It's not just the JSF that dropped the ball. The SGB couldn't hold any territory in the US, and let us hit the 30 territory condition. You had your chance in the US and lost all your territories there. In fact, when we were fighting in DC, you couldn't keep your foothold at Grissom even when you had air support there. Not our problem, not the JSF's problem.

Less information from the xml feed is a bad thing. What is the justification for this? Why is it a good thing? How does it prevent cheating?

Looking at it from a cynic's perspective, it seems designed to mask the fact that games played are dropping steadily. Pretty standard tactic from a developer, any MMO that launches with server populations visible soon swaps to a high/med/low system.

any word on when the title update will occur (360), and what might we be seeing?

quote:

Originally posted by mute11:
Looking at it from a cynic's perspective, it seems designed to mask the fact that games played are dropping steadily. Pretty standard tactic from a developer, any MMO that launches with server populations visible soon swaps to a high/med/low system.

Cynicism aside, that is a damn good point that I hadn't even considered. I think this issue will gut buried and forgotten, but I hope they will let us know the total volume of battles fought after the turn. It would be nice to know how many players are online at one time.

Actually with some time to think on it, I am glad they are sticking you xbox players with the update first...maybe they will realize how half baked the "fixes" are before they hit us with it.

I think these are steps in the right direction. A 3-min minimum for games to count is pretty good, although some will undoubtedly abuse that one and bug out from matches they know they will lose. Top-ranked and recognizable players might have a problem with this.

The 30-min delay and switch to percentage disrupts the information flow to players, but that is just intended to make it more difficult to gauge just how many games you would have to rig in order to tip the scales. It is incovenient, (I loved checking Supad's site) and it will probably disrupt some higher-level planning, but hopefully that and the 3-minutes will hobble cheaters sufficiently to reduce their influence.

As for the reduction of the Victory conditions to 2 capitols and 30 territories... assuming a situation somewhat like 1st war, where it was one faction absorbing most of the losses, Russia still dropped the ball on their home turf down in the Ft. Levski corridor, and when you look at that map, the likelihood of a real-life comeback was pretty slim. Taking and holding capitols is the hardest part of ToW and amassing 30 territories isn't easy, either.

Templar's idea about a Defcon turn sounds great though. Having a desperate last-minute offensive sounds fun, and it has good grounding in realism. It could also give a losing side a light at the end of the tunnel. I think the JSF wouldn't have experienced an exodus of skilled players if they knew there was a chance to really turn the tide coming up.

the more i think about it the more i think that the percentage system is a bad idea, if it was meant to even out the number of matches then i think it would be worse than the point system. because people after a certain point would likely only play the maps they have a lead on becuase they would think that the other maps (even if it is not true) that have a 20% or more lead is incapable of being retaken (ex. 50% lead 100:50 or 1000:500). most would assume the second rather than the first just to be same and only go to the territiores that they have a good lead in.

Great job to the devs for taking this seriously and moving in the right direction. Things can be tweaked later, but just the fact that they are doing something asap about the exploiting is great. It is very rare that a dev team will stop exploiting of a game. I mean it took Zipper 2 years to fix the cheat coding in socom 3. By then it was too late. So this is a good move and direction on the devs.

Wait Wait Wait. This doesn't not mean Europa wins, they couldn't take Moscow so the devs had to change the rules for them LOL

We Russians held our ground!

Good job Comrades

Your unintentional abuse of double negatives much amuses me.

Anyway, I'm thankful that these measures are coming into effect, they appear to be what we were looking for. Hopefully there won't be too many negative knock on effects.

yes this does provide the option for commanders to do a tactical withdraw from the battlefield which is good cause most of my major mistakes happen then, and it makes it more realistic. but on the flip side its going to be harder to get wins now i should think.

I have to agree with these changes.

All except the XML feed change.

Not knowing the number of matches and the impact of your win in a certain area makes it "less fun" to play for strategic control of the "overall" war.

It will still be just as fun to play the matches though.

Still, I do not see how this is an anti-cheating fix. Just seems like its a "let's hide the number of matches" fix.

thoughts?

quote:

Originally posted by xxxStalinxxx:
Wait Wait Wait. This doesn't not mean Europa wins, they couldn't take Moscow so the devs had to change the rules for them LOL

We Russians held our ground!

Good job Comrades

Yea, it's too bad your faction couldn't even get past phase 1 D.C. in 5 tries, and got kicked out of America. That's holding ground alright.

Exactly. If the game numbers were being used by factions to know where they had to cheat, and they have removed the ability to cheat, why remove the game numbers?

There has to be another reason.

quote:

Originally posted by x_gladiusDei_x:
It's not just the JSF that dropped the ball.

And lets not forget about awsome players like Bossnasti who dashboard when they're aout to lose; or haven't you forgotten that little 2v2 we had against you guys?

And yes, boosters DO use the stats to see where they need to evac spam, that's why they have a 30 min delay.

quote:

Originally posted by arahdial:
Exactly. If the game numbers were being used by factions to know where they had to cheat, and they have removed the ability to cheat, why remove the game numbers?

There has to be another reason.

They haven't removed the ability to cheat. Someone can still stay in the game past three minutes and throw the game. They are trying to mitigate cheating. That said, you still have a point. Trying to reduce cheating by limiting the information available to us is less than ideal.

I would have preferred some sort of account monitoring in which the accounts with the worst records were screened. For example, an account with a 1-100 win/loss ratio would be subject to screening, to see if the matches were being rigged (they could look at the time spent per game, replays, etc.) banhammering a few obvious cheaters could go a long way.

This is nothing but a quick fix so it looked like they actually did something, the 3 minute rule will slow down cheaters at best and the fact that they are masking the xml feed numbers shows that they don't want people to see that their "fix" isn't working. 30 Minute delay is a joke...so the cheating will be out of sync 30 minutes, not stopped.

Bravo for limiting the XML feed info.



I think I was the only one to beg for this, catching a ton of flak from people for it too.

It just takes so much "realism" out of the game. Sooo many times, 360 JSF would have a lead on maps when I went to bed. I'd wake up and the lead would be slimmed, but still there. There would be a flurry of games on all maps in the morning, but when I came home from school or work, I'd find we'd lost leads on a bunch of maps. Once EFEC would around a +50 lead on maps, those maps would become ghost towns. It's impossible to come back from behind once you're down because there are no games to be played.

Think about it. If I want to spearhead a counterattack by assaulting an EFEC territory, they should have no choice but to defend it. What happens in real life if an Army attacks one of your territories and you have no forces there? They plant their flag and then you have to go take it back. That's how it works in real life, but here's how it works in End War thanks to the XML feed:

JSF Commander: "EFEC, prepare to defend yourselves!"

EFEC Commander: "Umm, yeah... now's not really a good time. Thing is, we already have a lead on this map, so we're kinda busy molly-whopping you on a different map... Could you come back tomorrow maybe?"

JSF Commander: "Oh, my bad. Sure, no problem. I'll head over to the only map people are playing on so that I can contribute to your victory."

EFEC Commander: "Thanks dude."

What Happened to the insurgency or d-day style attacks after a faction losses its capital, I swear I remember reading that somewhere. As far as cheaters there is no sure fire way to keep them from cheating. Unless you make it where you can only create one account and cannot switch factions. I like the delay in the XML makes its harder for people to determine which maps to throw. I have a suggestion to fix the wait times any maps that no one is fighting use an AI commander at Hardcore level, that way you won't have everyone fighting on one territory. They do it on 2vs2 if your team mate drops out, of course the AI in 2vs2 when a player drops out is stupid, Happened to me and the AI put out all rifelman on a raid mission.