Jump to content


Clan Wars Map Exhibition: Northwest

MapExhibition TheHitchcockMap BetterThanHighway

  • Please log in to reply
90 replies to this topic

Allu_o7o7o7 #21 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 21:20

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 20477 battles
  • 6,207
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View Postkmidas16, on Feb 04 2014 - 05:31, said:

Having 14 clanmates spending 80,000 credits each = 1,120,000 credits PER MATCH.  

 

View Poststugger, on Feb 04 2014 - 20:00, said:

Seriously this would be immensely fun if it wasn't a gigantic credit sink.  I'm not participating in this series but would love to participate in the next one if something is done about the cost.

 

OTTER agrees with the above and won't even be entering a team. Sorry Q/Hyp - it would be a very hard sell to my guys.



Katukov #22 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 21:41

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 66854 battles
  • 3,286
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    11-27-2010
Rules should be like this. Stage 1: 4 teams round - robbing, 2 teams advancing. Stage 2: 4-5 teams round - robin, 2 teams advancing to playoff of 16 or 8.

D_O_M #23 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 21:57

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 21405 battles
  • 64
  • Member since:
    08-03-2012
Not to mention the cost of training add that to the cost of this tournament and you will find the that you can triple the cost of what you have to give in exchange to be competitive in this event. The last one was a lot of fun and learning the new maps as a clan is valuable info playing said new map against other good clans over and over is great getting a huge credit/gold sink is priceless (For wargaming) I as well will have a hard time selling this event to my clan unless there is a silver income provided after each match to further off set some of the cost.   

Katukov #24 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 22:01

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 66854 battles
  • 3,286
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    11-27-2010
I would advise entering because you may not need to fight day 1 at all. You may need to fight day 2 very little and make some gold.

KPEMEHb #25 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 22:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 41595 battles
  • 2,051
  • [_UKR_] _UKR_
  • Member since:
    02-27-2011
We lost our best battle caller after the previous one, we can't afford to enter this one.

Katukov #26 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 22:33

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 66854 battles
  • 3,286
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    11-27-2010

View PostKPEMEHb, on Feb 04 2014 - 16:16, said:

We lost our best battle caller after the previous one, we can't afford to enter this one.

He was severely overrated,  and methodically over lose. Diplo is opening more doors. Change the name to Revolutionary Union Sovereignty. Join petco and claim current forge lands without fighting.



stugger #27 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 22:45

    Major

  • Players
  • 20425 battles
  • 2,784
  • Member since:
    09-13-2011

View PostPrivate2AT, on Feb 04 2014 - 12:41, said:

 

Stugger,

 

I have not gone through the math, but potentially if you changed the way you clan pays out the gold it would be different.

 

So if you take each battle participated in as a share, and there are as you stated 19 games with assuming 14 players in each match, (feel free to go in with 10 and still school the opposition) that would mean there is a total of...19 X 14 = 266 shares.  Now take that 80K gold, and that means each share is worth...80 000 / 266 = 300 gp.  So if you played in all 19 matches like you gave in your example, you would have 19 shares and you would make...19 X 300 gp = 5700 gp.

 

feel free to re-run the numbers if you go in with the minimum 17 required for sign up and want to give equal shares to all.

 

According to your example that is twice the expenses you had (if I read right) so you would be making gold.  If you finished second, you would wind up breaking even roughly (same number of battle, just 1/2 the prize).  If its still not enough gold, that is a matter of opinion.

 

Just thought I would throw another angle at this.  Everyone will have to decide if its worth it for them to participate.  Also some people may not be motivated by economics.  Some just want to play big organized battles and there are not enough Champion Tank company oponents out there.  To each their own.

 

 

Throwing another angle or not you've clearly missed the point.  Not even 40 teams signed up last round and I know of at least 3 that basically pulled out after 2 or 3 matches in cause of the cost of ammo, repairs and any consumables, and receiving nothing to compensate for that.  1st place prize was increased from 50k gold to 80k gold this time yet its still not even worth the time and cost to get it.



KPEMEHb #28 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 00:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 41595 battles
  • 2,051
  • [_UKR_] _UKR_
  • Member since:
    02-27-2011

View PostKatukov, on Feb 04 2014 - 13:33, said:

He was severely overrated,  and methodically over lose. Diplo is opening more doors. Change the name to Revolutionary Union Sovereignty. Join petco and claim current forge lands without fighting.

RUS is not an animal and walrus is 6 letters :(



Katukov #29 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 00:05

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 66854 battles
  • 3,286
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    11-27-2010

Russian blue sounds good.

Just for reference:


Edited by Katukov, Feb 05 2014 - 03:03.


Beerstein #30 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 00:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 18649 battles
  • 11,644
  • [D4NCE] D4NCE
  • Member since:
    08-18-2011
Others may not agree but I don't think the reward pays for the shells fired, an ongoing issue with tournaments. Can't speak for anyone else but I see absolutely no reason to participate, in fact I only see reasons NOT to. If my clan participates I'll just laugh at them. Enjoy streaming low caliber clan wars play Wargaming. You can do a lot of things to screw us over (like increased riots) but you can't force us to pander to your streams for pennies, for once we DO have a say and I'm more than happy to return the favors we have gotten.

SpunkyGoon #31 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 01:53

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22115 battles
  • 608
  • [NUGGS] NUGGS
  • Member since:
    05-29-2012

View Postboomboomthunder, on Feb 04 2014 - 12:31, said:

yea more gold for all their top clans as usual smaller clans have no chance thanks WARGAMING!!!!!!! way to look out for all your players

Here's an idea, lets make a tournament, Losers get gold winners get nothing! sound good to you?



SpunkyGoon #32 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 02:12

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22115 battles
  • 608
  • [NUGGS] NUGGS
  • Member since:
    05-29-2012
How about since you aren't streaming the first few rounds(or are you?) you set them up in special battles, then set the semi-finals and finals in training rooms so you can stream?  dont see why this would be an issue at all.

GaIaxyman #33 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 16:02

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 36065 battles
  • 23
  • Member since:
    06-21-2012

View PostMakaze2048, on Feb 04 2014 - 19:46, said:

I don't think anyone is arguing that shells should cost any less. Rather the issue is the 0 credit income that result from the matches. No one complains that CW is too expensive. The problem is not the cost of shells, it's that you're running tournaments out of training rooms. Instituting a real tournament system that allows for scheduling, enforcement of full tourney rules, and compensating players for shells fired should be a priority over things like the horribly broken national mode. And speaking of dev priorities (or lack thereof...) whatever happened to that CW development team? It's been months now and nary a whisper of a change other than the universally despised subversions.

 

I can't speak for Red Sky in general, but I know I personally won't be participating for this and only this reason. It's just not worth the crazy amount of credits that were spent last time.

:great:



Banish #34 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 18:00

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17847 battles
  • 2,813
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    09-09-2011

The reward simply put isn't enough to motivate the majority of top clans into participating. I can only speak for Relic Main but roughly a weeks income for this amount of hassle just isn't worth it. I can however see the appeal for mid-level clans where the reward is enough to be motivated such as Enjoy, TYR, RDDT...etc.

 

Perhaps if you added more than just gold as a reward. For example:

 

  • Amount of time taken to unlock a locked tank is reduced by X percent
  • Clan receives a gold multiplier to their gold income for Y time
  • Each member in the clan receives one usable item that immediately unlocks a single locked tank. Does not expire.

 

This way clans can earn rewards that will actually effect them on the global map, and therefore top clans will want to earn these rewards.



Hypnotik #35 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 18:30

    Web Developer

  • -Players-
  • 16686 battles
  • 1,505
  • Member since:
    01-06-2011

View PostBanish, on Feb 05 2014 - 09:00, said:

  • Amount of time taken to unlock a locked tank is reduced by X percent
  • Clan receives a gold multiplier to their gold income for Y time
  • Each member in the clan receives one usable item that immediately unlocks a single locked tank. Does not expire.

I really like the tank locking ideas, especially that last one. 

 

View PostSpunkyGoon, on Feb 04 2014 - 17:12, said:

How about since you aren't streaming the first few rounds(or are you?) you set them up in special battles, then set the semi-finals and finals in training rooms so you can stream?  dont see why this would be an issue at all.

They are in special battles. All battles except the semi finals and finals are done through the tournament system. That's why they don't pay out credits.



Banish #36 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 19:38

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17847 battles
  • 2,813
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    09-09-2011

View PostHypnotik, on Feb 05 2014 - 13:30, said:

I really like the tank locking ideas, especially that last one. 

 

Thank you. Out of curiosity how difficult would it be to implement these kind of changes into the game?

 

  • Adding modifiers to a clans / province income
    • Clan earns 50% more gold for two weeks
    • Selected province earns 50% more gold for two weeks. The bonus stays with the province regardless of who owns it.
  • Single use items that a clan can use to add a modifier to their clans income
    • Clan earns 50% more gold for two weeks
    • Selected province that you control earns 50% more gold for two weeks. If you lose the province the bonus is lost, even if you retake the province
    • Selected province that you control earns 50% more gold for two weeks. The bonus stays with the province regardless of who owns it.
    • Selected province that you control earns 1,000 more gold for two weeks. If you lose the province the bonus is lost, even if you retake the province
    • Selected province that you control earns 1,000 more gold for two weeks. The bonus stays with the province regardless of who owns it.
  • Adding income to a clan
    • Clan earns 2,000 extra gold per day for two weeks
  • Adding modifiers to an individual accounts tank locking duration
    • Being able to change a set time on all tank locking (Minus 24 hours, for example)
    • Being able to change set number of time on specific tank types (Minus 24 hours on all medium tanks, for example)
    • Being able to change tank-locking times by percentage
  • Adding in-game items that effect tank locking duration's
    • Single use items that immediately remove a single tank that is locked
    • Single use items that reduce tank locking times by a set time (Minus 24 hours, for example)
    • Single use items that reduce the tank locking times by a certain percentage
  • Adding global map bonuses
    • Ability to give a clan an extra X number of chips for Y amount of time (I would highly recommend a maximum of five chips if you think about adding this)
    • Ability to automatically refresh X number of chips that are in cool-down / burnt
    • Discount or Free Spies and Counter-Spies for Y amount of time
    • Use items that prevent riots for happening on any of your clans provinces for 24 hours

 

I am wondering if some of these are too difficult or impossible to implement so I do not waste your time by requesting something pointless.

 

Are COAF applications on hold for the time being? My application has been sitting there for two months. :sad:



Katukov #37 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 20:01

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 66854 battles
  • 3,286
  • [OTTER] OTTER
  • Member since:
    11-27-2010

View PostBanish, on Feb 05 2014 - 13:38, said:

 

Thank you. Out of curiosity how difficult would it be to implement these kind of changes into the game?

*******

I am wondering if some of these are too difficult or impossible to implement so I do not waste your time by requesting something pointless.

 

Are COAF applications on hold for the time being? My application has been sitting there for two months. :sad:

 

Technically, WG could invest some time to make clan war similarly configurable like missions. Then Hypnotic could manually tweak rules, maps, etc and see results until he like it.

 



Hypnotik #38 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 20:48

    Web Developer

  • -Players-
  • 16686 battles
  • 1,505
  • Member since:
    01-06-2011

View PostBanish, on Feb 05 2014 - 10:38, said:

Thank you. Out of curiosity how difficult would it be to implement these kind of changes into the game?

Spoiler

 

I am wondering if some of these are too difficult or impossible to implement so I do not waste your time by requesting something pointless.

 

Are COAF applications on hold for the time being? My application has been sitting there for two months. :sad:

Clan consumables aren't something in the system, so that would require a bunch of development (something like the locking one would be game dev and website dev, map-based thing are just website-dev), but I think it is something that should be seriously considered, since it adds another aspect to the fighting without some of the negative effects of something like subversions. It think that the more good ideas this gets, the more viable it becomes for development. The ideas regarding gold are a tougher sell, since we get into game economy balancing (also, does Loz really need more gold?)

 

As for the COAF thing, I'll have to go digging, it may have gotten buried.

 

View PostKatukov, on Feb 05 2014 - 11:01, said:

Technically, WG could invest some time to make clan war similarly configurable like missions. Then Hypnotic could manually tweak rules, maps, etc and see results until he like it.

Things have progressed in the right direction as far as this is concerned. HQ has been pretty responsive in getting things like this done for us - for example rules are technically configurable (we have Subversions off, Korea has them on), it's just a matter of company policy. All of the recent map changes (like map choices, new LZ's, new province names) all happened pretty smoothly. Changes that require development obviously take much longer. One of the other problems that we run into is that usually config changes require map downtime, which we'd rather avoid, so we can't tweak things too often.



Bronirovannyy #39 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 21:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 13017 battles
  • 6,834
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    04-09-2012
Could you guys turn off everything that isn't tank locking(it allows for interesting strats, but I wouldn't care too much if it was turned off) and fog of war. 

Banish #40 Posted Feb 05 2014 - 21:26

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 17847 battles
  • 2,813
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    09-09-2011

View PostHypnotik, on Feb 05 2014 - 15:48, said:

Clan consumables aren't something in the system, so that would require a bunch of development (something like the locking one would be game dev and website dev, map-based thing are just website-dev), but I think it is something that should be seriously considered, since it adds another aspect to the fighting without some of the negative effects of something like subversions. It think that the more good ideas this gets, the more viable it becomes for development. The ideas regarding gold are a tougher sell, since we get into game economy balancing (also, does Loz really need more gold?)

 

Seriously? Lozarus only has 11,040 gold per day to work with. If I don't find a way to get more gold I'm afraid he might make me Commander or something. *Shivers*

 

The economy changes could even be set as:

 

  • Select Province X for bonus income, however you must select a difference Province for a reduced income to maintain the Gold bonus on Province X.
    • Gold pots are not acceptable for income modifiers.
    • Or
    • If Province X is a Gold Pot you must have at-least Y number of Provinces at reduced income, if you lose any of Y provinces the bonus is lost.
    • If a clan loses a province that has a modifier on it, all modifiers are removed and the clan takes a reduced income for a limited duration.

 

This way, it is a completely optional for clans to use this system and it isn't being forced on them. There is incentive to use it as you have the potential to make more gold, however if done incorrectly it can cause a large problem for your clan. Also Spies will reveal which provinces are under these effects so it'll add a bit more strategy for the Clan War environment.

 

Would it be easier if I just made a new application? The information on it is pretty old...

 

:e: Fixed some confusing wording.


Edited by Banish, Feb 05 2014 - 23:30.






Also tagged with MapExhibition, TheHitchcockMap, BetterThanHighway

4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users