in your bases and finding good layouts( all this makes fun).. but it's a world championship server where all good players should come together and fight each other, and forgotten with moral world's afford the highest requirements of "skill" and Teamplay.

So please don't make it so boring like other world's, where you login into your account, grind down a base with 10+ hits (which often don't need any simulation skills), afterwards you can go offline because you are out of repairtime.

2. Some minor game changes improve the balance

It feels like the game is kinda dead in things of development, improvements or anything else. And I can't understand why, it shouldn't even be a big thing to make the game better or even balanced, for example:
Changing the numbers of offensive or defensive unit's to improve the balancing and variation! Everyone who watches or plays a world knows how a defence looks like: 2buster,2 flak's and the rest is infantry..why? Because it's the best! Tanks in defence? No chance, every nod player has at least 3 strong cobras who will be the deadly counterpart of vehicles in the defence.. long-range artillery? No chance, far way to expensive for the little impact they have. Make it cheaper, the tanks harder to kill and maybe let us research the Mammut for the defence. :P

When you don't implement a third fraction, why not balancing the existing one? There is a biiiig gap between nod and gdi ! There are 3 types of ppl playing gdi: ppl like me who like the challenge playing the harder fraction, ppl who wants to give gdi a try ( after 1 week 99% of them say: next world I play again nod, gdi sucks), and the third type are noobs who don't have a real impact in the competition of a world and choosed gdi because of the blue screen.
Nod is better, easier, more efficient at farming and even till the endgame the defence is stronger..

Make gdi great again! How? Again, Just scale some numbers. The biggest difference is the bomber: for nod it's the ultimate weapon to kill outposts or bases, because of the 0,5 range.
For gdi the hawk is the biggest crap of history after u headed 2-3 weeks into the world! 1,5 range, yes we love it, wasting all ammunition before reaching the buildings because it flew over a wall, nice. Or needing two more attacks for a base then a nod player, because the gdi player needs to kill at least twice  the much buildings then a nod one.
Hey I would be fine with it if gdi outscales nod on other things but this isn't the fact either.. the almighty mammoth compared to the sooooo much weaker Avatar. The range of the mammoth is nice, that's true.. but that's it, the mammoth is more expensive, it has less hp, deals less damage and the biggest thing: the upgrade! Its a joke, a big mess, a junkpile of ****.. just the worst upgrade in the game, for the "best" unit in a gdis army... Tell me why? Why can't it have a little shield like the forgotten ones? Or maybe more damage upgrade like the predator? Because then it will be too good, like the Avatar with lifeleech who can kill everything on his lane and will have full life at the and without costing any repairtime?and I even won't say anything about the overpowered salamander compared to the weak upgrade of the Kodiak.. it's a nice upgrade, it's only to weak. There is so much more to say but I think it's enough.

All in all, there is only a small tuning of numbers needed to change the balance between nod and gdi, and also making the game more interesting by giving the opportunity to build other defense variations and stuff.

I don't say it's a bad game. I love it, being together with ur friends, simulating bases, helping each other out and having long nights because of PvP action.. but it's so easy to make it more exciting and interesting..

Best regards
The best and most gdi loving player
kOeGy

Replies

  • II_Karpov_II
    18 posts Member
    edited January 12
    I agree with you. But iam a Nod player, so i want to say that : do not change NOD gameplay!!!

    I choose NOD always not because "GDI" is harder, but because i was a noob that prefered the red color* And now i do not want to change.

    If what you said is globaly true, there is also some good point for GDI i believe, like the range Paladin^^

    About WCS settings. Yes you are totaly right, no rapairtimes to buy!

    Moral and FA seems to be the best settings.

    Or makes FB harder to kill... I mean much harder, change all forgotten units to make them much stronger. (Or maybe a system of bonuses, like POI for us!!)

    Karpov

  • Agree with Koegy some balance is required between GDI and Nod, for example, Orca with shields or paladin with shields like the cobra that will help to balance the game between the two fraction
  • if you make wcs with moral, make it at least 10 levels or even more, not 7
    we have seen this enough times: with 7 levels the game becomes unbalanced, with 75% farming, 25% digging
    digging is fun because you can do it in a team, and get a joint reward in poi, and good resources too
    there is no fun in farming because you compete with your teammates for targets, and do not get anything accomplished as a result of it, just a waste of ammunition and bad blood inside the team
  • Hello

    About first part WCS totally aggre. Should be with all features and without repair bundles.

    Kuchar
  • Make the WCS a real battle of skills.. no funding, all players haver 300cp with 2days rt, no other caps possible. (Of course we know this could never happen, this game is funds driven) Would be nice to see it once, at least for the so called WCS.
  • gamerdruid
    2720 posts Moderator
    edited February 1
    I think setting your 300cp and 2d rt (for 7 or 14 days) as a starting point and not allowing purchases to boost caps etc for 7 or 14 days would be a 'good' move.
    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • I know the game is all about funds and funding, but could go a ways towards determining a wcs winner without everybody complaining how they bought their way into the win.
  • Ofc a world without funds would be the best thing ever! But why limitating the caps? Just uncap it! With only 300cp & 2 days cap you cant save stuff for pvp. But therefor, you need to raise the cp income from 10/hour, maybe double it (because every "good" player is only pushing cp till mid) or let the supply remain but make clicking cost 0 or 1 fund so everyone can "click"(which is the most expensive stuff except buying RT which isnt hopefully enabled).
    For cost compensation, maybe do an entry fee to participate on the wcs =) But that are all ideas which are well known tbh.
  • gamerdruid
    2720 posts Moderator
    I agree, the 10/h growth of cp is a pain no matter how much you buy in capacity it takes a long time to build up.

    A world without funds but normal play is unlikely as funds are what pay salaries! Placing an initial capacity higher than the current 100cp and 12h rt with, I should add, them full at the start, would speed up the start. Limiting the adding of new capacity for a short time reduces the effect of funding but doesn't slow too much those that play with funds so they would be likely to continue to play until funds were allowed to be used.
    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • > @lordofcb1 said:
    > Make the WCS a real battle of skills.. no funding, all players haver 300cp with 2days rt, no other caps possible. (Of course we know this could never happen, this game is funds driven) Would be nice to see it once, at least for the so called WCS.

    "(Of course we know this could never happen"

    One server without funds, or with limited funding will not kill EA shareholders trust me XD

    All is about how much pressure players can make.
  • This is what happens when you allow free to play leeches and they have no clue about the history or current F2P business model.

    My primary suggestion is to delete all free to play forum accounts or restrict them to the PTE forum and server.
  • they may be good players but the reason why these people lose is that they literally have no war strategy, They dig to the middle with head in the sand not even thinking about basic things such as the numerical advantage of the opponent. No diplomatic skills either to overcome this and prefer instead to lose and then come here to complain.
  • gamerdruid
    2720 posts Moderator
    But what you describing isn't a 'good' player - or a 'good alliance'. To be successful you need both diplomatic skills (or have someone in the alliance with them) and to have a good war strategy (or have someone in the alliance with them).
    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • Such an interesting thread!
  • WCS Settings:
    Forgotten Attacks + Moral is the most challenging setup for the player and team play. A WCS should require the most of the game mechanics. A World without Moral ignores most of it.

    I also don't like the idea to buy repair time.

    Game Balance:
    No need for complex, hard to implement changes like "shields for orcas" (Lot's of potential for bugs, without proper testing). But basic changes in the numbers.
    -Cheaper techs (e.g. GDI mammoth, maybe commando, upgrade for orca).
    -Tweak the base numbers a little for tech units, so it doesn't affect early game. (I know the scaling with the level is the same for all units, so the base number is enough). Like Munition of GDI bomber by 10%, or HP of the mammoth, GDI raks in defence for example are the reason NOD def is FAR better until zone trooper update makes GDI def superior.
    I think a few easy to inplement changes would be enough to make the game more fresh.

    Funds:
    -I have no problem here. The devs have to get paid, and TA is still cheap compared to many other games. I only don't like buying repair time.
  • gamerdruid
    2720 posts Moderator
    I think the common opinion of many is that the ability to buy repair time should not exist. However, my guess is that it is a global setting for all worlds and EA control that setting (again, a guess). If I am right, then it is unlikely that the WCS will be any different to others. However, I do feel that buying repair time shouldn't be an option on other worlds - but it may be a lucrative form of income!
    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • They implemented the repairbuyshit before the last WCs, but Said: we wont enable it at the wcs...so the last one was without repairbundles...

    If they enable it on the incoming wcs, many ppl and alliances wont start ;)) buying repairtime has nothing to do with Champions
  • When they introduced the instant repair crates as 'gifts' they also said 'we'll never enable the purchase of these crates' - sometimes their plans change.
    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!