Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
omoplata

Giving Players More To Lose If They Die, Thus Making Them Behave Like Real People.

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

So, even though PR is very realistic, people would still take in game risks that they probably wouldn't take in real life.

 

To make them behave more like real people, I suggest giving players more to lose if they sacrifice their lives.

 

Such as experience points. The more you play (or win), the more points you get, and you become a more effective soldier. For example, your firing may becomes more accurate, you have more sprint, etc. Maybe certain kits and positions are available only to people who have a certain number of experience points. If two players want the same kit, or a certain position, the player with the most experience points gets it.

 

If you die, your experience points go down, or go to zero and you have to start all over again.

 

I understand that this is a big step, since this might affect gameplay significantly. So the devs can give servers the option to implement the experince point system or not.

 

What do you guys think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is one problem with all of these kind of get something after plyaing long enough (no matter if there is "minus" points counted or not). The Problem is that the "veterans" of the game do develop a huge upperhand compared to those who play really irregularly or are new (or even those who just aren't good at it). Now it might first sound good and something that should be natural, but in the end the players who play the game more than other have already huge upperhand they know the mechanics inside out, they know the effective ranges of weapons and what work to where and most importantly they know the maps.

 

Now when you add something gear related bonuses to that equation you can see how super unfair situation it would be to play against a bunch of game veterans if you yourself just started to play the game. Why to give more upperhand to player that already is playing good/really good? (+ sometimes even to decrease the joy to play by introducing something that makes it easier and hence more boring?)

 

If this were something like field upgrade in BF franchise even BIGGER NO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This does not seem appropriate for Squad.

It's a mil-sim FPS where your shots should be as good as you are (plus maybe some effect to simulate lack of accuracy after a long sprint, etc.).

But please, no EXP based modifiers. It will lead to frustration for many people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I agree that there should be a focus on realistic play, maybe instead of the focus on an XP penalty, there should be a penalty for not following the ROE's of the squad leader? Maybe it takes you longer to get a kit or something for not following orders? Just spit-balling!

Six

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeesh everytime someone suggests something about experience points this community just takes a collective shit. not saying i dont also feel like taking part of that shit, but im gonna be constructive rather than saying no so here goes: how about experience points are only relative to each individual round. that is, whenever a new round starts your experience points are wiped to zero, the benefits of experience would still need to be ironed out since i dont think your deviation/sway/stamina should increase like an rpg game. But i do like the ability or ease of  requesting equipment/kits depending on "xp" points as per OP. 

 

For example: 

Start of round people can select/request all or almost all equipment. then once you spawn your kit selection depends on your experience points level. This would require a sophisticated xp system so people who are doing good things for their team and not just necessarily killing a bunch of people can still be rewarded with equipment they need.

 

Example 2: xp points are cumulative for your squad or even team, squadmates will get/lose points for doing certain things and the SL allocates equipment to squad mates by spending XP in the "XP pool" for his squad. requires possibly more out of a squad leader(making FT leader more important role possibly?). Can be translated up to commander to possibly even 'order' more assets or intel?? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the point of playing a public match is to win it, giving players incentives outside winning the match will take away from the overall goal of the game. Death should only affect the outcome of the game itself, meaning that it's avoided only to try and win the game. Otherwise, you'll get silly situations where a player will refuse to make an endgame push because they don't want to to lose their favourite outfit or something.

 

To have a proper teamgame every teammate has to be working towards the same goal, if you give them conflicting interests, you destroy teamwork. Ways to get players to avoid death is to lengthen respawn timers or up the ticket cost of dying, or reward the enemy for getting kills.

 

I dont know how many people here have played games like DOTA or Smite. In those games, you're rewarded with experience and gold everytime you kill an enemy player. Experience means levels which means you get stronger, and gold buys items that make you stronger. So to die a lot to the enemy ensures a loss, not only because it forfeits territory for a period of time due to spawn delay, but also makes the enemy stronger.

 

This mechanic highly discourages players from dying, to the point where it is a very common tactic to sacrifice yourself by "zoning" or distracting the enemy to save the rest of your team, running like hell from a fight when you know it's being lost, or salvaging what you have left and retreating. In PR it's rare to do these kinds of things, usually the whole squad dies when they get in trouble, and they will try everything to revive their teammates rather then retreat. This is because territory/position is WAY more valuable than a life in the game.

 

Although the enemy IS rewarded whne they get a kill by chipping off tickets, it only LINEARLY contributes to a victory. If the enemy is rewarded a lot for getting kills, in a "snowballing" effect, then every time you die, the enemy gets stronger, making it harder to make a comeback. No matter what, the enemy on Kashan is always going to have their three tanks on respawn, two gets, three APCs, etc. What happens if you dying gives them more jets and tanks? You REALLY dont want to die.

 

to summarize: rank/unlock systems are an awful way to try and shape player behavior because they make conflicting interests that undermind teamwork, and rewarding the enemy for getting kills is a very good way to make players fear death.

 

It's "unrealistic", but it MIGHT MIGHT be worth considering testing a game mode that gives the enemy points for kills, which contributes to the amount of assets the enemy can buy, or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "PR-formula" works for this already?

 

  • Your death equals a ticket-loss for your team.
  • Your re-spawn options are limited (in numbers and places)  and hard to set-up or need to be defended.
  • You have an increasing timer for every death.

 

The re-spawn logistics seem to be the crucial point here. You can`t contribute to the fight if you can`t get there. Thus you being alive and fighting is important.

 

Maybe this can be further improved nevertheless?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I would like to see is maybe a score list.

Say you get X amount of ponts for every kill or death:

Kill: +3

Kill Assist: +1

Death: -4

Vehicle Kill: +8

Vehicle Death: -10

Flag Neutralize: +1

Flag Cap: +2

 

But dont give it any perks (not even a gold star)

Maybe just as an objective way of seeing how well someone plays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I would like to see is maybe a score list.

Say you get X amount of ponts for every kill or death:

Kill: +3

Kill Assist: +1

Death: -4

Vehicle Kill: +8

Vehicle Death: -10

Flag Neutralize: +1

Flag Cap: +2

But dont give it any perks (not even a gold star)

Maybe just as an objective way of seeing how well someone plays.

Not good.

People will begin to focus more on killing and less on squad objective.

I think in a game like Squad scores for kills should be really small. Instead fulfilling objectives and playing your part should gain you a lot more. It's probably tricky to implwment an algorithm that works but might be worth the effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not good.

People will begin to focus more on killing and less on squad objective.

I think in a game like Squad scores for kills should be really small. Instead fulfilling objectives and playing your part should gain you a lot more. It's probably tricky to implwment an algorithm that works but might be worth the effort.

Thats a good point. But it would be difficult to figure out how to do that that represents how well you are doing in matches. For example I can play as medic and not cap a single flag or kill an enemy, but still get first place. Although I understand how that works, it isnt very fair as my participation in a game is limited.

I think the algorthms wouldn't be too hard, but balancing them just right could take some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a good point. But it would be difficult to figure out how to do that that represents how well you are doing in matches. For example I can play as medic and not cap a single flag or kill an enemy, but still get first place. Although I understand how that works, it isnt very fair as my participation in a game is limited.

I think the algorthms wouldn't be too hard, but balancing them just right could take some time.

In the example you gave (and if i understood correctly) if you were a good medic, always there with your squad, reviving and healing them, then you are entitled to first place.

I usually play in PR as a medic because I suck at shooting (and driving and flying) and I always make it on the scoreboard, usually in top 10. Squad needs to reward support roles as much as fighting ones. PR does it to some extent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the example you gave (and if i understood correctly) if you were a good medic, always there with your squad, reviving and healing them, then you are entitled to first place.

I usually play in PR as a medic because I suck at shooting (and driving and flying) and I always make it on the scoreboard, usually in top 10. Squad needs to reward support roles as much as fighting ones. PR does it to some extent.

nah. Sometimes I am on a role, but the time I was thinking about I was just in a house treating my fellow tali like dogs and sending them back out to die. I just happend to have a good position for them to fall back to and still mantain control. Not very tactical, but at least it was something (even if it was insurgency)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We use a fairly complicated scoring system with our wargaming as a group. Factions, human units and AI are all scored. This helps build the wargaming world and decide which factions/units are getting stronger or weaker.

But I'm not sure if scoring in Squad would be a good idea, because really its more a cross between fun and realism. Simple scoring could work, more heavy in-depth scoring, although adds to the realistic feel for a prolonged game, would be far too time consuming in squad.

Some of what has been mentioned about spawning times sounds quick and o.k. When I come out of our group play and into Squad, I hope it will be a little more fun based, with some realism. But not too hard core like our group play, which I love, but you do need a break from it, every now and then.

 

Its how realistic players want it really, I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree with the OP's intent, but I do'nt see this as a good way to go about it. If all you're going to lose by dying is your position on the map + the respawn time + however long it takes to get into another fight (and maybe your special kit), people will be a lot more careless. I've discussed this plenty but the only solutions that I've seen working are A) no/extremely limited respawns and B) simulating behaviour in the player's character instead of the player themself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoe about more chance to become instantly "dead-dead" for example by taking a .50 to them head from 50 meters or a high explosive shell which impacts right next to you. This gives more realism to the game and people will behalve more carefull and this also gives a good transition with them blood and gore discussed about on this forum. Since you can now actually have torn off limbs on a personen when a shell hits them which also is more clear to see for the medics who is Alice and not. Good idea? To me this seems for the best solution since everyone in PR automatically assumes they will first get wounded before they die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoe about more chance to become instantly "dead-dead" for example by taking a .50 to them head from 50 meters or a high explosive shell which impacts right next to you. This gives more realism to the game and people will behalve more carefull and this also gives a good transition with them blood and gore discussed about on this forum. Since you can now actually have torn off limbs on a personen when a shell hits them which also is more clear to see for the medics who is Alice and not. Good idea? To me this seems for the best solution since everyone in PR automatically assumes they will first get wounded before they die.

I say that Headshot with any gun (Pistols, assault rifles and so forth) with one bullet is instant permanent (respawn) death with or without helmet (keep your head down + proned fellow shot straight ahead is more vulnerable this way like should be as the bullet travels whole way through your body making severe damage).

 

7.62 NATO / 7.62 Russian OHK (revivable to 100%), inside 200 meters with center of torso hit.

 

5.56 NATO / 7.62x39mm three bullets in center of torso is kill (40 hp per hit)(revivable to 100%) inside 200 meters and so forth (Body armor and bullet choice varies this).

 

With .50 BMG / Soviet equivalent / .338 LAPUA Magnum sniper guns if there is such - 1 hit kill everything under 1500 meters, but with revivable with medic, maybe not to full health as regular battlerifles and so on.

 

Melee blades one hit permanent (respawn) kill or two hit permanent kill, without any grap and knife take dogdags odditity :)

 

Nice and ruthless.

 

For revivable state there is that 20..30% or so extra life that can't be damaged in certain usual weapons (basic rifless) unles hit to head. For .50 cals etc. they have certain damage to that area so if the medic revives the player have permanent loss in that area and can't have 100% health. Maybe even so that the normal weapons eats that extra life, but allows one or two revives to 100% so the medics have job to do and there actually is big role them to keep the things going (Yep, one HC medic informs to duty ;) ).

 

PS. The more you give penalty to shooter in form of deviation, recoil, randomness etc. the more careless people are under fire since the certainty to be hit is lover, someone shooting a meter off constantly opens the door to counter play. It's all about balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×