11 replies to this topic

[Dracol]

With fast strikers, LRM teams, and lights getting benefits from the new reward system, the Assault brawlers are seemingly left out in the cold.

What about rewarding those players who can stay alive under intense enemy fire?

Basic formula for illustration:
(100 - % of "health" left at death or end of match) * mech tonnage * x cbills

How it would would play out:

Example 1: Atlas A is a new player and hasn't learned torso twisting yet.
He gets cored out and dies at 60% health. (100 - 60) * 100 * 1 cbill = 4k

Example 2: Atlas B is experienced and ends up a stick and dies at 15% health
(100 - 15) * 100 * 1 cbill = 8.5k

Example 3: Cent A gets unlucky and takes a headshot early and dies at 95/%
(100 - 95) * 50 * 1 cbill = 250

Example 4: Cent B has a great game and lives with only 20% left
(100 - 20) * 50 * 1 cbill = 4k

IMHO, this would help offset some of the lower rewards heavies and assaults are receiving while still encouraging engagement with the enemy. The cbill multiplier can be increased as needed.

Thoughts, concerns, questions?

(Edit: gosh darn it, can't believe I miss spelled sponge... gotta get my first cup of coffee down before I post)

Edited by Dracol, 22 October 2014 - 04:51 AM.

[Jetfire]

This I do like in principle but I would add a multiplier for surviving the match.

Something as a sliding scale that ends up with say 15k cbills for dying at 50% armor and 30k for surviving the match at the same level. Higher payouts for soaking more damage.

[keith]

no don't do it left at end of the match. then no one will ever want to go in first. first person always dies but helps the team win. that is part of the problem with this whole reward system so fearful of ppl stealing cbills by discoing/dieing on purpose the ppl who play get screwed.

[Colby Boucher]

keith, on 22 October 2014 - 06:05 AM, said:

no don't do it left at end of the match. then no one will ever want to go in first. first person always dies but helps the team win. that is part of the problem with this whole reward system so fearful of ppl stealing cbills by discoing/dieing on purpose the ppl who play get screwed.

Going in first doesn't allways mean dying.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Colby Boucher, on 22 October 2014 - 06:09 AM, said:

Going in first doesn't allways mean dying.

Yeah, not if your scrubby buddies follow you in.......but most the time, atleast in solo pugging...it does.

[Hades Trooper]

Something along these lines could work

[Jetfire]

keith, on 22 October 2014 - 06:05 AM, said:

no don't do it left at end of the match. then no one will ever want to go in first. first person always dies but helps the team win. that is part of the problem with this whole reward system so fearful of ppl stealing cbills by discoing/dieing on purpose the ppl who play get screwed.

I would think like all rewards... you have to actually be in the match to earn them and you could set a min damage dealth threshold to trigger it like say 100 damage to prevent afk farming.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Damage sponge reward and Marksman Reward: Destroy an enemy mech in less than 200dmg, but after having dealt more than 50, so as to try and prevent people from just plinking 5 pts off an already mostly cored mech. The damage you dealt it multiplied by 5 and added to your total in the end.

This new reward system could go alot of places....it sounds good in theory, almost like Football player bonuses.....

[Dracol]

Jetfire as Keith pointed out, rewarding a bonus on living would lead to more hessitant play.

But higher payouts for soaking more damage i agree with. Assaults would be the biggest benifactors. Also, i believe it would help encourage learning how to absorb damage.

Jetfire, on 22 October 2014 - 06:15 AM, said:

I would think like all rewards... you have to actually be in the match to earn them and you could set a min damage dealth threshold to trigger it like say 100 damage to prevent afk farming.

Good catch. Agreed

[Logan Hawke]

Yes please to this. I guess a good analogue in the f2p world would be WoT and the 'Steel Wall' reward. It's a great thing for assaults (and heavies to an extent) as they aren't going to be benefiting from a majority of the new rewards and should have at least a couple rewards that specifically play to their strengths.

[Joe Mallad]

Imo, there is already way to much rewarding of points for losing in this game. Not saying the losers should get nothing. But I do believe the bonuses in some categories were a bit too high. We should not be rewarding so much for losing. This is supposed I be a competitive game right? So how about people compete and try and win? Why should the losing side be rewarded so much?

I play WOT too and there are plenty of times in that game that the losing side (if you are lucky) will come out of it in the positive.
We should not be getting these massive rewards for losing our mechs lol. We should not be getting massive rewards for running right into the battle with no regard to the outcome. It's to he point that people are spoiled because they know they can still make great money and decent XP even for playing stupid lol.

Logan Hawke, on 22 October 2014 - 06:24 AM, said:

Yes please to this. I guess a good analogue in the f2p world would be WoT and the 'Steel Wall' reward. It's a great thing for assaults (and heavies to an extent) as they aren't going to be benefiting from a majority of the new rewards and should have at least a couple rewards that specifically play to their strengths.

tho I can agree with.

[Logan Hawke]

Yoseful Mallad, on 22 October 2014 - 06:35 AM, said:

-snip-

Don't take this as an insult, but please no. The grind in WoT is soul crushingly bad. I meant my comment only as an example of a type of reward class, not something that should be copied exactly. One of the things this game thrives on is the multitude of mechs and chassis and variants. Making it harder to get more variants (and less necessary to buy more bays) would be bad for both the game and the profit margins.

Edited by Logan Hawke, 22 October 2014 - 06:39 AM.