27 replies to this topic

[Xarian]

I've come to the conclusion that the new system heavily rewards players for remaining alive. Why?

• Rewards are granted when you perform an action.
  
• You cannot perform actions if you are dead.
  
• Rewards are no longer one-time-only - you can get many rewards multiple times, like flanking and standing near allies.
  
• You cannot get rewards multiple times if you are dead.
  
• This is also why losing teams get significantly worse rewards - because they are dead!

Imagine this fairly common situation: a team is making a big push into the enemy, with an Atlas DDC near the front in a lance with a pair of Dire Wolves. The Atlas does his best to spread damage and be intimidating - his main job is to keep the enemy players from shooting his other lance mates, who are in Dire Wolves. The opposing team responds, and kills the Atlas and a couple other people, but none of the Dire Wolves. Because of this, the Dire Wolves really pile on the damage and the Atlas player gets a victory.



How would the C-Bill rewards break down? Well, the Dire Wolf players would get a ton of C-Bills (in theory) because they did their jobs very well - blowing the crap out of people. The scouts and skirmishers would get a decent amount of C-Bills because they stayed alive the whole time TAGing, NARCing, and harassing from a distance.

The DDC player, however, would get next to nothing for the victory. He did maybe 400 damage to 3 or 4 players, picking up a kill or two and several assists. Despite this, however, his gameplay was the single biggest reason that his team won - leading the charge. But, because he died early, he misses out on all those opportunities for rewards. No more flanking bonuses, no more hit and runs, no more "solo kill" bonuses.

When you see screenshots of people who got a large amount of C-Bills in the new system, notice a few things:

• Lots of kills
  
• Lots of damage
  
• Still alive when the mission ends

Simply put, some roles are very bad at staying alive for the whole match. Shock/bomber-type mechs, especially, tend to live short and spectacular lives - run in, blow someone up, and put a bit of damage on another person or two before they die. These roles are very important to winning the game, but they don't receive hardly any rewards for it.



How can we address this?

• Make more rewards large, but only give them once per match. Once Johnny Atlas gets his Flank bonus, he can die because he can't get another one
  
• When you get into brawl range (~300 meters), you are considered to be charging/charged for a relatively short time (5-10 seconds).
  
• "Shock" bonus - While charging/charged, you get a bonus based on how much damage you deal. (Bomber)
  
• "Awe" bonus - While charging/charged, you get a bonus based on how much damage you suffer. (Bodyguard)
  
• "Died for the Cause" bonus - While charging/charged, if you are the first friendly mech to die and you have other friendly mechs nearby, you get a bonus. This adds on to the "Awe" bonus, further rewarding the one specific player who leads the charge. (thanks to Bront)
  
• If your allies inflict damage on or are damaged by enemies within your brawl range while you are charging/charged, both your Shock and Awe bonuses increase.
  
• You don't get any Shock/Awe bonus at all if you are alone, unless...
  
• You get a huge Shock/Awe bonus if you are the last mech standing on your team.
  
• When you are no longer charging/charged, these bonuses are fully disabled until you are fully disengaged (see Russ's post; basically it means you are out of combat).

What does this do?

• Awe encourages mechs like the Atlas to get in and tank damage.
  
• Shock encourages mechs like the Griffin to run in and bomb people.
  
• Bonuses are dependent on teamwork and will not reward suiciding.
  
• Both Shock and Awe encourage people to stop being afraid of combat!
  
• These bonuses apply equally to the winner and the loser, meaning that receiving a charge well will get you just as much reward as charging into a brawl.

How would this affect the above scenario with the Atlas DDC?

• If the Atlas punched a few noses on his way in (and his team backs him up), then he will receive a large bonus for Shock.
  
• If the Atlas died but soaked up a lot of damage and his team capitalizes on it for the win (torso twist, etc) then he will receive a really large bonus for Awe.
  
• If the Atlas is the first guy to die during the charge, he will get a bonus for having Died for the Cause.

Edited by Xarian, 22 October 2014 - 03:04 PM.

[Alexander MacTaggart]

I think it'd be simpler to have a bonus only for assaults that gives them C-Bills for taking damage while there's a teammate nearby.

Still encourages them to run in and tank, but is less convoluted.

[Ultimax]

Xarian, on 21 October 2014 - 08:59 PM, said:

Imagine this fairly common situation: a team is making a big push into the enemy, with an Atlas DDC near the front in a lance with a pair of Dire Wolves.

While this does frequently happen, in my opinion that is a bad push.

A good push saturates the opponents field of fire with as many mechs as once as possible.


Instead of pushing in as a wedge, which allows for much easier focus firing, teams should be pushing as a line or a crescent.


It makes it much more difficult to focus a specific target.



Also, if that wedge of Atlas + Dire Wolves is outside 300m, it's most likely those Dire Wolves will be focus fired more heavily than the Atlas will.

[Lord de Seis]

Interesting ideas, you are definitely right. If you die early leading a charge you get very little compensation, I was getting some very poor results in my AS7-S because I was tanking damage or leading a charge. But in my Ilya I had a game where I made 360K, which was great but I only had 2 games like that the whole night. The rest were all low or below 100K.

The system has gone from a fairly consistent and predictable amount to varying wildly, I think the losing end is a big to low with some games I was only make 34K in a hero mech with premium time. How about a "base" amount in a match for launching into a match? Say 50K? I would be okay with making less for those once in a while games (like the 360K one I had) and be making at least 100K on my losses to balance things out.

Pretty low for a victory:

360K Game:

Edited by Lord de Seis, 21 October 2014 - 09:18 PM.

[Xarian]

Ultimatum X, on 21 October 2014 - 09:08 PM, said:

While this does frequently happen, in my opinion that is a bad push.

A good push saturates the opponents field of fire with as many mechs as once as possible.

Instead of pushing in as a wedge, which allows for much easier focus firing, teams should be pushing as a line or a crescent.

It makes it much more difficult to focus a specific target.

Also, if that wedge of Atlas + Dire Wolves is outside 300m, it's most likely those Dire Wolves will be focus fired more heavily than the Atlas will.

For the sake of your last comment, let's just assume that the Atlas puts itself in a position where it gets into brawl range fairly quickly and the Dire Wolves aren't in view at the time - this is pretty common when coming out of the tunnel in Crimson, for example, or if the Dire Wolf is literally hiding behind the Atlas (when I play my DDC I usually make it a point to stand between my DWF buddy and the bullets).

Regarding the tactic, I'm actually glad you mentioned this, because this is a topic that I've wanted to discuss for a while.

The "All in" push works really well against disorganized teams. The idea is that you throw as many targets into their field as you can and they won't be able to effectively burn down one guy (because people usually shoot what is in front of them, and with this strategy, they have targets everywhere) - basically spreading out the damage so that your team stays alive as long as possible. It's extremely effective! However, it has one major weakness: it lets your opponents pick who they want to shoot.

Against disciplined teams, the "all in" push usually fails spectacularly - they will just kill all your damage-dealers and ignore the hard-to-kill mechs until after the damage-dealers are dead. This goes back to your comment about targeting the Dire Wolves - if the entire friendly team is fighting the entire enemy team, then they're going to put a high priority on your Dire Wolves, Stormcrows, Gauss boats, etc. On the other hand, if you:

• Leave Gauss boats outside of the brawl but close enough that they can still shoot people,
  
• Saturate the enemy field of fire with both tanky mechs (Atlas/Stalker) and frustrating mechs (Firestarters, Commandos, occasionally Jenners)
  
• Have the Dire Wolves and bombers hide in a strategic spot and run out after other teammates have the enemies' attention

Then you are forcing the enemy to commit on your terms rather than just throwing everything into chaos and hoping that your team is more disciplined than your enemy.

Edited by Xarian, 21 October 2014 - 09:31 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

This is nothing to do with the new rewards system - happened the same with the old rewards system.

The longer you stay alive the more chance you have at getting more points and damage etc.

The new system may make that gap wider but it was always there.

The issue has always been there is no way to reliably give rewards for being a TANK, for SOAKING damage.

There are a few achievements based around taking a lot of damage but the exact teamwork reward of being a good bullet sponge is impossible to achieve because its not just about taking a lot of damage - it is about taking a lot of damage at a certain time which pivots the game tactically.

The guy who survived til the end and then goes down after losing all his armour etc is not really tanking but surviving.

Its a thankless task being the bullet sponge - always will be because computer systems cannot reward people for tactical positioning.

[Xarian]

Asmudius Heng, on 21 October 2014 - 09:40 PM, said:

This is nothing to do with the new rewards system - happened the same with the old rewards system.
...
Its a thankless task being the bullet sponge - always will be because computer systems cannot reward people for tactical positioning.

It's even worse now, since you earn C-Bills almost exclusively by doing stuff while alive.

[kapusta11]

Then stay alive. Really? You complain about getting less money because you die? Aren't you supposed to?

[Asmudius Heng]

Xarian, on 21 October 2014 - 10:50 PM, said:

It's even worse now, since you earn C-Bills almost exclusively by doing stuff while alive.

You earned cbills while being dead before?

A bonus to winning is what is needed to help people do stuff for the win

[EgoSlayer]

Asmudius Heng, on 21 October 2014 - 11:04 PM, said:

You earned cbills while being dead before?

A bonus to winning is what is needed to help people do stuff for the win

Yes, assist bonus was one of the biggest C-Bill rewards in the previous system. And in many cases those assists occur after a death (team finished them off after a player damaged them). Now they still happen, but are worth much less. The "fillers" to make up for the difference in pay out are all things that can only pay while being alive.

While it's a good system in that it promotes certain activities and encourages team work, it's a horrible system for new players or people who are consistently losing. They are earning 30-50% less on a loss (if you believe the postings) than with the previous rewards which turns the barely tolerable grind into a completely pointless one. It will drive people away because they can't win consistently until they get the money they need to improve their equipment, and now it will take twice as long to grind for that equipment. People who are really successful are earning something more, people who were average or below are earning less - it's creating an economic divide between the player base which is bad for the longevity of the game.

[Xarian]

EgoSlayer, on 21 October 2014 - 11:32 PM, said:

Yes, assist bonus was one of the biggest C-Bill rewards in the previous system. And in many cases those assists occur after a death (team finished them off after a player damaged them). Now they still happen, but are worth much less. The "fillers" to make up for the difference in pay out are all things that can only pay while being alive.

While it's a good system in that it promotes certain activities and encourages team work, it's a horrible system for new players or people who are consistently losing. They are earning 30-50% less on a loss (if you believe the postings) than with the previous rewards which turns the barely tolerable grind into a completely pointless one. It will drive people away because they can't win consistently until they get the money they need to improve their equipment, and now it will take twice as long to grind for that equipment. People who are really successful are earning something more, people who were average or below are earning less - it's creating an economic divide between the player base which is bad for the longevity of the game.

I would say 50% is a conservative estimate. Otherwise, you're right. Unless you're consistently winning, and winning hard, you're gaining C-Bills at a snails' pace (or losing them, if you are using consumables).

Meanwhile, when you get those 400k reward numbers, everyone on the other team is getting 35k - you will have earned more C-Bills than the entire enemy team put together. That's just not right.

[kapusta11]

Xarian, on 22 October 2014 - 12:21 AM, said:

Meanwhile, when you get those 400k reward numbers, everyone on the other team is getting 35k - you will have earned more C-Bills than the entire enemy team put together. That's just not right.

So a guy who put the most effort to ensure his team's victory is not supposed to get the reward he deserved? And those who didn't even bother to play should get more? New system is FAIR. If you're good you'll get your money regardless of whether you win or lose. If you're bad you'll get nothing, get better.

[Brody319]

Some suggestions for rewards:
Increase the amount kill assists give.
Give ECM mechs rewards every few seconds for each teammate covered with ECM, or for every point of damage dealt to an enemy mech with ECM while countered.
Give rewards to heavies and assaults for dealing large amounts of damage.

[Xarian]

kapusta11, on 22 October 2014 - 12:40 AM, said:

So a guy who put the most effort to ensure his team's victory is not supposed to get the reward he deserved? And those who didn't even bother to play should get more? New system is FAIR. If you're good you'll get your money regardless of whether you win or lose. If you're bad you'll get nothing, get better.

It's a team game. Everyone on the team contributes to the win - you're assuming that he put forth the most effort to ensure the team's victory. What about all the people who tried their hardest to keep that guy alive? What about the scouts who found targets for him to shoot, and kept him from getting shot by giving away their positions? When a team goes 12-8 and someone on your team scores 400k C-Bills, it's because 8 people on his team died to keep that guy alive and doing his job.

Honestly, you're like the hyper-egotistical lead singer of a band who thinks that he is the band. You can be an amazing player and die early, getting essentially no rewards; you can ensure your team's victory and get essentially no rewards. The score doesn't tell you who is good or bad; it tells you who survived long enough to get all the reward bonuses. They are not the same thing.

[Brody319]

Xarian, on 22 October 2014 - 12:59 AM, said:

It's a team game. Everyone on the team contributes to the win - you're assuming that he put forth the most effort to ensure the team's victory. What about all the people who tried their hardest to keep that guy alive? What about the scouts who found targets for him to shoot, and kept him from getting shot by giving away their positions? When a team goes 12-8 and someone on your team scores 400k C-Bills, it's because 8 people on his team died to keep that guy alive and doing his job.

Honestly, you're like the hyper-egotistical lead singer of a band who thinks that he is the band. You can be an amazing player and die early, getting essentially no rewards; you can ensure your team's victory and get essentially no rewards. The score doesn't tell you who is good or bad; it tells you who survived long enough to get all the reward bonuses. They are not the same thing.

yes, and those people who helped get less money. he makes 300K because his team sacrificed themselves for him. Meanwhile because of their contributions that probably ensured the win, they get to make 90K. Totally a fair and just system.

If I get in and rip up the enemy's armor leaving almost all of them crippled but I die, clearly the guy who comes in after me and gets the kills, deserves more money than I do.

[Xarian]

Brody319, on 22 October 2014 - 01:04 AM, said:

yes, and those people who helped get less money. he makes 300K because his team sacrificed themselves for him. Meanwhile because of their contributions that probably ensured the win, they get to make 90K. Totally a fair and just system.

If I get in and rip up the enemy's armor leaving almost all of them crippled but I die, clearly the guy who comes in after me and gets the kills, deserves more money than I do.

Well he got the higher score, so he's clearly a better player and deserves more money than you.

That's sarcasm, by the way.

[Brody319]

Xarian, on 22 October 2014 - 01:10 AM, said:

Well he got the higher score, so he's clearly a better player and deserves more money than you.

That's sarcasm, by the way.

If only I wasn't such a bad newbie pleb I might actually get the kills instead of my 12 assists and 700+ damage.

[kapusta11]

Xarian, on 22 October 2014 - 12:59 AM, said:

It's a team game. Everyone on the team contributes to the win - you're assuming that he put forth the most effort to ensure the team's victory. What about all the people who tried their hardest to keep that guy alive? What about the scouts who found targets for him to shoot, and kept him from getting shot by giving away their positions? When a team goes 12-8 and someone on your team scores 400k C-Bills, it's because 8 people on his team died to keep that guy alive and doing his job.

Honestly, you're like the hyper-egotistical lead singer of a band who thinks that he is the band. You can be an amazing player and die early, getting essentially no rewards; you can ensure your team's victory and get essentially no rewards. The score doesn't tell you who is good or bad; it tells you who survived long enough to get all the reward bonuses. They are not the same thing.

So that's what you think of yourself, you're keeping everyone alive huh? I don't blame you, you probably find comfort in that thought, but who's being hyper-egotistical now?

[Xarian]

kapusta11, on 22 October 2014 - 01:14 AM, said:

So that's what you think of yourself, you're keeping everyone alive huh? I don't blame you, you probably find comfort in that thought, but who's being hyper-egotistical now?

Myself? No. The other 11 people on the team of that one superstar that you're so fond of.

[EvilCow]

In general the system is punishing for first line mechs that do their dirty job by doing massive damage, tanking as much as possible then die.

Probably there should be additional rewards for damage/crits/kills done at short range.