Jump to content

  •     

Photo

Asynchronous Battles For Each Division


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Zordacz

Zordacz

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 451 posts

Posted 15 January 2014 - 01:27 PM

Now once a battle for our division has been finished, often we have to wait for other divisions to finish. In extreme situations it can be up to 35 minutes of waiting. Wouldn't it be better if each division fought independently?

 

Example:

A new campaign starts and every division starts at the same time. D4 finishes first at T90 - it immediately enters the 5-minute break and the second round. In the mean time, other divisions finish their rounds in a similar way (as soon as they reach 1800 domination points), go on a 5-min break and proceed further.

 

This way no one has to wait more than 5 minutes for the next round to begin. Faster divisions also get an advantage of contributing more campaign points (up to ~30% in rare cases) as they can fight more rounds than slower divisions in the same campaign.


  • Jimkats1 likes this

#2 Shiina Sayane

Shiina Sayane

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts

Posted 15 January 2014 - 03:39 PM

Now once a battle for our division has been finished, often we have to wait for other divisions to finish. In extreme situations it can be up to 35 minutes of waiting. Wouldn't it be better if each division fought independently?

 

Example:

A new campaign starts and every division starts at the same time. D4 finishes first at T90 - it immediately enters the 5-minute break and the second round. In the mean time, other divisions finish their rounds in a similar way (as soon as they reach 1800 domination points), go on a 5-min break and proceed further.

 

This way no one has to wait more than 5 minutes for the next round to begin. Faster divisions also get an advantage of contributing more campaign points (up to ~30% in rare cases) as they can fight more rounds than slower divisions in the same campaign.

 

 

That would be chaos.

No change needed at all


  • erepsistant likes this

#3 AntrikosA

AntrikosA

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • LocationMacedonia

Posted 27 January 2014 - 05:57 PM

That way some battles may have more rounds for some divisions and it wouldn't be fair.


Loved by many, hated by more, envied by most, respected by all.


#4 Jimkats1

Jimkats1

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 122 posts
  • LocationGreece

Posted 11 June 2020 - 01:38 PM

It would be chaos. I support that in this state of the game.


  • KisJ0zsi and erepsistant like this

Hellas 4ever


#5 Nicolae Crefelean

Nicolae Crefelean

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 39 posts
  • LocationBucharest, Romania

Posted 11 June 2020 - 02:11 PM

Imagine a highly disputed D4 battlefield between two countries fighting over an important region, to get the double campaign points. They go at it for the maximum amount of time (2 hours), while the other divisions play normally (1.5h). By the time D4 finishes battle number 3, D1-D3 will have finished the air round.  :lol:

 

 

44rxvn.jpg


Edited by Nicolae Crefelean, 11 June 2020 - 02:11 PM.

  • erepsistant likes this

#6 Rican

Rican

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts
  • LocationGeneve

Posted 11 June 2020 - 10:13 PM

that would mean that beginner's divisions would probably have fewer battles and thus less income.


titan_0.png

 

if you're not the lead dog...

... the scenery never changes.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users