Gimme more tactics in a scenario   10 comments


In the discussion about the PTS notes on WAAAGH.de (german) Wothor said something interesting:

Der Sinn von SCs sollte darin bestehen, sie zu gewinnen, und das möglichst schnell, nicht möglichst langsam.

I’ll translate it ;) “The purpose of a scenario should be to win it as a fast as possible, not as slow as possible.”

He’s 100% right. At the moment most of the scenarios..well..all.. are played as slow as possible. This leads to ignoring the objectives and spawn camping ..or getting spawn camped. The reason is quiet simple. You gain more points this way and those pixel hunters are happy this way. Of course there are also those grinding folks who don’t participate in a scenario if it can’t be won and Mythic is struggling at how they can bring those people to fighting.

So..let’s do a little gedankenexperiment (I love this word, not only because it’s german, but because I like german words in english sentences ;) ).

What would happen if there would be no renown and points awarded for killing players in a scenario, but a timer would count down and the faster you finish the scenario, the more renown and token you gain. Additional to that there are still points there to be reached and for more points your side gains, you get more renown. So the renown and token output is solely based on the scenario objectives. If you just want to mindlessly beat someone, there is still the RvR lake.

What should be the result? There is an incentive to finish the scenario fast, because those renown wh**** don’t want to camp at the spawn when there is nothing to be won other than just some officer medaillons or Annihilator gear (I always laugh, when a RR85+ enemy drops Annihilator ;) ). If it’s a close race, both sides are still rewarded for giving a good fight.

Would such a system work?

Karic (doomdiver.wordpress.com)

Posted February 17, 2011 by Karic in Scenario, WAR

10 responses to “Gimme more tactics in a scenario

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I think it would work and would even be awesome. That alone is reason enough for Mythic to never implement it.

  2. Dangerous, because of following.

    I just want to acquire insignia, so I would no nothing beyond not getting the idle hands debuff. You get a small group of with that attitude and you would be buggered. Tokens could be affected like you say, but …

    The best groups would get away with murder, though to be fair they do that already.

    The people who get away with doing nothing, would be rewarded with a quicker way to achieve their aims.

    • You can’t force the players to play the game by a mechanic.. there will be always someone who thinks that being idle in a scenario is an easy (and right) way to earn something and will try to circumvent any code based incentive for being active. So instead of thinking how you can bring all players to fighting, you should reward those who actually try to win the scenario.

      I think that my idea gets rid of the renown farming in scenarios and gives the scenario objectives more weight again. Independent of winning or losing, I think we can all agree on that it’s the most boring part during a scenario when you stand at a spawn camp and just grind for renown or get farmed. I’m always thankful if someone carries the resources in Serpent Passage and the scenario ends fast.

      One of the biggest problems the changed system would something different. Most of the time I enter a scenario the sides are not equal in number. 9 out of 10 times it’s 12:6 for Destruction.. that has to be fixed for the “racing-system” I’ve proposed.

  3. I like the idea a whole lot. You should post it in the official Suggestion Box.

  4. Pingback: Das Buch des Grolls wird weitergeführt | Gromson's Groll

  5. Well imo it could work but the impact on the actual playstile is pretty unforeseeable as we haven’t seen a mechanic like this in WAR before.

    If Mythic would introduce such a scenario within an event, I would really appreciate it!

  6. Pingback: Kurznachrichten: 17.02.11 - WAAAGH.de

  7. That´s basically what I was aiming at ;)
    Sure, in its raw form it´s abusable – basically there needs to be a reason not to *lose* as fast as possible, even if there´s a chance to lose, but with pride if you get my drift.

    Nevertheless, as long as the simple fact remains that stretching it out is of benefit, the system stays broken. It needs to be fixed somehow, there´s no way around it – imo. So, basically a bonus/malus on time is mandatory to accomplish that.

    I don´t think it´s necessary to totally abandon kill points – for example the scenario points, I mean like 80:450 could act as a modifier for a dimishing return. Thrilling matches wouldn´t suffer, only the 500:10 type. Some more cents ;D

    • My idea on an incentive not to lose as fast as possible was that there actual two timers. One counting down, which determines the renown bonus for the winning side and one timer which counts upwards for the “base-renown” gained for both sides. The second one would be significantly less than the first one. So if you don’t want to give you enemy renown, but want to maximize your own renown, your goal would be to win as fast as possible. Maybe you could even build in a minimum time you have to withstand the enemy to actually gain anything. The outcry would be loud, but it would enforce the sc-afk’ing folks to at least step once out of the camp.

      The weight of kill points should not be that much that it dictates who’s winning. Therefore I took the harsh route and discarded them altogether. Killing should be the way towards the winning of the scenario by doing the objectives, not by sticking to the ..Choppa-way of ..only killing and forgetting everything else.

      Of course my suggestion is difficult to balance..maybe it’s even too communistic for an US-Dev , because in my mind most of the involved players gain the same renown. Well this could be weighted on RR and..”influence” in the scenario and phase of the moon (that would be Warhammerish, if the moons decide how strong Chaos is ;) )..or whatever. To put the ending scores into the renown distribution would be also nice.
      The nice side effect for this communistic kind of renown distribution would be that it would be quiet irrelevant if people form their own group, it would be 12vs12 ..not 12vs11+1. I’m not saying that it’s a perfect draft I wrote yesterday, but the general idea seems to appeal to some folks and it would be nice if this could be tested in a weekend Event or such like Erdknuffel said.

      I’m sure that this would change the way scenarios would be played a lot… most likely even to the good.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: