|
|
Pros and Cons of the World at War
Last post 04-25-2008, 8:30 by Cam34. 49 replies.
-
04-21-2008, 11:51 |
-
moss500
-
-
-
Joined on 04-20-2008
-
-
Posts 3
-
-
|
Pros and Cons of the World at War
First off let me say that we had a lot of fun participating in the war. It was clear from the get go that a lot of thought was put into the gameplay and the organization as well. There were a few things I was unclear on, and just had a few suggestions for the future wars.
First off, it was a little unclear how the points were accumulated in the end. The Germans were in the lead at lunch time, yet their final score was only 8900 points. This means the high score for the first half was some number less than 8900. Well, as far as I could see, the second half played just like the first-with the Germans dominating. We pretty much owned the entire city for 70% of both games. We were walking around the city with little or no fear of being shot at-and I'm almost positive the German flag was never dropped. It seemed clear to us near the end of the game that we had either won, or taken a close second place-yet we were in last place. It was very confusing to most of the German players how this was possible. We had nearly every flag in the city up for most of the game. The Japanese were pinned in their spawn for the last half of the first game, and their flag was even dropped by a spy-yet they took first place...
We were also a little confused on how the points scored in the 2nd half were drastically greater than the points scored in the 1st half. The Germans were leading at lunch with a score of around 5000 or so. What did the Japanese do in the second half to score over 40,000 points? Considering they were allied with the Germans during the second game, we were quite puzzled on how they scored 40,000 some points, and the Germans scored virtually none. Was it gold?
If I were to make a few changes, it would be that the point system should be weighed more towards who controls the city, the center flag, and the surrounding flags. That should be what earns the most points, not the gold. After all, this is paintball. The game should go to the team that wins battles.
I saw some complaints about people cheating-but that's to be expected. Honestly, I think the refs did a pretty good job considering the massive amount of people there were to monitor. There's only so much that can be done when you have that many people playing at once.
One big change I would make would be the arm-bands. There was almost no way to tell any enemy from a friend at a glance. The arm bands were not only very small, but worn in different places. You had to look over the players whole body to find their band. I would have GLADLY paid an extra few bucks to have each player equipped with a nice and big velcro band on each arm.
I think making the game a tad more simple would do wonders for gameplay. Possibly eliminating gold and negotiators would help. I would keep the mercenaries but change the way they're obtained. For instance, each team could have the mercenaries for a total of 10 minutes once every hour. Also, the briefing was nice-but a better explanation of the points system would have helped greatly. Clearly there was some confusion about the most optimal way to score points when there was a gap of 35,000 points between 1st and 4th place :)
Other than a few minor changes I think it's run pretty good and we all look forward to coming back in the future.
|
|
-
-
04-21-2008, 12:13 |
-
bpoydence
-
-

-
Joined on 03-08-2007
-
Indiana
-
Posts 325
-
-
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the World at War
From my perspective as a Jap, I would really have to say it was the gold. In the second game I was part of the Jap force that got to the city almost immediatly along with the Germans. The first thing I noticed was that the Germans were putting flags up and holding the perimiter but I didn't see ANY picking up gold. I gave my gun to a kid on my side and went to work. No exageration, I picked up 2 big rocks of gold and a TON of bricks. It had to be at least 30. I just kept delivering them to some guys waiting just outside the city and they relayed it home. Put it this way, I only played about 2/3 of the last game since I was so tired from hauling all the gold.
This is one thing I have noticed in many scenario games. Most players go out and trade shots, they don't pay any attention (or at least very little) to the objective at hand. The Germans did a great job taking control of the city, but they really squandered the opportunity (in my opinion). I saw the priorities as this, 1. Gold, 2. Flags, 3. Enemy Suppression. Reason being, the gold was worth straight points, I forget how much the huge "nuggets" I recovered were worth but I know each brick was worth 250 points. If you do the math, picking up 2 250 point bricks was worth more then holding the center flag for an entire 20 minutes (if I remember correctly).
I really liked the setup, the only thing I would have liked to see is the flags worth a bit more point wise and for there to be some small missions mixed in (not a lot due to the chaos that can happen). Keep it simple like you did, but do add a small bit of variety.
In the end though, hats off to ARC, that was definatly in the top 5 games I've ever been to!
Sorry for the bad spelling, no firefox at work!
Captain of Total Resistance. http://www.trpb.net Sponsored by Mission Masters. http://www.missionmasters.com
|
|
-
-
04-21-2008, 12:30 |
-
Blackcellsniper15
-
-

-
Joined on 04-15-2008
-
Athens, Ohio
-
Posts 14
-
-
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the World at War
I was a little confused on how the points worked out too. I would really like to see a break-down of the scores to see how it all worked out...
Some of you might know me from SpecOps, blackcelldrumr15
|
|
-
04-21-2008, 12:39 |
-
04-21-2008, 12:56 |
-
Ivan
-
-

-
Joined on 09-28-2006
-
Youngstown, OH
-
Posts 1,021
-
-
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the World at War
Ok, I will be writing up the full de-briefing much like we did for TET. It isn't done, yet... It isn't started yet, sorry but I have some real work I have to do early this week before I can get to that. It is coming soon. Admittedly we did not have the entire scoring and valuation system figured out with enough time to post it online, etc. Here is a short version until I can do more: USA JAPAN BRITAIN GERMANY Morning 600 900 200 2400 Afternoon 1300 2700 0 3200 FLAG TOTALS (including deductions for getting your flag pulled) 1,900 3,600 200 5,600 Everyone was told that gold will be converted to points at the end of the game. GOLD 29,500 46,000 24,000 6,500 USA JAPAN BRITAIN GERMANYTOTALS 31,400 49,600 24,200 12,100 These numbers are different from what was announced the day of, and I humble apologize for my poor math. I missed a couple of things in translating all the data from the different score sheets in use. Again this was my fault. The Winner remains the same (thank god) 2nd and 3rd switch places, and germany was given the point they earned in the second half (I don't know how that happened). Sorry, It was a long day and I was drained. Ivan
不要忘记您的毛巾 - They call me Ivan Who Dares Wins "I've Got Shomting for You"  ivan at arctrooperspaintball dot com
|
|
-
04-21-2008, 13:51 |
-
Raider
-
-

-
Joined on 02-16-2007
-
Painesville
-
Posts 307
-
-
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the World at War
moss500:First off let me say that we had a lot of fun participating in the war. It was clear from the get go that a lot of thought was put into the gameplay and the organization as well. There were a few things I was unclear on, and just had a few suggestions for the future wars.
First off, it was a little unclear how the points were accumulated in the end. The Germans were in the lead at lunch time, yet their final score was only 8900 points. This means the high score for the first half was some number less than 8900. Well, as far as I could see, the second half played just like the first-with the Germans dominating. We pretty much owned the entire city for 70% of both games. We were walking around the city with little or no fear of being shot at-and I'm almost positive the German flag was never dropped. It seemed clear to us near the end of the game that we had either won, or taken a close second place-yet we were in last place. It was very confusing to most of the German players how this was possible. We had nearly every flag in the city up for most of the game. The Japanese were pinned in their spawn for the last half of the first game, and their flag was even dropped by a spy-yet they took first place...
We were also a little confused on how the points scored in the 2nd half were drastically greater than the points scored in the 1st half. The Germans were leading at lunch with a score of around 5000 or so. What did the Japanese do in the second half to score over 40,000 points? Considering they were allied with the Germans during the second game, we were quite puzzled on how they scored 40,000 some points, and the Germans scored virtually none. Was it gold?
If I were to make a few changes, it would be that the point system should be weighed more towards who controls the city, the center flag, and the surrounding flags. That should be what earns the most points, not the gold. After all, this is paintball. The game should go to the team that wins battles.
I saw some complaints about people cheating-but that's to be expected. Honestly, I think the refs did a pretty good job considering the massive amount of people there were to monitor. There's only so much that can be done when you have that many people playing at once.
One big change I would make would be the arm-bands. There was almost no way to tell any enemy from a friend at a glance. The arm bands were not only very small, but worn in different places. You had to look over the players whole body to find their band. I would have GLADLY paid an extra few bucks to have each player equipped with a nice and big velcro band on each arm.
I think making the game a tad more simple would do wonders for gameplay. Possibly eliminating gold and negotiators would help. I would keep the mercenaries but change the way they're obtained. For instance, each team could have the mercenaries for a total of 10 minutes once every hour. Also, the briefing was nice-but a better explanation of the points system would have helped greatly. Clearly there was some confusion about the most optimal way to score points when there was a gap of 35,000 points between 1st and 4th place :)
Other than a few minor changes I think it's run pretty good and we all look forward to coming back in the future.
LOL you owned the city sure, however did it ever occur to you that U did not own your own flag for the majority of that game :). Me, Nathan and a brit spy snuck around and put it down. After we got the one guy out he never came back? The only other guy who saw us was out. We left and he came back, put up the flag and left. Then we went back and just droped it again. And i liked those armbands bunches, thought they were easy to see, But i would like one on each arm for everybody.
WWJDFTW?
|
|
-
-
04-21-2008, 13:54 |
-
Hannibal
-
-

-
Joined on 02-25-2007
-
Massillon, Ohio
-
Posts 456
-
-
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the World at War
AH, a respectable 2nd place. Much better. I know TGE feels much more justified in not spending our "gold" now.
"Where the f*** are my KEYS!!! Has anyone seen my keys?!?!" 1st Strike Paintball
|
|
-
04-21-2008, 14:04 |
-
TheScarecrow
-
-

-
Joined on 08-13-2007
-
-
Posts 214
-
-
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the World at War
moss500:
I think making the game a tad more simple would do wonders for game play. Possibly eliminating gold and negotiators would help. I would keep the mercenaries but change the way they're obtained. For instance, each team could have the mercenaries for a total of 10 minutes once every hour.
So by simple you mean boring? Lets take these four teams....and see which one has the most players left. wow! action packed day huh. Adding things like gold, supply crates or whatever, and adding various changing objectives keeps everything exciting and hopefully very stressful. The negotiators and the black market was a really good idea. the way the mercenaries are obtained is simple, just like anything else you could get in the black market (I had no involvement with it so i don't everything that was available); you trade off points for something that can really help you out. I'm not thinking this one through all the way, I'm sure there are good uses if you use your head, but why would you only get the mercenaries for ten minutes. Boohoo if one team get them more than some others (I'm pretty sure my team didn't get them at all), they made their sacrifice in points for the time.
*rustling leaves* ...boo! "We are the Japanese, and we'll put the HELL in hello kitty, shithead"
|
|
-
-
04-21-2008, 14:27 |
-
Chappy
-
-

-
Joined on 09-28-2006
-
Fowler Ohio
-
Posts 1,835
-
-
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the World at War
You guys should have paid more attention.....I said it at the Tune Up, I said it in the 13th demi journal, i said it during the briefing....
IT'S ALL ABOUT THE GOLD.
And as for simple...you obviously weren't around for our last scenario the TET Offensive....if you want to compare the to, the WAW was like putting a band-aid on a cut and TET was somewhere between a heart transplant and brain surgery. I think we dumbed down the WAW about as best as we could without making it a single elimination- your hit and done for the day game lol.
As for the Arm Bands...eh, i was much happier with them this time then the TET game, you could actually tell the colors apart, we probably do need to arrange some kind of standard placing on it for next time though. Then again maybe we'll try the Colored Duct tape like they did at blanding.
 KamaKazi, Order of Lenon, 2 Reichtstag Crosses. I swear..... if im on the field and get hit with bong water... -Hannibal we ARE a community of quasi-militant, mock-combat junkies. Chappy at Arctrooperspaintball dot com
|
|
-
04-21-2008, 14:30 |
-
moss500
-
-
-
Joined on 04-20-2008
-
-
Posts 3
-
-
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the World at War
I disagree with what the scarecrow said.
Since the gold was worth an abundant amount of points, the winning team could
have won without winning a single battle, or hardly even firing a shot.
The flags basically meant absolutely nothing considering the gold was worth so
much more. The Germans, Americans or British could have captured the main
flag of every single team, BOTH games, and wouldn't have even come close to
winning because the gold was worth so much money. Does that make much sense?
After seeing how much the gold was worth, only a complete fool would ever spend
gold on mercenaries. The mercenaries are helpful for winning battles and
taking flags, which means absolutely nothing when you look at where the
majority of points come from-gold. Buying mercenaries is essentially
throwing away points because you have to give up gold for mercs. It's
like trading a 100 bill for a 20 dollar bill.
I think the gold pretty much threw the entire game off balance. It was
worth too much, and much too easy to obtain. You could capture enough
gold to win the game and not win a single battle at the same time.
From a tactical standpoint, there's no point in even trying to capture any
flags or even win battles because you should just walk around picking up gold.
If the gold were to be used again, there are much better ways to use it.
For instance, each team could have gold bricks painted their team color, and
this gold would be placed near an enemies base-this way battles MUST be won to
get the gold. This would balance the gameplay much better. It
would make sense to buy mercenaries-because they help win battles, and winning
battles would mean you could acquire the gold that was near the enemies
base.
At the end of the day I could care less who wins, I came out to have fun.
If you look at the points minus the gold, the Germans dominated the game-which
is why many of us were surprised we lost. From my perspective and many
others I spoke to, the point system could be made much simpler, and the gold
concept should really be re-thought.
|
|
-
04-21-2008, 14:31 |
-
The Great Equalizer
-
-

-
Joined on 10-10-2006
-
Brimfield, OH
-
Posts 600
-
-
|
Re: Pros and Cons of the World at War
Honestly, I think the only people (for the most part) who really care about the points are the generals, and only because it helps their ego. In a day or so, points and places will be forgotten but the stories will still be going on. Looking back over the few years I've been going to Battlefront, I couldn't tell you how many times I was on the winning or losing side unless 1st Strike played a particular leadership role during a game. What I can tell you (at great length), is about all the fun I've had at this field, the friends I've made and the stories I now have to share.
Sure I'm happy to see our team bumped up to 2nd place... but at the end of the day, I think I'm really the only one who cares. (Except perhaps Hannibal). The team played really hard against 3 other very good teams and frankly I think everyone knew that and had a really good time, regardless of where we fell in the rankings.
 Nobel Peace Prize, Golden Globe nominee and 2 time winner of the Cy Young Award 1st Strike Paintball
|
|
Page 1 of 4 (50 items)
1
|
|