Stabilis -> RE: =ED= Balance Discussion Thread (3/6/2012 18:37:49)
|
@ND Mallet, quote:
The problem with a voting system is that the OPd will want to be OPd and will vote against it. And if people had the option to not get nerfed, then people would take it no doubt at all. The pride of selfishness. How will I be able to handle that? Hmm... Options: i) Allow only a balanced number of players from each class (10 Mercenaries, 10 Tech Mages, etc etc) to participate in the voting, the UN is made up of groups in collective agreements, such as Canada normally supporting the U.S.A., or China normally supporting Russia, there is no definite sovereignty to oppose each and every motive, groups have different opinions from each other. In this way majorities or sovereigns do not mass control the system. ii) Sacrifice. Take a cookie and lose a finger. If a player opts to VETO any change at all, they apply -1 VETO towards the next vote. These negative counters accumulate for the next poll, the number of usable VETOES becomes 10 - the number of used VETOES from the last vote. Example1: Each poll consists of 10 bullet point balance proposals. Starting VETOES = 10. Player1 VETOES removing reroute from TacM. VETO count = 9. Upon the next vote, Player1 is permitted 9 VETOES. Example2: Each poll consists of 10 bullet point balance proposals. Starting VETOES = 10. Player1 VETOES 6 balance changes. VETO count = 9. Upon the next vote, Player1 is permitted 4 VETOES. iii) Dedicate each balance change to one class at a time. No description needed. The majority of players will therefor be unlikely to VETO every change. quote:
This leaves the power of the classes in the majority of the forum population(despite there being a couple thousand others who don't use the forums). We have what, 20 people posting at most in the average week in ED sections? How many do we have on just one server? 1000+. Why on earth should 11 players who want to be OPd have to make hundreds of players suffer because they voted for something? I wrote my poll system on my phone during a spare period. I did not get to finish everything. If I had to choose, I would allow the entire game community to participate... in and out of the forum. I would give the ability to vote ONLY to the level cap players. Alternate accounts would have been abused for mass voting. Also, crackdown on alternate accounts for cheating, unjust sportmanship, and manipulating the system. This includes placing multiple accounts into a Faction or dummying or abusive behaviour in general. quote:
Balance doesn't work by voting. You are right, Vladimir Putin gives your comment a +1. quote:
It works by getting rid of the power imbalances. Vladimir didn't give your comment a +1, but I did. quote:
Voting is biased, numbers aren't. The work-related mortality rate (if you can find this statistical data I will be much obliged to thank you) in Canada before labour unions began was quite high because of the obligation to perform life-threatening tasks for factory labourers who had to crawl into furnaces or work at extreme heights without proper safety measures. Unions formed to protect workers by initiating strikes to combat the supremacy of the employers who controlled their pay, work hours, and duties. Voting may sometimes be biased, but granting the power unto one sovereignty is biased as well. Joseph Stalin became the leader of the Soviet Union after Vladimir Lenin died. He alone had control over the motherland. Because of his actions, at least 20, 000, 000 people both from his own country and enemies had died in WW2. This was not intentional, this is with tactics at fault. There is a little reminder of history for you. quote:
Balance is about numbers, not common opinion. Numbers? I digress.
|
|
|
|