Denied End Campaigns after a 100 Point difference

[Jason M.]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Allows (If both Senior HC + SL agree) for a side that is suffering from atleast a 100 campaign score difference to end a campaign early through a forced baseraid (Similar to what happened a few days back).
This could also be in the form of:
- Ending a campaign when a team reaches 150/100 campaign score first
- Ending a campaign after a team secures 3 natural base raids

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
Idfk probably.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
-Losing sides get a fighting chance again
-Its more fun to actually play as both sides are competing
-More motivation to fight since when there's a week left in a campaign and a 100 point diff, there is NOTHING you can do to win.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
-Needs to be monitored by SL to avoid abuse.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
Do you like playing this campaign? I don't.
No one in NATO is enjoying it.
USSR is getting bored.
The first week of a campaign is always the most fun for a reason.

Watch Garry's Mod (x64) 2025-02-26 18-59-39 | Streamable

Watch "Garry's Mod (x64) 2025-02-26 18-59-39" on Streamable.

streamable.com

 

[Levi]

Neutral
I do like this idea however there are a few variables that could make a drastic negative effect. Not using this as an excuse however NATO consistently struggle either way. They lose almost every war so even if the map was reset, within a week the same result will occur. This loop would be quite boring for the player base, let alone a base raid every week where there is practically nothing they can do. However, this change could be pointless as one side can simply refuse to have a base raid and the server will just stay the same as before this change.
Edit: I can't read as Jason said below, changed accordingly

 

[Jason M.]

Neutral
I do like this idea however there are a few variables that could make a drastic negative effect. Not using this as an excuse however NATO consistently struggle either way. They lose almost every war so even if the map was reset, within a week the same result will occur. This loop would be quite boring for the player base, let alone a base raid every week where there is practically nothing they can do. The only thing I would change however is for SL and both HC teams to approve it so that any abuse from this action won't be caused. However, this change could be pointless as one side can simply refuse to have a base raid and the server will just stay the same as before this change.

This guy just didn't even read the first sentence of the suggestion.

 

[King Jez]

very valid suggestion but its a quick fix to a major problem

 

[Auburn]

How would this work to the campaign schedule? Would it extend the next campaign duration? Would the remaining campaign days not be counted?

 

[Jason M.]

How would this work to the campaign schedule? Would it extend the next campaign duration? Would the remaining campaign days not be counted?

Idk man whatever fix requires no dev time
(Since were not getting it if there is any dev time)

very valid suggestion but its a quick fix to a major problem

MRP needs quick fixes, no other fixes available atm.

 

[L.Saint]

+Support
One side having control of the majority of the map for a week is what made me lose interest in MRP originally. 100 points dif is crazy tho

 

[Jason M.]

+Support
One side having control of the majority of the map for a week is what made me lose interest in MRP originally. 100 points dif is crazy tho

More than 100 point diff atm

 

[Harry]

First valid jm suggestion in a long timr
+sup

 

[Jimmy Special]

+Support

 

[Maverick]

+SUPPORT
As Said above, MRP needs quick fixes as none other are available

 

[Mikheali]

+Support
More base raids more fun

 

[Jack G]

Suggestion Denied​

---

Hi Jason M,
Your suggestion has been denied. This would be too unstructured for it to be worth doing as it also relies on a community supervisor being available basically 24/7. We are making steps to make campaigns closer and more balanced, of which I'll link the github issue for you.

Campaign Balancing · Issue #396 · civilnetworks-projects/MRP_Public_Development_Tracker

Forum link Leave blank if not applicable. Enhancement description (1) Campaign score dependent on player count. E.g a war with 20 people would be worth less campaign score than a war with 75 people...

github.com

Thank you for taking the time to make a suggestion​