21 replies to this topic

[David Sumner]

Conquest, last man standing, 3 enemy left, 7+assists, done ~140dmg, lost the match 748:750
Match score 79

Skirmish, 2nd to last man standing, 1 assist, done 356dmg, lost the match 12:2
Match score 218

WTF!!!!!

The mismatch between score and objective for those is so extremely high it's ridiculous.
The scores should be reversed.

[The6thMessenger]

Why? You barely did damage to your enemies. You can have 7 assist, with 7 damage, all you have to do is deal any amount of damage and it's called an assist when someone else managed to kill someone.

[Aiden Skye]

1 - You barely scuffed up the enemies paint jobs.
2 - Why does match score matter anyway?

[Zergling]

Assists are rewarded for doing just any amount of damage to an enemy that is later killed by a teammate. In terms of score and rewards, they are near worthless because they are so easy to achieve.

The only kill assists that are worth anything are 'most damage' assists.

Edited by Zergling, 22 December 2016 - 07:25 AM.

[MikeBend]

On a side note, NARC rewards are miserably low too. Its really stupid, when afk on a win is rewarded 2-3-4 times greater, than losing in a 12:0 stomp, dealing top damage on your team.

[Tristan Winter]

PGI isn't actually trying to make you complete the objectives as efficiently as possible. I suppose if you're a PGI apologist, you could argue that PGI is actually trying to incentivise behavior that is entertaining to as many people as possible. In other words, while the most effective way to win Conquest in a military perspective is to avoid contact with the enemy to minimize your casualties and just win by cap if possible. But this wouldn't be fun in a game like MWO, so they give you very little incentive to do that.

In other words, they are unable to make a good game mode where the path of least resistance is entertaining, and so they use the match score to force you to "brawl", as Russ has referred to it (in the context of Invasion mode). Smash mechs. Shoot robots. Pew pew.

So even in the case that you actually didn't contribute much to winning the match, PGI still want to incentivize that behavior, because you're making other players happy by your "just brawl, bro" approach.

[Beaching Betty]

Move along..

[Mole]

So... you're expecting good match scores for being terrible...?

[Lukoi Banacek]

You didnt accomplish the objective in either match and in game one you dont seem to have contributed much. Why should the match scores be flipped exactly?

[Metus regem]

David Sumner, on 22 December 2016 - 02:24 AM, said:

Conquest, last man standing, 3 enemy left, 7+assists, done ~140dmg, lost the match 748:750
Match score 79

Skirmish, 2nd to last man standing, 1 assist, done 356dmg, lost the match 12:2
Match score 218

WTF!!!!!

The mismatch between score and objective for those is so extremely high it's ridiculous.
The scores should be reversed.

Mr. Sumner,

I do hope that you are aware that 50% of the damage that you do, is counted towards your match score.... If not, well I do hope that my post has been informative for you.

[xTrident]

What mechs were you in? Because a light doing ~140 damage with seven assists and losing the cap game by two wouldn't piss me off that much. Lights that do ~25 damage piss me off.

[Mole]

xTrident, on 22 December 2016 - 09:17 AM, said:

Lights that do ~25 damage piss me off.

Wait, are you saying that other weight classes doing ~25 damage doesn't piss you off?

[NRP]

Getting pissed on pisses me off.

[Mystere]

Tristan Winter, on 22 December 2016 - 07:54 AM, said:

PGI isn't actually trying to make you complete the objectives as efficiently as possible. I suppose if you're a PGI apologist, you could argue that PGI is actually trying to incentivise behavior that is entertaining to as many people as possible. In other words, while the most effective way to win Conquest in a military perspective is to avoid contact with the enemy to minimize your casualties and just win by cap if possible. But this wouldn't be fun in a game like MWO, so they give you very little incentive to do that.

In other words, they are unable to make a good game mode where the path of least resistance is entertaining, and so they use the match score to force you to "brawl", as Russ has referred to it (in the context of Invasion mode). Smash mechs. Shoot robots. Pew pew.

So even in the case that you actually didn't contribute much to winning the match, PGI still want to incentivize that behavior, because you're making other players happy by your "just brawl, bro" approach.

Is it really (just) PGI? Or is it partially/fully peer pressure from your teammates?

I've seen games in which players drop strikes on or shoot a teammate trying to cap.

[blood4blood]

Uh, isn't Capture mode in QP just "Each team take the two points nearest your own drop then go brawl in the middle?"
...as compared to QP Domination, which is "Rush to the middle and brawl ASAP!"
...as compared to QP Assault, which is "Rush near the middle to brawl, except the 1-2 lights that try to cap and turn the enemy, so the enemy team might split and get defeated or might still deathball and roll us because were 1-2 mechs down."
...as compared to QP Skirmish, which is "Rush near the middle and brawl!" (Plus that one guy on voice chat screaming "Push! Push now! Quit hiding! OMG, *I* died?! It's your fault! This team sucks! Why didn't you follow me?! WTF is wrong with you potatoes! I am godmode!"

"Stuck in the Middle with You" should really be PGI's theme song.

[Tristan Winter]

Mystere, on 22 December 2016 - 10:24 AM, said:

Is it really (just) PGI? Or is it partially/fully peer pressure from your teammates?

I've seen games in which players drop strikes on or shoot a teammate trying to cap.

Peer pressure is definitely a part of it, though I haven't seen anyone drop strikes. That's funny.

But trying to treat the peer pressure to fix things would be treating the symptom rather than the disease, I feel. The underlying problem is PGI's agenda when they decide the algorithms for matchscores.

[Karl Streiger]

The whole system is completely strange, not only is the algorithm a farce of "player skill"
It is even worthless because the MM doesn't work - I drop regularly with guys that play there first MWO games (nice that there is new blood) but also known and true T1 players (those that had maxed T1 when the nonsense did start)

Last not least it is known that killing and damage doesn't provide as much points in Conquest however it's a bad taste when every member of your team get a decrease although there is not a single enemy mech remaining - sure happens and I also would say why not we missed the primary objective and the other team keept us busy to win by points even when it cost them everything.
But when in a different game - skirmish you participate even less died because you have forgotten that your PPCs had minimal range and you get a rise? Sure everything works fine

Edited by Karl Streiger, 22 December 2016 - 11:32 AM.

[Vellron2005]

What I've learned about playing ANY mode in MWO is.. "When in Rome, do what the Romans do"..

If people are capping - cap. If people are brawling - brawl. If people are scattering - scatter, if people are death balling - death ball.

Usually yields good results. Also, if no targets are called, try to shoot and engage targets others are engaging, and keep good situational awareness.

Give locks, flank as possible, and don't go off on your own..

[PhoenixFire55]

David Sumner, on 22 December 2016 - 02:24 AM, said:

Conquest, last man standing, 3 enemy left, 7+assists, done ~140dmg, lost the match 748:750
Match score 79

Hide from the fight all game, spray some lazzors all over enemy team without focusing your target = useless = low match score.

David Sumner, on 22 December 2016 - 02:24 AM, said:

Skirmish, 2nd to last man standing, 1 assist, done 356dmg, lost the match 12:2
Match score 218

Same as above.

David Sumner, on 22 December 2016 - 02:24 AM, said:

The mismatch between score and objective for those is so extremely high it's ridiculous.

Yes it is. If you care about your match score I suggest you actually contribute towards what really matters, i.e. both dishing out and recieving damage alongside your teammates.

David Sumner, on 22 December 2016 - 02:24 AM, said:

The scores should be reversed.

No they shouldn't. Staying alive when your entire team is dead is counter-productive at best. Capping/hiding like no tomorrow while your team is clealy losing an actual engagement shouldn't be rewarded at all.

[BumbleBee]

Scouting enemy Mechs, UAV bonuses, holding locks for LRM fire and capturing objectives add to your Match Score. My guess is that you did more of these in the second game