37 replies to this topic

[adamts01]

Greatly reduce most current cbill rewards and crank the hell out of cbill victory rewards. It will promote teamwork, equalize rewards among all the weights, and punish selfish players who's actions get kills, but lose matches. On top of that, no matter how you won on assault, you'll get $.

And PGI, for God's sake, change PSR so it doesn't trend upward and so people can move down. If these people who refuse to play as a team keep moving up there's zero point to having a match maker.

"But I kicked *** and just couldn't carry my noob team... " If you're so good you'll win more than you lose, don't worry. Besides, would you rather have good games, which this promotes, or more cbills and bad matches?

" MM hates me, I never win... " good players have strings of loses sometimes, but if it's a recurring trend, you're the common factor, look inward.

Edited because not enough coffee this morning.

Edited by adamts01, 18 January 2016 - 09:50 PM.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

I'm ok with this.

Plus it'd make capping lucretive on assault so people might actually go for it as something other than a diversionary tactic.

[Moldur]

If the c-bill reward for wins outweighs the net total of half wins/half loses that most people should have, then that would be good incentive to you know.. win more.

Sorry if that's confusing. What I'm trying to say is if 1 win and 1 loss right now produce, say, 1 million c-bills split 55/45, then giving wins a huge payout, and losses a small one should at least hit the same 1 million c-bills but with a bigger split going to wins, meaning if someone won a lot of games, they would be raking it in, thus giving bigger incentive to actually win.

Edited by Moldur, 18 January 2016 - 11:10 PM.

[adamts01]

Moldur, on 18 January 2016 - 11:06 PM, said:

If the c-bill reward for wins outweighs the net total of half wins/half loses that most people should have, then that would be good incentive to you know.. win more.

Sorry if that's confusing. What I'm trying to say is if 1 win and 1 loss right now produce, say, 1 million c-bills split 55/45, then giving wins a huge payout, and losses a small one should at least hit the same 1 million c-bills but with a bigger split going to wins, meaning if someone won a lot of games, they would be raking it in, thus giving bigger incentive to actually win.

You make perfect sense. And I really think it would help equalize the ques. Assuming all equal players, lights and mediums just can't do as much damage as assaults and heavies. But they do have important roles, such as scouting, harassing, suiciding to stop a base cap till the team can get there, fake capping and chasing off lights. These roles don't pay much, don't add up to much damage and are too hard for a program to distinguish as useful but they absolutely contribute to winning. I'd be much more willing to suck it up and play the thankless role that wins the match if I was rewarded for it, and more goofy points for "scouting" aren't the answer.

[Revis Volek]

Its already like this...

On a decent match with PT i get 250,000 on a win, on a loss i get like 100,000.

How much more incentive do you need? Most of the time in Wins you are doing more dmg and were alive longer to get other rewards like lance and hit and runs and stuff.


Also KMMD give you more cbill then Killing Blows. So kill "stealers" already dont make more money then someone who did all the work.

[El Bandito]

So, basically PSR the C-Bill/XP bonus?

Cause it is win dependent.

Edited by El Bandito, 19 January 2016 - 12:29 AM.

[adamts01]

DarthRevis, on 18 January 2016 - 11:36 PM, said:

Its already like this...

On a decent match with PT i get 250,000 on a win, on a loss i get like 100,000.

How much more incentive do you need? Most of the time in Wins you are doing more dmg and were alive longer to get other rewards like lance and hit and runs and stuff.


Also KMMD give you more cbill then Killing Blows. So kill "stealers" already dont make more money then someone who did all the work.

That's if you deal out a lot of damage. For example: I could snipe in a LL Raven from a flank and rack up the damage and mget a decent c-bill reward for doing so while my team was torn apart by LRMs and lost. Or, I could get hardly any damage/cbills because I'm too busy running around protecting my team from LRMs and contribute to a win. Or, an Atlas waits till everyone else is dead to power up and waddle in to combat on a brawling map. He'll probably get a couple kills, deal 400 damage, be focused down and killed, and receive a fat payout. That's almost always the case. But, if he had been in the fight from the beginning, he would have likely gotten fewer kills and less damage but would have had a much better chance of winning the match.
.

El Bandito, on 19 January 2016 - 12:24 AM, said:

So, basically PSR the C-Bill/XP bonus?

The exact opposite. I don't believe PSR accurately determines who best contributed to the win, or that a program can ever determine that. That's why I firmly believe in wins counting more than anything else.

[Ano]

Hm. I like the principle (focus people on winning, which hopefully will promote better teamplay as we all know teamwork is OP) but I do think it would incite a *massive* avalanche of QQ -- particularly those who play at "offpeak" times, and therefore perhaps encounter a wider delta of player skill on their team/their opposition.

I tend to agree with you on the PSR stuff as well. I'm about 3 pixels away from being tier 1. When I do tick over, there'll be a HUGE gap between me at the bottom of tier 1 and the people at the top. Huge. Of course there are always going to be a group of players (group size dependent on population size) who are obviously better than pretty much everyone else, but this gradual accretion of what are probably mid-level players in the top tiers does seem to have some disadvantages, even if (as I believe is the case) the matchmaker is actually using a much more nuanced PSR value (let's say a score between 1 and 2000) rather than just the 5 ranks when it's assembling teams.

Edited by Ano, 19 January 2016 - 01:35 AM.

[McValium]

Sorry we allread had this. Win = maximum credit for cbills will result in assault capraces, cause its the most efficient way to make cbills.

[adamts01]

Ano, on 19 January 2016 - 01:35 AM, said:

Hm. I like the principle (focus people on winning, which hopefully will promote better teamplay as we all know teamwork is OP) but I do think it would incite a *massive* avalanche of QQ -- particularly those who play at "offpeak" times, and therefore perhaps encounter a wider delta of player skill on their team/their opposition.

I tend to agree with you on the PSR stuff as well. I'm about 3 pixels away from being tier 1. When I do tick over, there'll be a HUGE gap between me at the bottom of tier 1 and the people at the top. Huge. Of course there are always going to be a group of players (group size dependent on population size) who are obviously better than pretty much everyone else, but this gradual accretion of what are probably mid-level players in the top tiers does seem to have some disadvantages, even if (as I believe is the case) the matchmaker is actually using a much more nuanced PSR value (let's say a score between 1 and 2000) rather than just the 5 ranks when it's assembling teams.

I really don't care what PSR uses. It can only do it's best to try to determine what behavior leads to winning. So I say skip to the end result. If you play well as a team member, you'll win more over time. It's that simple.
There's not much skill difference between a lot of tier 3, 2 and 1 players, being good only speeds up your XP bar. That's really the biggest issue with MM, tier doesn't matter.

McValium, on 19 January 2016 - 01:37 AM, said:

Sorry we allread had this. Win = maximum credit for cbills will result in assault capraces, cause its the most efficient way to make cbills.

I hate assault more than anyone, but some people like it. Either way, there's an objective set forth, and players should be rewarded for completing it.

[oldradagast]

adamts01, on 18 January 2016 - 09:48 PM, said:

Greatly reduce most current cbill rewards and crank the hell out of cbill victory rewards. It will promote teamwork, equalize rewards among all the weights, and punish selfish players who's actions get kills, but lose matches. On top of that, no matter how you won on assault, you'll get $.

Looks like "post something insane as a game suggestion" is the theme this week. First, we had the lunacy of "please make missiles worthless because they are already the weakest weapon system in the game, but they could be useful on the new map, and we can't have that." Now we have "the entire team should be punished for the poor play of a few players on it."

No, just no. If I felt like hunting down epic face-palm memes, I'd do so, but this thread is barely worth a reply, much less a meme. Punishing the whole team for losing because it had more disconnects or poor players on it is just a horrible and illogical idea. You can't force "teamwork," and teamwork isn't going to magically make poor players good or reconnect disconnected players. All this change would do is cause more people to play assaults, reduce player interest even further since the game is already very grind-driven, and encourage players just to YOLO to rush on to the next game once their team is down a mech or two because they're already getting basically nothing for that match.

Seriously, the ONLY THING you can control on your team is YOUR actions, so why should I be punished because the rest of the team is full of useless potatoes when I put out an excellent performance? Heck, I'd argue the opposite of your proposal, in that the current rewards for a loss are horrible. You can get a few kills, rack up 400+ damage, and still get squat and a down arrow just because your team has a few people on it who can't get near 100 damage or who bumbled off to die alone without doing anything. No, a team game must rewards a person for playing the game well, and having everything hinge on victory does not do that; it simply punishes people who drew more poor players or disconnects, which we can't control.

Edited by oldradagast, 19 January 2016 - 04:18 AM.

[adamts01]

oldradagast, on 19 January 2016 - 04:14 AM, said:

Seriously, the ONLY THING you can control on your team is YOUR actions, so why should I be punished because the rest of the team is full of useless potatoes when I put out an excellent performance?

What's your overall W/L? You're tier 3 so you must be doing things right.

[EekaBlitzer]

No no no to the op idea. Its bad enough already that a win/lose swamps the effects of the actual player.
Making it even more so would be a move in a very wrong direction.

[adamts01]

oldradagast, on 19 January 2016 - 04:14 AM, said:

Seriously, the ONLY THING you can control on your team is YOUR actions, so why should I be punished because the rest of the team is full of useless potatoes when I put out an excellent performance?

EekaBlitzer, on 19 January 2016 - 04:46 AM, said:

No no no to the op idea. Its bad enough already that a win/lose swamps the effects of the actual player.
Making it even more so would be a move in a very wrong direction.

You guys that drop with me know I'm nothing special, but my overall W/L is 1.82 and that's almost entirely from solo que. Of course you can't carry every game, but I believe if you're a good team player your W/L will reflect that in the long run.

And as far as everyone rushing to play assaults? Lights can help win just as much and after this, damage wouldn't be the main factor in getting paid. So there's almost as much financial reward for bringing a light as something bigger. As it is, damage brings the most money, so right now bigger mechs are way more popular than they would be.

[Greyhart]

I'd be happy with major rewards been given out for pressing R and locking targets. Pressing R and teamwork are OP.

I know I am in tier 5 but the number of people that just don't lock targets and shoot at fully armoured sections when both legs are red (or something along those lines) drives me nuts.

[adamts01]

Greyhart, on 19 January 2016 - 05:32 AM, said:

I'd be happy with major rewards been given out for pressing R and locking targets. Pressing R and teamwork are OP.

I know I am in tier 5 but the number of people that just don't lock targets and shoot at fully armoured sections when both legs are red (or something along those lines) drives me nuts.

That might be the most frustrating thing ever. Spectating a mech blasting away at a fully armored Dire core while both legs are red cored.

[DerMaulwurf]

Yeah, because we really need to return to the capwarrior online times.

As frustrating as constant nascaring around the crater in Caustic, while ignoring the ostensible objective, is. The times when teams just ignored each other and ran for the base were worse.

It will not encourage teamwork. It will encourage the quickest way to farm money. How do I know that? We already tried it.

[adamts01]

DerMaulwurf, on 19 January 2016 - 05:56 AM, said:

Yeah, because we really need to return to the capwarrior online times.

As frustrating as constant nascaring around the crater in Caustic, while ignoring the ostensible objective, is. The times when teams just ignored each other and ran for the base were worse.

It will not encourage teamwork. It will encourage the quickest way to farm money. How do I know that? We already tried it.

Assault sucks as is. Either way, you're talking about 1 game mode. And if cap rushes become that big of a deal, the turrets will get put back in (hopefully without LRMs) and teams will start guarding their bases.

[Wildstreak]

The only reason to crank victory awards is if R&R was in the game.
What rewards are you looking to reduce?
There may be an argument to review rewards (I think the NARC award is missing) but nothing to 'crank the hell' out of them.

PSR allows people to move down if their team loses.

Seems you are oversimplifying a situation with many moving parts focusing only on one or a few. Overweighing wins is not good.

If the main complaint is Assault, why not add an element from Conquest? I believe in Conquest you get rewards for how many points your team collects so you have some matches won by points and some won by wiping the enemy out even if your team's points are lower than theirs but you still get that point reward.
Thus give a point count for how much of the enemy base you capped over time with no point limit and a reward for that at end of match. Also allow a team to have someone refill the cap bar on their team's base.

Right now it is much more important to have events with rewards for team play instead of all this rewarding individual effort stuff. There also needs changing to encourage people going after the Attacker objective of Invasion Mode instead of the farming there.

[Skoll]

adamts01, on 18 January 2016 - 09:48 PM, said:

Greatly reduce most current cbill rewards and crank the hell out of cbill victory rewards. It will promote teamwork, equalize rewards among all the weights, and punish selfish players who's actions get kills, but lose matches. On top of that, no matter how you won on assault, you'll get $.

And PGI, for God's sake, change PSR so it doesn't trend upward and so people can move down. If these people who refuse to play as a team keep moving up there's zero point to having a match maker.

"But I kicked *** and just couldn't carry my noob team... " If you're so good you'll win more than you lose, don't worry. Besides, would you rather have good games, which this promotes, or more cbills and bad matches?

" MM hates me, I never win... " good players have strings of loses sometimes, but if it's a recurring trend, you're the common factor, look inward.

Edited because not enough coffee this morning.

No thanks.

I understand where you're coming from, but no thanks. The matchmaker seems to viciously hate me and the rest of WoL and as you've seen in your drops against us earlier, we are saddled with horrible teams who refuse to work cohesively. I'd rather get my cbill rewards for fighting or doing the objectives, than getting a pittance because the team refused to work together. PGI has been on the up and up so far, which is why a lot of vets are returning. Your idea is reminiscent of the bad old times.