Multi-Waypiont missions

nschafer · Post by **nschafer** » Mon May 04, 2009 10:54 pm

Do multi-waypoint missions count as a single mission for the purpose of calculating rank or does it count as a mission per waypoint? The obvious reason for asking is that if it counts as a single mission then it makes more sense to take several single waypoint missions than to take a multi-waypoint mission when trying to increase your rank.

Thanks,
Neal.

49rTbird · Post by **49rTbird** » Mon May 04, 2009 11:03 pm

Very good question and point.

:(:o

berighteous · Post by **berighteous** » Tue May 05, 2009 12:33 am

You don't do multi waypoint missions for the purpose of getting rank. You do them because you are brave and want to kick as much vonari butt as you can. I can't believe you would want to put your own ambition ahead of the cause! Mercenaries!

Your greatest ambition is probably to make fleet admiral by doing a thousand "find the box" runs.

Multi and single wp military contracts should count the same. I think the find the box missions should count less though.

Post by **Vice** » Tue May 05, 2009 1:11 am

Mission credit is the same, the count is per completed mission, not sub-divided into waypoints or individual objectives. However, the multiple waypoint missions stack their pay, so you can earn a lot more money with those than you can with the single objective missions.

nschafer · Post by **nschafer** » Tue May 05, 2009 1:14 am

Actually I'd like to see the "Find the Box" mission have some teeth, like you must get within a range of 500 to complete the mission, but if you get with 250 it explodes like a proximity mine. Would still be easy, but you'd have to pay attention to it.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Tue May 05, 2009 2:01 am

I thought the amount of enemies killed also is a factor affecting your rank, so doing multi way point missions killing 35 Vonaris does that not give you 5 points to wards your rank 1 for every 10 kills and one for completing the mission and one for the credit earned compared to 1 point
for a 4 kills one way point mission and very little credit?:o

[Edited on 5-5-2009 by Maarschalk]

warsign · Post by **warsign** » Tue May 05, 2009 10:25 am

For this reason if you want to boost your military rank fast, you have to choose missions with less waypoints. A logical approach imo, in short period.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Tue May 05, 2009 12:15 pm

Thanks for the info guys. Geeeeeeee......z! That is why everybody is doing those locate lost container missions. Nobody wants to kick the Vonarions in the hind anymore! LOL:P:P:P

warsign · Post by **warsign** » Tue May 05, 2009 12:23 pm

Originally posted by Maarschalk
Thanks for the info guys. Geeeeeeee......z! That is why everybody is doing those locate lost container missions. Nobody wants to kick the Vonarions in the hind anymore! LOL:P:P:P

Yes, I used this aproach too much in the beginning, lol.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Tue May 05, 2009 12:52 pm

Originally posted by warsign
Originally posted by Maarschalk
Thanks for the info guys. Geeeeeeee......z! That is why everybody is doing those locate lost container missions. Nobody wants to kick the Vonarions in the hind anymore! LOL:P:P:P
Yes, I used this aproach too much in the beginning, lol.

I think there should be more incentive to do other missions, credit alone to do military missions is not enough!

You can do 4 to 5 Locate missions in the time it takes to do 1 4 kills 1 Waypoint mission so you get more credits too in less time doing locate missions!

I think this is one of the things that is out of Balance, We need more incentive to do more difficult missions to increase millitary rank! For example get more points towards rank for a Spy mission, or getting points per amount of Vonarions killed or for Vonari Battle cruisers destroyed!

berighteous · Post by **berighteous** » Tue May 05, 2009 2:44 pm

Besides when your ship is all shot up to hell after a bughunt, it's cool that you can still be useful to the cause by finding boxes while your ship repairs itself.

I dunno if kills should count toward rank, but it'd be nifty to have a leaderboard somewhere to show how many vonari kills we all have. Maybe daily per server or something.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Tue May 05, 2009 4:08 pm

Originally posted by Eclipse
Originally posted by Maarschalk
I think there should be more incentive to do other missions, credit alone to do military missions is not enough!

You can do 4 to 5 Locate missions in the time it takes to do 1 4 kills 1 Waypoint mission so you get more credits too in less time doing locate missions!

I think this is one of the things that is out of Balance, We need more incentive to do more difficult missions to increase millitary rank! For example get more points towards rank for a Spy mission, or getting points per amount of Vonarions killed or for Vonari Battle cruisers destroyed!
Non-combat missions can be more essential for military forces.
It makes it fun to realize that even though some pilots might have high rank, they might not be able to fight well. High military rank should not be used a measure of combat effectiveness (there are a lot of highly ranked "real world" officers that are clueless on good combat tactics).

I Agree! However there is only one military non combat mission and it is very easy to do once you have done a couple of hundreds of them you can almost do them with your eyes closed in between 10 to 30 seconds! Yes it is repetative and boring but you can increase your rank very quickly! I am just talking about balance here.

Surely it is more rewarding and fun to get points for rank for doing a hard days work and have a feeling of achievement then just doing something repeatetly and easy for more credits and more points towards rank! It is like getting all A's and graduating school for just answering one and the same question correctly over and over again!;)

warsign · Post by **warsign** » Wed May 06, 2009 3:16 pm

Actually, ranks must be effect the job you accept. Like military ships.Also must be effect to weapons like civillian frames. Lower ranks can accept small missions, buy small weapons just like civillian frames and military ships.

With this approach, everything would be ok imo...

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Wed May 06, 2009 4:11 pm

Just discoverd last evening with some members of [SD] in MP mode that you can do locate missions in a relay kind of fashion! You have a group of players at the Station in line to choose the locate mission and one near were the way point pops up in space! The player in space locates the object and completes the mission while the player who selected the mission jumpes to your location and you jump back in line at the Station and the nexplayer in line accepts the next locate mission. In this instance you could do a mission in about 10 seconds that is 360 missions in an hour and everyones ranks and credits in that sector will benefit! Now how easy is that!LOL:P:P:P

[Edited on 5-6-2009 by Maarschalk]

MMaggio · Post by **MMaggio** » Wed May 06, 2009 6:54 pm

How cool!

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Wed May 06, 2009 9:14 pm

And if you do not want to participate you just dock at the station and watch the others and watch your rank and credits increase for doing nothing!LOL:P:P:P

SVB · Post by **SVB** » Wed May 06, 2009 11:47 pm

I would like to make a suggestion on this...

Why not have the WP Missions count as multiple contracts?

5WP = 5 Military Contracts?

It would give me the motive to actually do these again...

p.s. maybe not make this count for "Contracts total" and have a separate "Military Points" below the Military rank - and having this

0.5 Point for Box Mission
1 Points for 1 Waypointer
2,3,4,5... ect for multiple waypoints
And a ? for spy mission... (havent thought of this one yet, but maybe 2 points for your hard work surviving)

This can work great

And it will still be 998< for fleet admiral, and ect... its just instead of contracts done - its in POINTS....

Like I said above: 1 normal waypoint mission is 1 point, while the box is 0.5
This adds difficulty, but its worth adding to the game so there will not be so much Fleet Admiral Noobs who just do boxes!

berighteous · Post by **berighteous** » Thu May 07, 2009 12:24 am

no, that's silly. The only true motivation to go on any single or multi wp missions is to be stand up and be brave and kick vonari butt. Any other motive and you're in the wrong navy.

Doing it just to get a promotion is missing out on the thrill. Doing it for the money is stupid, unless you have buddies flying with you, since it costs more in repairs than you'll ever get for it should you get hit.

I can see the longer missions being worth more if you're doing them solo, vs with 5 buddies online. A 5 wp mission only takes 10 minutes or less with 6 people. With 6, doing it for the money becomes viable since you're less likely to get shot up. But if you're only interested in money, you'd be doing civilian contracts, which pay twice as much and are easier.

If you want to be a fleet admiral, you need to so a lot of missions, and gain the experience, skill, and stamina. It takes more of all 3 to survive the longer missions. It's harder to not make any grave mistakes on a 7 wp mission, or to fight your way back from a mistake early on and complete. That's what makes a great pilot - earning his rank.

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:17 am

Originally posted by berighteous
no, that's silly. The only true motivation to go on any single or multi wp missions is to be stand up and be brave and kick vonari butt. Any other motive and you're in the wrong navy.

Doing it just to get a promotion is missing out on the thrill. Doing it for the money is stupid, unless you have buddies flying with you, since it costs more in repairs than you'll ever get for it should you get hit.

I can see the longer missions being worth more if you're doing them solo, vs with 5 buddies online. A 5 wp mission only takes 10 minutes or less with 6 people. With 6, doing it for the money becomes viable since you're less likely to get shot up. But if you're only interested in money, you'd be doing civilian contracts, which pay twice as much and are easier.

If you want to be a fleet admiral, you need to so a lot of missions, and gain the experience, skill, and stamina. It takes more of all 3 to survive the longer missions. It's harder to not make any grave mistakes on a 7 wp mission, or to fight your way back from a mistake early on and complete. That's what makes a great pilot - earning his rank.

That is excactly my point I'm trying to make! Earn your rank by doing hard work! At the moment it is to easy with the box locate missions! look in the scenarios I described in this thread above! The relay one for the locate the box mission!
We should get more points towards rank for more difficult missions with more waypoints! I like what SVB is suggesting!;)

berighteous · Post by **berighteous** » Thu May 07, 2009 6:48 am

No shortcuts. Do a thousand more missions.

warsign · Post by **warsign** » Thu May 07, 2009 10:03 am

Originally posted by Eclipse
Military rank in the game is all for show anyway, it has no effect on game play.
Just keep in mind that some pilots with high ranks have gotten there "the easy way", those pilots' combat skills are not going to be that good.
Military rank is not a performance indicator for anything other then just the number of completed military missions.

Yes, single game feeling is so much different than MP.
If you want to be a good fighter, have to let us to kill you

Yoda says (aka Bravehart), "You have to loose in order to win".

Storm · Post by **Storm** » Thu May 07, 2009 10:36 am

Originally posted by Eclipse
Military rank in the game is all for show anyway, it has no effect on game play.
Just keep in mind that some pilots with high ranks have gotten there "the easy way", those pilots' combat skills are not going to be that good.
Military rank is not a performance indicator for anything other then just the number of completed military missions.

I think that is what some people are suggesting... make it a little more reflective of WHAT you did... and less of "how many times you did something".

Maarschalk · Post by **Maarschalk** » Thu May 07, 2009 3:54 pm

Originally posted by Eclipse
Originally posted by Storm
I think that is what some people are suggesting... make it a little more reflective of WHAT you did... and less of "how many times you did something".
What for? The current structure is close to how real military rank works. Real military rank is based upon a point system that has nothing to do with difficulty of military objectives, the points are based on time of service and training (classes) completed.
Awards and citations are based on what is done, rank is not.

Maybe you should be asking Vice to incorporate an award system instead of asking him to change the ranking method used.

But in order to get your military rank in Evochron Legends you have to complete misssions so in principle your misssions are your classes and training to get your rank. If in real live you fail training or classes you do not advance your rank, you might even get dismissed! And I'm sure that training and classes for a higher rank are more difficult then doing the same one thing a thousand times over and over again! Hence if you fail a training in real life you do not get a chance to do it over and over and over again!;)

[Edited on 5-7-2009 by Maarschalk]

Storm · Post by **Storm** » Thu May 07, 2009 6:24 pm

Originally posted by Eclipse
Originally posted by Storm
I think that is what some people are suggesting... make it a little more reflective of WHAT you did... and less of "how many times you did something".
What for? The current structure is close to how real military rank works. Real military rank is based upon a point system that has nothing to do with difficulty of military objectives, the points are based on time of service and training (classes) completed.
Awards and citations are based on what is done, rank is not.

Maybe you should be asking Vice to incorporate an award system instead of asking him to change the ranking method used.

That's only *partially* true, but it is not that simple or direct. I admit that I can only speak (definitively) about the Army. I know that there are different priorities in the Air Force and Navy, but given *one* point I am about to make, they are not THAT different. I've worked at sites that were multidisciplinary / multi service (in the Philippines, I was Army, but had an Air Force rater... when I was an Instructor / Writer, my rater was a civilian).

Lets try to avoid "comparing military careers", we can both agree that we were both in the service.

But I know what I am talking about. I served for 22 years, Signals Intelligence (and thinking about it, working the percentages, it was about 50% strategic, 27% tactical, and 22% in an instructorship / tech writing). I retired in 1996... I did see promotion policies change a bit over the years, shifts in emphasis and so forth... but the basic process was always the same.

In the Army, "points" are primarily important to those looking for promotion up to E5/SGT. At E6/SSG, you start to see more "meatier", subjective requirements, your records (especially those portions of your records most important for promotion) SHOULD be looked at almost as if they were a peculiar, unique form of resume (if you want to get promoted). At E7/SFC and above, "points" are completely insignificant (emphasis with the promotion boards *was* on certain specialized classes, I admit ... but also the assignments that you had and *what you did and how well you did with those assignments*) . I *know* that higher ranks in the Air Force and Navy are almost the same way, I had friends that I worked alongside with from the other services, doing almost the same thing that I was doing.

I don't have DEEP knowledge of how promotion of officers was managed, but I do know that it's is even LESS about "points" than for enlisted. The emphasis *most definitely* is on WHAT you've accomplished. Company Commanders, Battalion Commanders, and so forth (and the equivalent in other services) ALWAYS had to be thinking of what they *accomplished* with their units.... (Above the Brigade, your pretty much looking at "did this guy win our war for us"; to be simple about it). How their troops did in the physical fitness tests, MOS tests, *tasks* that were assigned to them. An innovative, aggressive "go-getter" would always get promoted ahead of the stereotypical "administrator". Quite often, the "administrator" type leader got RIF'ed (Reduction in Force - mediocre officers are "invited to leave").

Okay - having said that....

There are some people that feel that certain military missions should be "worth more" than others. If they feel that their promotion could be made a little more significant by emphasizing the harder, longer missions, and their enjoyment of the game could be enhanced that way, then I for one see their point. They are just providing input and making harmless suggestions.

(edit) I do have to admit that the whole idea (this topic) might be (MIGHT be) going into the "too complicated to be practical" direction. No problem... it's just a game. But I for one would be worried if no one offered suggestions; as long as people realize the difference between what is practical, what is too difficult to implement, and what can be implemented but not in a "user friendly" way.

[Edited on 5-7-2009 by Storm]

Post by **Marvin** » Thu May 07, 2009 11:44 pm

Officer promotion works differently in peacetime. It is administrative (how many medals, how many military schools, how many college degrees, how good you look in your official photo, how many HHQ assignments, etc.)

Much of it goes out the window in time of war. And most of it probably won't be applicable in a future where military commanders have managed to learn the lessons of history. Ergo, any promotion system devised by Vice will be as viable as any that's currently in effect.