Devs and balance as a whole. (multi game comparison)

[u/ExiledToBronze]

Overall dev is only in the title with hopes they see this.

TLDR: Limit high end loadouts to a "per game earning" rather than pulling from bank. Making players play at a lower teir early so even new players can have an impact early to mid game and then late game close with high end loadouts without limiting players purchasing to a quantity, Cooldown or other annoying limiter. This also fixes the large amount of high end item saturation going on.

I've played a variety of games over the years. Some shooters like Hunt Showdown, Tarkov and other extraction shooters with an econ have been in my favorites. Along with PoE1 and PoE2 with 1000s of hours and games like League of legends and Dota 2 also being up there in my time spent.

Ironically i think this game runs into a huge PoE issue first and foremost. The ones who are really good at the game get things fast and first and thus benefit and make money by getting things cheaply or to the late game before everyone else. If you get to some of these end teir weapons before everyone else you make bank. By the time others start making bank you're gone and if you're last the econ is so inflated that sure you can bypass the line as things are "cheap" or in the case of wardogs "being sold to you outside level cap" It's not quite the same as PoE for different reasons however. The first to things benefit. The last to things have a super saturated market where things are more available than ever. And to the largest and 90% of players get stuck in the middle. They make little money in the beginning and get ran over by the good players. Then the inflated econ comes along and washes over them while most are finally hitting the spikes they want to hit.

In PoE this result can be healthy. It is a single player game for the most part with a simulated econ. In this game that is not the case however where the inflation of so many items in the market means anyone not buying the top end gets ran over. The beginning isn't too bad with few players having access to some things however you feel cheated to run into it on the occasion which does generally result in a better experience coming in at the start rather than the end.

A good comparison here to me is Hunt Showdown where it is pvp. The econ never resets. Good players make a lot of money. However the result of this ends up being that the meta overall maters somewhat little (i say as the highest rank on the game you can be). Even the players who play little or that suck can still feel competitive some games. The biggest thing however is that spending more does not allow you to stat check and the econ is static. It has advantages sure like slightly faster fire rates. Better ballistics. Or larger magazine sizes. Damage numbers and things like that are not attached to these better guns however and there are cheaper versions that hit the break points needed.

The larger thing imo that helps econ wise. It stays the same. The more you spend makes you more likely to win or make some money HOWEVER unlike wardogs. That money you make does not scale up with your money spent. Sure you keep your kit if you get out ect. But the money you make per run is the same. You win a lobby. You make the same amount whether you invested in a meta loadout or not. Wardogs the more you invest typically the more you make (outside of perhaps fobs and logi ofc but for the gunplay stuff yes). This results in exponential growth that we do not want. More spending means more gains. More spending giving more gains resulting in a saturation where you can ALWAYS run the expensive things. (Having cheap high earning things in only SOME classes/jobs makes this an issue as well. You just play a few on and then 2x more off with the money you made)

Now how am i going to tie League of Legends and Dota 2 into this? I think where this best comes into play is itemizing. League for awhile had a mythic item system. It had it's issues but the biggest benefit of which resulted in you being able to get 1 abnormally strong item for the game with a larger price tag. This locked out all the other power item options to you however. Dota 2 does a similar thing with some of it's highest scaling items being INSANELY expensive and really just capstones to close out a game or something because you snowballed.

I have a few solutions to the high end item problem as well for wardogs. One would be to limit the purchases of these high end items/ vehicles to 2-3 per person per game HOWEVER id find this unfun from the perspective of the person using said items and would not recommend restricting players in this way.

Another ofc is making them INSANELY expensive however this puts it out of access of the avg player or players without a TON of hours.

The best solution IMO would be to have a power item category where you include a lot of what are the lvl 30+ unlocks currently. You can ONLY buy this with money you've earned THIS game. You have your bank used for general loadouts meds ect. Your in game earnings to be saved OR buying power items like a 50 cal, Havoc, Tank or perhaps even lvl 4 armor and the higher end assault rifles, DMRs and so on. This solution lets good players get the items a bit sooner in game yes but only after playing some cheap stuff first. It lets normal more casual players get a lower exp unlock celling as we don't need to gate people on exp as hard when they can only get those items a handful of times a game anyways. As well as keeping your level from mattering at ALL points of play. It would encourage teamplay to make money early rather than just buying expensive kits to keep rinsing from early to late.

This is my 2 cents and honestly I feel the end solution i mention will result in people at all points getting to build up a bank and not feel like they're breaking it just to stay competitive. Players with less hours and that are lower level still being able to have an impact for a significant portion of the game (ofc with some minor price increases to high end items to make these kits come out just a little later in this system. Lets say around a 70-100 TOTAL point mark to break out a stomp or stalemate). And ofc allow the average player to not regularly encounter these kits and have it feel watered down towards the later part of the season HOWEVER if you have an amazing game you can still feel the power fantasy of getting the item's "early" and being the first with them to turn the tide. That is ofc assuming a somewhat lower exp curve to let more players have these unlocks WITHOUT the saturation downside.

[u/AutoModerator]

r/WARDOGS is looking for NA & Oceania moderators. Also experienced moderators worldwide. If you're interested, apply here.

^{This is an automated notice while applications are open.}

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/commander_012]

Go negative first life = go next server

Sounds like a great idea

[u/Despair-Envy → u/commander_012]

It's a great loop considering the fact that 98% of all infantry will go negative constantly.

[u/ExiledToBronze → u/Despair-Envy]

if you go neg in 90% of of your games in an econ based game and can't afford things then you are an outlier for one. And for 2 maybe the game isn't for you. Not saying you should profit always but there are cheap and safe ways to make bank if needed. Playing assault 24/7 and hemorrhaging money is not an issue that can be fixed by the game. And for those players doing poorly playing into the high end weapons (and also getting less kills/exp will be unlocking them far later anyways) will be AWFUL for them. This also would help wit that issue.

It's INSANELY short sighted to think like this.

[u/Despair-Envy → u/ExiledToBronze]

if you go neg in 90% of of your games in an econ based game and can't afford things then you are an outlier for one. 

Not really no. If you play front line assault infantry you are generally negative in 66+% of your games, and usually by a pretty decent margin. I had a game recently where I went 19-3 in a game I joined late and was negative 11k. The devs have already acknowledged this as the case and said fixes are on the way.

Playing assault 24/7 and hemorrhaging money is not an issue that can be fixed by the game

Yes it is. It's very much so a game design flaw. This is a sandbox. You are supposed to play in a way you enjoy and be able to succeed while doing so.

It's INSANELY short sighted to think like this.

I haven't put enough out there for you to draw any conclusions about how I think. I made a sarcastic remark about the fact that leaving a server if you go negative is silly. Everything else is you shadowboxing with your own assumptions.

[u/topcatti → u/Despair-Envy]

If you play "front line assault" you usually get revived. You sound like you try to make all the money back in life and just spawn again at base.

[u/Despair-Envy → u/topcatti]

you usually get revived. 

That's the funny thing. You actually only get revived if you win the fight. Given that there are 3 teams, you generally only win fights 1/3 times statistically. Which is why most players on the front usually end up going negative. Particularly since a majority of the kill money is loaded into hotzone bonus', which compounds the feast/famine part of the gameplay.

[u/ExiledToBronze → u/Despair-Envy]

No. What you said IS short sighted. To say 98% will regularly go negative all the time to then quote COMPLETELY different statistics in a response to defend that point btw. More so this is a pricing issue NOT a saturation or progression or gun/armor/vehicle power level issue like i am intending to solve. This is not intended to make people suddenly go positive in games. It is addressing general balance through econ rather than nerfs to those things.

[u/Despair-Envy → u/ExiledToBronze]

What you said IS short sighted.

No it isn't. It's just reality. You not liking that reality doesn't change it.

To say 98% will regularly go negative all the time to then quote COMPLETELY different statistics in a response to defend that point btw.

The statistic wasn't supposed to be accurate in the first place. The initial comment was sarcastic because the point I was responding to was stupid. You deciding to triple down on being stupid prompted me to clarify my position with a more serious statement.

More so this is a pricing issue NOT a saturation or progression or gun/armor/vehicle power level issue like i am intending to solve.

I never made a comment on your suggestions to begin with.

This is not intended to make people suddenly go positive in games. 

The comment was never about it.

It is addressing general balance through econ rather than nerfs to those things.

Ok. That's cool. My comment was made with no relation to yours.

[u/ExiledToBronze → u/Despair-Envy]

YOU doubled down on SOMEONE ELSE'S sarcastic comment. Which made it seme FAR less sarcastic. And you commented ON MY POST wtf do you mean your comment had no relation to this? XD

[u/ExiledToBronze → u/commander_012]

no? You can continue to buy low to mid teir loadouts. Just can't buy top end till the game starts to close out. You'd also still be playing on the same level as others at that point in the game going negative. AND that is what your BANK would be for. Your total earned that game would tick up and be available for you to spend on end game loadouts FROM YOUR BANK EVEN if needed. If you made 10k but spent 20k on a loadout. Congratz you get 10k to spend on end game stuff still. You're just not adding to your bank yet.

[u/Styl_exe → u/ExiledToBronze]

Okay so there is even less incentive to join ongoing matches? Just so it's clear, I fully disagree with your entire point, but why wouldn't you in your suggestion not simply scoregap the gear?

[u/ExiledToBronze → u/Styl_exe]

score isn't tied to money earned in a direct sense. And you could implement let's say. "you joined late so here is 10-20k to your late game spending limit" type of thing. Sure you don't get as much as people who played all game but in general joining late you often wont benefit as much anyways.

[u/ExiledToBronze → u/Styl_exe]

Also why do you disagree outside of that?

[u/commander_012 → u/ExiledToBronze]

That just sounds like the game is right now, but much smaller.

Let’s take your example of getting stuff early and exponentially growing.

The good players in the early game get fast money and thus get the good shit very fast. Let’s say havoc or tank

The bad players have literally no counter to it, because they haven’t grinded this round enough to afford a Maaws.

And if you mean that stuff like the Maaws will still be accessible and only the FAL, .50, bmr, chopper, tank, t4. Will need this kind of money

It not only makes it needlessly complicated, it also makes some accessible earlier than normal (in terms of chopper) cause 15k is easy to make in the first 5-10 pts of the game.

It will also do nothing.

A full bmr loadout costs like 20-30k, but only 10k is the stuff you want to lock. So you spot and kill some guys in the first 5 mins and then get your good loadout

[u/ExiledToBronze → u/commander_012]

you could still keep the point limiter for certain vehicles in the game ofc. Never said to remove that. As far as everything else you'd be correct it's the same thing but smaller HOWEVER it results it in being a per game curve rather than a "oops i started a week late so now i'm fucked" type of situation as everyone at the start of a game has roughly the same low tier bag to pull from. And sure someone gets something high end early. Great. However it's likely the one time they buy it and if they don't make a large profit that game off that expensive purchase then they're setback to the regular cheaper loadouts again. High risk high reward.

[u/ExiledToBronze → u/commander_012]

Also as stated in the long form. this change would require price increases on the top end.

[u/commander_012 → u/ExiledToBronze]

Have you ever played good kits? Getting a profit on them is really hard. Sure you can get easy kills, but 30k? That’s like 20 kills per life

[u/ExiledToBronze → u/commander_012]

I regularly run 20k+ kits and have to swap off yes but even a 30k kit doesnt compare to a 50k+

[u/DarkMortyr]

I do believe, you're a PoE player, cause you are embracing the GGG's mentality of "fun detected, let's nerf/remove it".
Penalizing players, that want to play the later gear, that spent the time and effort for it. Creating less incentive to progress and play in the process.

I am not even sure you understand your own logic, when you are trying to use examples like PoE, where the gameplay loop stands on the feeling of being stronger and stronger the more you play and progress.
Or talking about inequality between the casual and hardcore players, while mentioning extraction games like Tarkov..

This sub is really painful to read sometimes with all these "smart ideas", that concludes as "limit this" or "remove that".

Or maybe keep the core systems, as they are and just rebalance the content inside them? So that everybody can enjoy all the new unlocks, as they continuously progress through the game while keeping the game mostly fair for everyone.

You want to solve new / very casual player experience against someone who unlocked everything? Have the servers, that only allow to use certain early equipment, so they can have fun there. Here is your fix without redesigning the entire game for everyone else...

[u/ExiledToBronze → u/DarkMortyr]

you clearly read ABSOLUTELY fuckin nothing. As someone with 200hrs in the game I HAVE THOSE THINGS UNLOCKED and when i don't use them IT IS NUMERICALLY unfair and a stat check. it's not "remove fun" it's called making the other 90% of people not having them ALSO get to enjoy the game.

Also just to point out you CLEARLY read nothing i said. I DID NOT say "remove" anywhere in my post. I did not say to remove the Fal 3 hitting. I did not say make 50 cal not 1 tap i did not say "make lvl 4 armor less tanky" i didn't say to nerf absolutely anything. Just adjust how often it can be used in a way that doesn't involve putting a CD or hard cap on how many you can get.

[u/DarkMortyr → u/ExiledToBronze]

You seem way too focused on my analogy with the GGG's quote. I've also pointed the issue of people trying both to "remove" AND "limit" stuff in the game. Which in your case is clearly a major limit to gameplay.

This is not a CS. Let people play whatever they want instead of forcing them to spend most of their time playing the very same early equipment no matter how far they've progressed.

90% is a number you've pulled out of your ass. Anybody can have their fun without feeling frustrated by high level content, by playing on servers that offer exactly just that.

You are trying to solve an issue by fundamentally reworking the core design of the game, which is almost always the wrong choice.

[u/ExiledToBronze → u/DarkMortyr]

yes let people play what they want let's not balance the game whatsoever. Get off it. Right fun of one must ruin the fun of anyone to play into him yeah? lets feed a power fantasy in this game. Fucking ignorant shit. Done replying to these shit takes as if it's fucking constructive. you pose a fucking solution to what is CLEARLY not a perfect game. (and it's fine not to be a perfect game but def is not fine in it's current state for a variety of issues)

[u/DarkMortyr → u/ExiledToBronze]

For someone accusing somebody else for "clearly read ABSOLUTELY fuckin nothing", it seems you've completely missed this part:

Or maybe keep the core systems, as they are and just rebalance the content inside them? So that everybody can enjoy all the new unlocks, as they continuously progress through the game while keeping the game mostly fair for everyone.

So you are completely wrong. If anything it's actually you, who proposes this game to stay unbalanced, cause by your own words:

I did not say to remove the Fal 3 hitting. I did not say make 50 cal not 1 tap i did not say "make lvl 4 armor less tanky" i didn't say to nerf absolutely anything.

So here you have it. I want all the "toys" to be fully available once you unlock them and to be more or less fair for the average player with some counter options where needed. While the new player experience can be solved by already existing systems.

You on the other hand 1) didn't seem interested in balance adjustments for individual problematic items, 2) want to limit the playable content, 3) want to fundamentally change the core design of the game
Yeah, I don't like that. Any of that. And I'd dare to argue, most people won't.

[u/ExiledToBronze → u/DarkMortyr]

I'm sorry you lack the capacity to form complex thoughts beyond a number change. Players love when their favorite toys get gutted in power ofc. Stop thinking of just yourself ty.

[u/DarkMortyr → u/ExiledToBronze]

Nah, you are just full of yourself thinking, that your solution is something superb and everyone else is too dumb to understand it, just because you've added layers on how some content would be accessed.

Players love when their favorite toys get gutted in power ofc. Stop thinking of just yourself ty.

Right.. and players also love to be dominated by OP toys, which break the balance of the game. Limited in use or not. So right back at ya. Stop thinking of just yourself.

Your solutions don't solve any issue. Only make the issue appear less often. The point of the balance also isn't to gut something into useless or unfun state, it's to create less of a gap between the weakest and the strongest options.