The Third Empire - Page 2

CutterJohn · 2011-02-13, 09:19 PM

Originally Posted by TRex

You watch the pops in current planetside , fridays usually NC pop jumps to 40% , then by sunday it might have swapped to tr and so on.

This can be easily solved with a more intelligent mechanic for swapping teams, by restricting swapping to the overpopulated empire, and giving a bonus for swapping to an underpopulated one. You wouldn't even need punitive timers then.

I would prefer the freedom to play on whichever team I wished. I have made plenty of friends from the other team, people I killed, or who killed me, and we got to talking. I would frequently switch to that side and play with them.

Hamma · 2011-02-13, 09:55 PM

Very good point on the empire switching. As soon as that was allowed it changed the entire dynamic of the game. There need to be much heavier restrictions on it or it needs to be disallowed in my opinion.

Tool · 2011-02-13, 10:10 PM

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

This can be easily solved with a more intelligent mechanic for swapping teams, by restricting swapping to the overpopulated empire, and giving a bonus for swapping to an underpopulated one. You wouldn't even need punitive timers then.

I would prefer the freedom to play on whichever team I wished. I have made plenty of friends from the other team, people I killed, or who killed me, and we got to talking. I would frequently switch to that side and play with them.

However there are those players who choose to play one empire exclusively and would be possibly punished or unable to play their chosen empire if it's currently the most populated.

But I do understand and share the desire to play on different empires, sometimes on one server. The most logical and least detrimental is going back to one empire per server, it may not be the best solution but it seems to be the most balanced of choices.

Sifer2 · 2011-02-13, 10:51 PM

I see some others have already beat me to it mentioning DAOC. What they say is correct. When it comes to PvP focused MMO's you want at least 3 factions not just 2.

The reason for that is because when its only 2 inevitably one gains the upper hand and a mass exodus occurs of people jumping to the winning side an its a huge zerg an ruins the game. You can see this happen time an time again in any 2 faction MMO that had PvP.

3 However creates a strange system of balance where by if one faction is starting to gain too much ground the other 2 decide to gang up on it. Rather than just feeling like they can't win an switching sides. So no removing the 3rd Empire would be very bad for Planetside IMO an would result in one Empire being pushed back to Sanctuary on like every server from lack of manpower.

Truth is if in real life it was that Black an White with only two countries fighting for control of Earth. One or the other would have won long ago.

CutterJohn · 2011-02-13, 10:52 PM

Originally Posted by Tool

However there are those players who choose to play one empire exclusively and would be possibly punished or unable to play their chosen empire if it's currently the most populated.

There is no possibility that those people would be punished because they aren't swapping. They would simply log in as per normal.

Example. Assume VS has a 45% population.

VS player logs in. Logs in just fine.
NC player logs in. Attempts to switch to VS. The game chastises him and prevents him from switching.
VS player logs in. Attempts to switch to NC. The game thanks him and sends him there.

[/quote]But I do understand and share the desire to play on different empires, sometimes on one server. The most logical and least detrimental is going back to one empire per server, it may not be the best solution but it seems to be the most balanced of choices.[/QUOTE]

One empire per server is more detrimental, as you no longer have a mechanism to affect short term population imbalances, and the strategy for long term population imbalance is depending on new players(yay, your reinforcements are a bunch of scrubs), or players deleting their current characters(generally unlikely).

The one and only reason it was bad was because of poor implementation. Players could switch to any team, no issues. Meaning if one side had 60%, the other two sides could and would bail and switch to the overpopulated empire to avoid being farmed. Get rid of that ability and it no longer has any downsides. Promote the hell out of the overpopulated side switching teams, and you have an active method for keeping populations balanced.

Sifer2 · 2011-02-13, 11:00 PM

Even if they create a mechanic like that though to encourage you to jump to the underpopulated side an not allow you to join the overpopulated one. Is that what we really want? For the game to just be a side switching fest? I mean it happened eventually to the original but that was more due to lack of players overall.

I think the idea of faction loyalty an going with the more natural counter to the Zerg in the form of 3 empires is preferable. At least to me anyway. I would rather they go that way an limit faction switching severely like in early Planetside. An if we have lack of players again they can just implement side switching. But hopefully Next is more successful.

Tool · 2011-02-13, 11:01 PM

I see what you mean, I was thinking you meant changing empires at any time but what you said makes sense. Perhaps part of the issue stems from seemingly broad empire imbalances. It's obvious certain empire weapons excel in their respective areas and in an FPS or any game for that matter, players will tend to choose the best option.

So, if empires were relatively the same with regards to performance rather than operation, people wouldn't really feel the need to change empires or choose the one that has the best tool pertaining to their chosen playstyle?

Grimster · 2011-02-14, 03:12 AM

I agree with Sifer2. I enjoy the faction loyalty you had back in the old days. I get it why you are allowed to have characters on several factions due to that you only have one server nowadays. But I think we can assume that when the Planetside sequel arrives we will at least see three servers. One european and two american one for the west and one for the east.

I played 95% of my time as NC on Werner but when I wanted a change of scenery I usually logged on to one of my VS alts on Emerald which worked fine for me even though I am located in Sweden. Sure I had higher ping but it sill was very playable for me.

So in my opinion having characters on several factions on the same server should be prohibited and I hope it will be.

CutterJohn · 2011-02-14, 04:43 AM

Originally Posted by Sifer2

I think the idea of faction loyalty an going with the more natural counter to the Zerg in the form of 3 empires is preferable. At least to me anyway. I would rather they go that way an limit faction switching severely like in early Planetside. An if we have lack of players again they can just implement side switching. But hopefully Next is more successful.

Its a game. I can't feel loyalty for any of it because its all fiction, and irrelevant to gameplay anyway. Sure, I have a favorite, but it was just a favored set of equipment. There was nothing else to be loyal too. Just a color, a small blurb of RP, and a few weapons. Your contributions weren't even permanent.

So no. I feel no loyalty, and think the concept is quite silly. Being forced to stick to one empire on a server won't make me appreciate it, just obligated to abide by the rule for lack of any other options. Sure, I will have loyalty to friends, and want to play with them, but like any fps, playing with them is oftentimes playing against them.

In other words, its like being loyal to Red over Blue in TF2. Fine for a forum gag, but pointless in game.

Originally Posted by Tool

So, if empires were relatively the same with regards to performance rather than operation, people wouldn't really feel the need to change empires or choose the one that has the best tool pertaining to their chosen playstyle?

Sure, that would be fine and lead to more balanced populations. Try convincing people that the empires should be more equivalent though.

I'd be for it, because a game can be perfectly fun even when everyone has the same weapons, but for some people its a huge part of what made PS great for them.

I SandRock · 2011-02-14, 05:57 AM

Originally Posted by Grimster

I agree with Sifer2. I enjoy the faction loyalty you had back in the old days. I get it why you are allowed to have characters on several factions due to that you only have one server nowadays. But I think we can assume that when the Planetside sequel arrives we will at least see three servers. One european and two american one for the west and one for the east.

I played 95% of my time as NC on Werner but when I wanted a change of scenery I usually logged on to one of my VS alts on Emerald which worked fine for me even though I am located in Sweden. Sure I had higher ping but it sill was very playable for me.

So in my opinion having characters on several factions on the same server should be prohibited and I hope it will be.

Originally Posted by Hamma

Very good point on the empire switching. As soon as that was allowed it changed the entire dynamic of the game. There need to be much heavier restrictions on it or it needs to be disallowed in my opinion.

Agreed on all counts. It also opens up the possibility of exploiting. Farming kills etc. + Spying.

Once you login to your character on one side it should start a cooldown that lasts 3 days. That means you have to play on the empire for 3 days before you can switch. And if you do switch, you have to play on that side for 3 days.
No cross-empire communication

Preferably no empire switching at all on the same server if it was up to me.

Grimster · 2011-02-14, 06:09 AM

no cross-empire communication?

I always liked that. I would just settle for simply not allowing playing on more than one faction on a server. I always enjoyed when you nail someone and they start bitching at you over /tell

Or last week when I got ambushed by 4-5 TR Reavers(at least it felt like 4-5 Reavers) in my AA Max and I managed to take one of the Reavers down with me in flames which happened to be Tigersmith. I had to at least say hi.

Tool · 2011-02-14, 06:25 AM

Perhaps then there should be more and better incentives for playing a single empire instead of jumping ship whenever odds are not in your favor. The current ones don't get the job done and what else could be in their place, I don't know.

Come to think of it, MAG has some type of veteran system in which players could change factions after they obtained a certain, if not max level. In which I think they'd start from scratch. I'll have to read up on that but it's not a terrible idea if it's only allowed one character per server.

I SandRock · 2011-02-14, 06:26 AM

Originally Posted by Grimster

no cross-empire communication?

I always liked that. I would just settle for simply not allowing playing on more than one faction on a server. I always enjoyed when you nail someone and they start bitching at you over /tell

Or last week when I got ambushed by 4-5 TR Reavers(at least it felt like 4-5 Reavers) in my AA Max and I managed to take one of the Reavers down with me in flames which happened to be Tigersmith. I had to at least say hi.

Well if you can only play on one side cross-empire comm is probably ok. It's just that if you do allow people to play on both sides in any form or another I'd prefer not to see cross-empire comms. It makes it too easy for say a TR alt playing on NC to relay certain surprise attacks to one of their TR buddies. You can still do this if you have each other on MSN or steam but at least it makes it a little harder

CutterJohn · 2011-02-14, 07:42 AM

In what way would empire switching be detrimental to the game if there were limits in place to prevent switching to an overpopulated empire? Please be specific.

I SandRock · 2011-02-14, 08:16 AM

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

In what way would empire switching be detrimental to the game if there were limits in place to prevent switching to an overpopulated empire? Please be specific.

Kill farming. Population could still switch constantly between the 2 non overpopulated ones. Spying. Tactics are hard to keep unique. Let's say an outfit has a specific tactic and one of their members loves to switch sides constantly... he can then tell those tactics to his other empire faction and they'll know exactly how that outfit operates.

What's the problem with a 3-day cooldown? Make up your mind what faction you want to play with :P

The whole "BARNEYS ARE LAME!" "NC ARE OP!" "TR ARE SHIT" is cool. You need a sense of faction and enemy. Everyone being all merry and happy and cheerful hopping around hand in hand in the playground just ain't what a PvP game should foster :P

But I wouldn't mind different ruleset server if the population can support it. One where you can switch faction as you like and one where you can't.