errorblankfield wrote:
I guess I'm just a mean person cause if the sign says no switching till the game is over.... I think it should mean no switching till the game is over.
And paying for an advantage over the rest of the community? That's just asking for trouble.
Now a solution I can get behind is running a few games of GW in parallel. As in having different universes each with a game of GW that you can participate in. I don't wanna break up the player base or anything, but one really long game (like we have now) with a couple of much (much, much...much) smaller galaxies would be pretty cool. Wanna test a new race? Go to the other universe and bam. For reference, if the current map runs for about a month. The other maps could aim for a runtime of a week or less. (Heck if it's popular enough there can be even longer/shorter matches lying around).
Any who, you get the point. Lower the pressure/penalty of the main game with some parallel ones.
Which actually solves a problem with new GW players (like myself) who don't know if they can commit to an epically long game enough to make a positive impact.
Just a thought.
1. The intention is not to get a benefit over the community- it would be to give friends a chance to group up in a faction or people bored with one faction to try another.
2. Probably too few people to do multiple instances, and arguably having multiple instances is detrimental to the experience.
3. Theoretically with the restrictions and costs mentioned you could abuse it but is it actually likely to happen?
Also a faction's population having an effect on whether it wins or not seems like an indication of broken game mechanics. Cybran will always have an unfair advantage and UEF will always have an unfair disadvantage- unless restrictions on joining factions based on balance are added. If those restrictions are added then changing factions would always benefit the overall balance of the GW game right?Statistics: Posted by Fordeka — 22 Jan 2014, 17:22
]]>