How about a Petition

I'd like to add that I think the Panzer II Luchs is way too expensive too. I know it's not used much anyway because of its high rarity cost (which is probably warranted), but it just seems silly. Would be nice to have it as a viable option for games where rarity is toggled off.
 
Compare greyhound to the 222/223 etc is also a bit off

So what we basically need to figure out is whre is battlefrons algorithm that determines unit cost wrong, or what values it assigns too much/too little importance.
 
holoween said:
Compare greyhound to the 222/223 etc is also a bit off

So what we basically need to figure out is whre is battlefrons algorithm that determines unit cost wrong, or what values it assigns too much/too little importance.
Click to expand...
Yes, I think what I would suggest is for them to go back and take a new look at their algorithm... instead of just tweaking single vehicles. There's clearly something wonky about the way their algorithm works.
 
Yea but just telling them their algorithm is off wont do anything unless we can point out what exactly is off.
 
I must say I kind of doubt they even use an algorithm to determine unit costs actually. I think it's just a way to shut down discussion.
 
Bulletpoint said:
I must say I kind of doubt they even use an algorithm to determine unit costs actually. I think it's just a way to shut down discussion.
Click to expand...
They definitely do hand adjustments. Some things were fixed over time in individual units without everything changing.
 
Redwolf said:
They definitely do hand adjustments. Some things were fixed over time in individual units without everything changing.
Click to expand...
Could you be more specific? They adjusted the prices for US rockets a few years back, but that was for a unit type.
 
Bulletpoint said:
I must say I kind of doubt they even use an algorithm to determine unit costs actually. I think it's just a way to shut down discussion.
Click to expand...
If they are lying to us about how the game works it's a lie they've been telling for 20 years.

"Are the 3" mortars underpriced? Perhaps, perhaps not. All depends on how they are used, and that is true for many weapons systems in the game. However, keep in mind that the equations that calculated the prices for these mortars are the same ones that calculated the prices for every other artillery type weapon in the game."

81mm vs 75mm

community.battlefront.com community.battlefront.com
 
Bremer dan Gorst said:
If they are lying to us about how the game works it's a lie they've been telling for 20 years.

"Are the 3" mortars underpriced? Perhaps, perhaps not. All depends on how they are used, and that is true for many weapons systems in the game. However, keep in mind that the equations that calculated the prices for these mortars are the same ones that calculated the prices for every other artillery type weapon in the game."

81mm vs 75mm

community.battlefront.com community.battlefront.com
Click to expand...

That's about CM1 though. And about artillery, not about AFVs. With arty, I would imagine it would be easier to make a formula for the points price, since you could base it mostly on the amount of explosive times the number of shells.
 
Bulletpoint said:
That's about CM1 though. And about artillery, not about AFVs. With arty, I would imagine it would be easier to make a formula for the points price, since you could base it mostly on the amount of explosive times the number of shells.
Click to expand...
Nearly all of BFCs comments about QB prices relate to CM1 because they stopped discussing QB prices before CM2 existed. But I do not think they ever abandoned their distaste for "arbitrary" unit prices.

Admittedly, I can't prove anything.
 
Not to be a kill joy but.....I have twice sent BF extensive documentation (files, passwords, explanations) on obvious bugs. I never even gotten an acknowledgement of receipt of my emails. The bugs were never corrected in patches that came out.

One would think that correcting bugs (an objective problem) would have a high priority. To correct point values (a subjective problem)? I wonder.

Like most businesses, they are understandably focused on the future.
 
Nemesis said:
Like most businesses, they are understandably focused on the future.
Click to expand...

I think BFC are exceptionally indifferent to their customers though.

There was just yet another patch out for Mius Front yesterday... they keep updating and improving things regularly, even for old DLC campaigns.
 
Last edited:
Nemesis said:
Not to be a kill joy but.....I have twice sent BF extensive documentation (files, passwords, explanations) on obvious bugs. I never even gotten an acknowledgement of receipt of my emails. The bugs were never corrected in patches that came out.

One would think that correcting bugs (an objective problem) would have a high priority. To correct point values (a subjective problem)? I wonder.

Like most businesses, they are understandably focused on the future.
Click to expand...
The best method for bringing bugs to BFC's attention is to start a thread in the relevant tech support forum. No guarantees beyond that but Elvis is fairly reliable in my experience.
 
Pretty crazy when you think about it, that something as basic as adjusting some unit price points in a computer game needs people to make a petition.

maxresdefault.jpg
 
Bulletpoint said:
Pretty crazy when you think about it, that something as basic as adjusting some unit price points in a computer game needs people to make a petition.
Click to expand...
Off the top of my head I know of 4 requests for changes in QB prices now pending in BFC's bug tracker.* I have no idea if any of them will be acted upon but they are there.

*None involve StuGs :whistle:
 
Bremer dan Gorst said:
Off the top of my head I know of 4 requests for changes in QB prices now pending in BFC's bug tracker.* I have no idea if any of them will be acted upon but they are there.
Click to expand...
Apparently there are literally ten thousand entries in their bug tracker, so I wouldn't hold my breath.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom