29 replies to this topic

[Baron Kreight]

Something like MVP vote system in SWTOR?

[SuomiWarder]

Sometimes it would be obvious, but usualy you don't know what everyone else on your team was doing. Is there any point to naming an MVP? I don't think so.

[CommanderBoom]

It would be cool to have a system to give people credit if they really kicked ***... that way then next guy see's his rating and knows he is good... this would also help merc corps decide if a person should be recruited... also might help determine good commanders from bad ones... and encourage random groups to follow the commander if he has say 60 ratings and his avg is 4.5 stars, making matchmaking that much more enjoyable. Can't really explain it well.

[Devil Fox]

Agreed with SuomiWarder... you don't know what the opposing team's gameplan was, how effective either team was in terms of their roles, and objectives, who was winging it etc. Just too many factors to consider voting for a MvP from a match... if you had an objective observer/ref maybe in organised Mech unit battles it will be good for reputation and moral amongst units, but to the average joe and pub player it won't matter.

[Ramius Hazen]

MVP stats probably not very useful for an indication of quality. Good for extra c-bills and xp tho. To use your SWTOR example, crews routinely run grouped and just MVP each other for the bump. Which I don't oppose necessarily. But it just indicates quantity not quality. (I know. I know. Quantity has a quality all its own.)

[Freakiie]

Not to mention that people tend to be incredibly biased and often deny what was an obviously good job because of some silly reason.

"Ooh you bumped into me, you stink! What you managed to get both their assaults killed due to good scouting? Pffft that wasn't you, that was our fire support being awesome!"

You know the drill.

[Sean von Steinike]

These often tend to be popularity contests with units voting for each other at the expense of any outsider they might have played with.

[Feindfeuer]

-people will vote for their friends and clan-members instead of a stranger, even if the stranger outperformed them
-people will not vote for someone, because he did not follow their personal battleplan, even if the plan was stupid
-people will not vote for someone, because they think he 'wronged' them somehow in an earlier game

[CommanderBoom]

these are all good points, my previous idea is retracted...

Edited by CommanderBoom, 18 July 2012 - 01:30 AM.

[Crimson Dux]

I pity the solo player joining a drop with an existing group.

[JD Makane]

No player voting. MVP, Ace, whatever you want to call it should be automatic based on stats. An accolade system based on roles would seem to be more intuitive. Similar to WoT, you would have Top Gun, Top Scout, etc. But based purely on stats, not votes.

[Viper69]

Value is an arbitrary thing. To what aspects do you hold most valuable in a player? I was not a fan of MvP voting in TOR because either the healers got all the votes or the killers got it, not the cappers or ball runners. So your version of valuable may not coincide with the teams picture of value, so why place a value at all except on the win itself.

Edited by Viper69, 18 July 2012 - 05:28 AM.

[Pyriel Ward]

JD Makane, on 18 July 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

No player voting. MVP, Ace, whatever you want to call it should be automatic based on stats. An accolade system based on roles would seem to be more intuitive. Similar to WoT, you would have Top Gun, Top Scout, etc. But based purely on stats, not votes.

Totally agree with you there.

[SinnerX]

Were you supposed to vote for the best guy in SWTOR? I always voted for the one with the worst stats, because I figured he could use a little pick-me-up. Apparently others had the same idea, judging from the amount of MVP votes I got.

[Viper69]

TOR was such an overblown bucket of puss. I damn my brother every time I see him for talking me out of my personal abstinence from anything related to star wars after SWG.

[Nacon]

I didn't vote yet... because... why?

I don't understand why the needs for voting for players after a match... do they get something other than pride?

[Whip]

JD Makane, on 18 July 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

No player voting. MVP, Ace, whatever you want to call it should be automatic based on stats. An accolade system based on roles would seem to be more intuitive. Similar to WoT, you would have Top Gun, Top Scout, etc. But based purely on stats, not votes.

101% agree

A computer doesn't get personal, it just crunches the numbers and hands the award to the one with the best stats.

[Daeso]

It always amazes me how 1 mmo is compared to another. MWO is a completely different platform, and should stay as such. Stop requesting mechanics from another mmo.

You want a damage meter next?

geesh....

Edited by Daeso, 18 July 2012 - 07:07 AM.

[Bodha]

A MVP award could be voted upon, but tbh I would rather see it go to the person who contributes the most to the winning team. Problem is how to automate that team contribution judgement to favor ppl who aren't hard camping.

[Seventy Times 7]

I would approve of this. Often in these types of games it isn't the person who topped any charts who did the most, it is the person who correctly led the team tactically to victory or someone who did a typically unimportant role so well they became the most important person on the team.

Also, when you're awarded "MVP" from the computer based on its own arbitrary calculations, it doesn't mean NEARLY as much as when the players in the game vote on it. I think that would provide a special type of pat on the back.