[Faction Thread] First Order vs Resistance
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
- 4.3K Gameplay Discussion
- 8K Feedback & Suggestions
- 587 Community Events and Creations
- 1.5K Star Wars™ Battlefront II Recruitment
- 2.8K Off-topic
Replies
Add me: FoxDie491
Good idea but would need a lot of management etc.
Check out the forum rules & guidelines
As for the question there can be only one answer
Yes first order all the way!
It would be great if guys could pull this off! Don't know if EA have done this for other games, but at least for me It would be something I've never seen a publisher do before. Please tell us if they consider it in the future
We do have this I guess: https://discord.gg/Sdf4DSg its more for multi games then just SWBF but we do have a SWBF section I guess.
Check out the forum rules & guidelines
What... is a "pubbie"?
(edit: I forgot that **** gets beeped out. Ah, the morality of the Fireman...)
Hmmph. You space commie scum.
Neat
But thanks none the less, I'll give it a try.
Light.
We are the spark that will light the fire, that will burn the First Order down.
LOL. Well, I hope you can strike up another spark once you get snuffed out in challenges. What fun would it be for us if it was easy for us to win?
In most games I've ever played that had something like this, this is how it turned out: lots of hardcore players turn out for the "evil" side and put in a ton of effort and do really well. However, the "good" side will usually win due to the sheer numbers of players who will choose it by default, even though most of them will just coast.
Just my experience.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=xfr64zoBTAQ
How to effectively play Yoda: https://battlefront-forums.ea.com/discussion/97820/i-have-waited-a-long-time-for-this-moment-my-little-green-friend-yoda-guide
General discussions about Yoda: https://battlefront-forums.ea.com/discussion/98884/general-discussions-about-yoda
"Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you?"
"Attachment leads to jealousy. The shadow of greed, that is. Train yourself to let go of everything you fear to lose."
Respect your fellow users (and Yoda), help improve the game and have a great day!
In Palpatine's naaaaaaaaaaame!
Officer of The Knights of Gareth
That is because they didn't just leave Veers and OOM-9 in charge of the military.
Pirate of the Knights of Gareth
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQ0RS0hEX9GFB5JdDBMdERA
If I had any skill in Writing I would totally write a fan fiction where Veers is made Supreme Commander of all Imperial Forces and OOM-9 is reactivated and together they destroy every traitor with the power of Evil Bros
OOM-9 Hero Concept by AzelfandQuilava
https://i.redd.it/uleh1g22xrhz.png
Suppor The Latest OOM-9 Thread
[url="https://battlefront-forums.ea.com/discussion/121855/grievous-vs-oom-9/p1/p1[/url]
Yeah, I've honestly considered that. My loyalty is not firmly in place just yet. I wonder who will have cooler abilities, Finn or Phasma?
Finn will have the cooler stuff.
Phasma will be cried over for nerfs within the first hour of release.
She's Brienne of Tarth , after all.
buyakashak
I don't think either will be particularly interesting but I'd give the edge to Phasma
Officer of The Knights of Gareth
Always dark side.
I’m sure it’ll be an average score. You can’t account for the numbers of players that’ll choose dark or light so I suspect they’ll just take the mean (0.68453 achievements per Dark player vs 0.67934 achievements per Light player = Dark wins). That way the most skilled group wins regardless of numbers.
Bravo sir, Bravo
Pirate of the Knights of Gareth
That will not be happening.
Check out the forum rules & guidelines
Yeah, but it won't stop people from claiming it did if they lose. People swore that the only reason their team lost when For Honor had a similar idea is that the devs rigged it. Even though there was no reason they would, and no evidence it happened tons of players from the losing teams swore it was happening.
WE SHALL BURN AWAY THIS LOWLY RESISTANCE.
ALL SHALL BOW TO THE FIRST ORDER.
Thanks for clearing this up, I was pretty worried about it.
So the competition is to see which side completes the most challenges. But will we be contributing progress towards challenges for the opposing team while playing as them? Or is the system designed not to track that progress intelligently?
I'm 99% certain you will always contribute to your chosen side, no matter as which team you play. It was the same in For Honor, you chose a faction but still got to play the others...all your accomplishments counted towards the chosen faction though, not the played one.
That looks good on paper, but I don't think that will happen. If they did, I think that will put light side at a HUGE disadvantage. With so many people likely to choose "good" by default, there will be lots of players who join that side and then barely play again if at all. I see that all the time, I've even done it during particularly busy times.
In all honesty, I think the fairest way to count it up is through direct contribution to a total score.
It will probably be average based as opposed to just total overall score. That's the only way it could possibly work, otherwise it's just who has more people. If they take th average scores then a smaller group of guys putting in work overcomes a large group being lazy and just counting on numbers.
I can't imagine you'll earn points for the opposite side by playing games, if that was the case it seems like people would just quit anytime they got the wrong team.
Let's say I pick Resistance. When the second "half" of Galactic Assault comes up on Starkiller Base, for example, wouldn't I be incentivized to let the Resistance win when it's my turn as FO?
There's one major flaw in that. First, let's say that only 100 people join the FO and 500 join the Resistance.
Let's say that the entire FO goes ham, and all 100 people that join it get 100% on challenges. Now let's say that 100 people on the Resistance also give it their all and 100% the challenges. Unfortunately, though, 100 of the Resistance never even played, and the remaining 300 were casuals that only got about 50% completion.
In that scenario, is it fair that the FO wins?
Now let's say that the FO goes ham and all 100 get 100% on the challenges. Let's also say that 100 players on the Resistance give it their all and get 100% as well. However, 100 people on the Resistance just joined and quit, and the other 300 are just casuals who average around 50% completion. Even though the exact same number of skilled players got the same score on both teams, the Resistance will be dragged down by the casuals.
Is that a fair way to score the game?
I believe it is yeah, that’s just how averages work.
I’m not saying it’s inarguably the most perfect system for every individual, but it’s the fairest. Your suggestion relies mostly on which side has the numerical advantage, and we might as well just announce the winner on day one when it becomes clear that one side is over-subscribed.
Not only because of the cooler models, but because currently Villains stomp over Heroes in HvV and that might play a role for the fraction's win chances.