Jump to content
fracas

World wide campaign

Recommended Posts

Will WC maintaining an ongoing internet campaign for both Dystopian Age and Firestorm Universe?

 

For DA the faction with the highest victory points for fleet action at the end of the captain gets a new fleet model; same for the faction with the highest armor clash VP.

For FsA it is the highest VP for Armada and Planetfall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a neat idea in theory, but in practice  I can't see this working out well. 

In general any ranking of global play stats is going to highlight the most powerful faction at the competitive end of the game. This is useful data often used to help calculate where overpowered factions/units are and to also assess if the army variety is suffering (ergo everyone is using the same handful of units). 

 

I think attaching this to a release schedule would be a mistake. First up if it goes to the most popular then yes, in theory, its supporting a larger body of players; but it also means that the faction which is currently the most powerful gets new toys/units/power. 

Secondly there's a risk that some factions might just be under-represented and thus could spend a very long time never getting anywhere near the top shelf

Then there's the fact that new releases are a slow turn around process; so it would take time for any release to be reflected. Unless Warcradle already had models developed, it would mean that you could wait months before seeing reward for rankings. 

Finally don't forget cheating. If people think there's a physical reward for getting their faction to win chances are they will cheat, so some degree, in reporting results to Warcradle, in order to get their faction to win and thus get new releases they want. This would mess up balance impressions; but it also messes up the whole idea. Also some might not view it as cheating; instead they'd view it at tactical playing/reporting. Either outright reporting lies to ensure 1 faction wins because its already winning; or tactically choosing to not report match losses or heck just playing that faction to generate victories. 

 

In general I think event driven releases and marketing should be done on the event scale and, where possible, should most likely influence game lore instead of game releases/mechanics/etc... That way gamers get to contribute; the contribution period is controlled; and it doesn't really make any huge difference which faction actually wins - in tabletop terms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with @Overread on this. Many global campaign events end up with skewed results, either from a lack of diversity in forces being used, or from "selective reporting" of game results. Hell, look at tournaments. How many non-marine players do you see at a 40k tournament?

I own several Dystopian Wars fleets, with all sorts of different models, to provide variety/choices for people who play at my club, but for "away" games, I almost always only bring the same few models.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is however you do it it would still be biased and still be open to problems. Eg if people knew that whichever faction ranked low would get new things then there'd be a scramble to have favoured factions recorded as ranking low. Plus what happens when one faction wins two or three times in a row - suddenly its getting far more attention over the others.

Much easier for Warcradle to have a release schedule under their control. They can always have a tournament event that ends with the release of new units (Privateer Press did that several times with campaign results steadily unlocking bits of hints toward big new releases and such). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could avoid all this by not releasing models based off of rankings in tournaments.  If every faction gets one or two releases at a time then all of them will get the same amount.  Also, having one or two models won't take as much time or resources than say several models.  They can change  the order in which factions get models in each release so it's not always the same factions first.  For example, when SG released the new modular battleships they released 4 of the main factions and then the other 3.  War cradle studios could do the same things with a single model at a time but for multiple factions at one time.  

If the tournament's are all being won by the same faction then they should look at the rules and adjust them if they favor some factions over other factions.  I don't expect every faction to be perfectly balanced, but they can at least have them fairly balanced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly to get this to work easier to return to the megafactions format of the 2.5 big alliances of DWars, which gives a reason for every faction to be in a battlezone, because their allies called them in.  Secondly a new boxed set like the Spartan ones with fluff, scenery and new boats seems the optimal to help set up the battlezone with extra stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The forum-driven FSA ‘campaign’, where forum members posted very basic information, was about as reliable a reporting source as you can get, since there was no real incentive to cheat beyond personal ego.  In aggregate, it showed that Aquans were the ‘dominate’ faction, Sorylians were weak, Sorylians and Relthoza weren’t very common (probably since they never received a big box 2-player release like the other ‘core’ factions), and most games were played at 800 or 1,200 points, with very few exceeding 1,200.

The only way to get better results is to have a controlled, regulated environment, like a tournament, which is why a strong tournament scene with company support can go a long way to making the game better. Adepticon and Reading Warfare were probably the biggest FSA Tournaments, and they showed the same basic picture.

What Warcradle decides to do with this information is up to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.