14 replies to this topic

[Jman5]

We have a problem. Your objectives are not giving players any matchscore rewards.





Matchscore is a critical system not only for judging player performance, but it's the basis of the entire PSR. Having to travel to a fuel cell, run back to drop it off at the base, and then move back to the team is a very time consuming process and needs to be properly accounted into matchscore. Otherwise this is in effect a nerf to lights and other fast mechs who are supporting their team when they could be getting easy points by just deathballing with the team.

Installing a battery at your base should give you at least 25-50 points to matchscore.

Damaging turrets, mobile field bases, and defense towers should award you 0.25 - 0.5 matchscore for every point of damage you do. This lines it up with how regular damage works and more importantly doesn't rely on kill stealing the structure to get rewards.

If you want players to do more than just skirmish you have to make the objectives reward you properly. Think about how long it takes to go back and forth to your base collecting fuel cells compared to how long it takes to fire 1-2 alphastrikes. You need to make it worth players time to make it fair.

There is a massive opportunity cost here going for fuel cells, or attacking the base instead of just deathballing with the team. You need to better balance it at the matchscore level or players are just going to treat the game mode like Skirmish.

[Cy Mitchell]

Absolutely correct. What is the point of adding game modes if the only objective in any of them is to deal damage and get kills? I set up a private lobby with two accounts and then used one account to complete all the objectives and win the game. The highest match score I managed to obtain without farming Mech damage was a 91 and that included a head shot on the afk Mech. When I left the Mech alive and just did the objectives I scored a 56 match score which included two batteries picked up and delivered.

The rewards and match score systems need to be reviewed and improved for all the modes besides Skirmish including Incursion.

[Jman5]

Rampage, on 25 March 2017 - 09:24 AM, said:

Absolutely correct. What is the point of adding game modes if the only objective in any of them is to deal damage and get kills? I set up a private lobby with two accounts and then used one account to complete all the objectives and win the game. The highest match score I managed to obtain without farming Mech damage was a 91 and that included a head shot on the afk Mech. When I left the Mech alive and just did the objectives I scored a 56 match score which included two batteries picked up and delivered.

The rewards and match score systems need to be reviewed and improved for all the modes besides Skirmish including Incursion.

Agreed. I'm trying to keep my feedback focused on Incursion, but there is a larger issue here. Matchscore rewards mean you get heavily punished for playing objectives. A typical laserboat will be getting 25 matchscore every time they fire their guns. PGI needs to take this stuff into account because when I'm out playing objectives I'm not firing my guns at bad guys. There needs to be some sort of equivalent balance for what I'm doing instead because it is important.

Edited by Jman5, 25 March 2017 - 09:45 AM.

[rolly]

A good point. Though this is sort of endemic of the entire game itself. They want this to be a thinking mans game and a team game, yet poorly reward teamwork, usage of team based tools and mostly centered around individual damage scores and kills.

Having to constantly run back and forth on a battery run doesn't seem to integrate well. Why not give ECM equipped mechs the ability to hack the towers and shut them down and have the towers run infinitely once the batteries are in place? This gives a more dynamic secondary mission to nullify towers, whie the main attack the base OR destroy defenders objective is in place.

[Monkey Lover]

You can see my score up there I attacked a dire before going to thier base . I took out 2 turrets,radar tower and 2 base points. My whole score was from the fight with the dire .

[rolly]

Monkey Lover, on 25 March 2017 - 10:09 AM, said:

You can see my score up there I attacked a dire before going to thier base . I took out 2 turrets,radar tower and 2 base points. My whole score was from the fight with the dire .

You'd think they'd have this scoring thing nailed down though. I mean this is a fully launched game with several iterations of scoring.

[Cyrilis]

+1 to score up for objectives!

Score up also needs also to be done for Scouting, which was proposed earlier

https://mwomercs.com...__fromsearch__1

(sorry for the commercial...)

[Shino Tenshi]

I mentioned this in another thread too and wholeheartedly agree with it. I did a LOT of work on cracking the scoring system for the game a while ago and can confirm you get precisely 0 match score for running batteries back to base or for killing towers.

As others have mentioned in numerous threads, if you want objective based play, then you need to reward accordingly when someone (or a team) plays the objective and doesn't just deathball. I love playing lights, but it doesn't matter how well I do my job as a light in a game, I will always score 1/4 to 1/3 of the score I would if I took my AWS-8R LRM60 boat out and did a typical 800-1000 damage, 3-4 kill game. And that 1/4 to 1/3 is when I'm deathballing with a light or using my Arctic Cheetah w/ERPPC. If I dare take my Raven w/NARC and TAG out for a spin and even hand 6-8 kills over to the LRM boats, I'm lucky to clear 100-150 match score.

Incursion mode (and every other objective based mode) suffers from the same problem as above, not enough match score (or cbill/xp reward) for playing how you're supposed to. So thus everybody deathballs and mops up whatever objective is left when there hasn't been anyone left to fire at for a minute or more.

I've been looking forward to Incursion for about a year now and really think it has a lot of promise as the best game mode. What we have here is a good start, but suffers from a lot of the same problems many other game modes suffer from... mainly lack of incentive to play to the mode.

[R Valentine]

It does. That guy with a match score of 6? He played the objectives. That's a noticeable deficit.

[Malrock]

Making objectives meaningful sounds like a solid plan to me.

[Jman5]

I just want to make sure we're clear here. If you make battery power ups worth 1 or 2 points you are not fixing the problem. Matchscore rewards need to be significant enough to at least partially balance against the guy who's sitting in the deathball launching alpha strikes and gaining 15-25 points a pop. Granted, fighting the other team is harder and riskier, so no one is expecting a 1:1 reward parity, but it should still be in the ball park considering the time it takes to go to the generator, back to base, and then back out.

[CainenEX]

+1 to this thread. Seriously though PGI needs to fix their match score system. This problem is endemic to all their game modes :\

[Big Tin Man]

Jman5, on 25 March 2017 - 09:16 AM, said:

We have a problem. Your objectives are not giving players any matchscore rewards.

This has been a problem for a long time.

Conquest (got better after they added conquest speficic rewards after what, 2 years?)
Assault
Scouting (worst offender)
Invasion/Siege (not bad if you're a loyalist doing a gen rush)
Domination

And now Incursion

If you play the objective straight up, you get hosed. PGI can't seem to figure out how to make a game mode specific scoring formula, or can't be bothered to do it. It is badly needed in many places.

[Jman5]

Big Tin Man, on 27 March 2017 - 03:49 PM, said:

This has been a problem for a long time.

Conquest (got better after they added conquest speficic rewards after what, 2 years?)
Assault
Scouting (worst offender)
Invasion/Siege (not bad if you're a loyalist doing a gen rush)
Domination

And now Incursion

If you play the objective straight up, you get hosed. PGI can't seem to figure out how to make a game mode specific scoring formula, or can't be bothered to do it. It is badly needed in many places.

Faction play also has the infuriating issue of dividing the matchscore by mechs you go through. I can see maybe a 10 point bonus for every surviving mech, but you don't freaking divide # of mechs used. It makes the matchscore worse than useless because you're telling players that sitting in the back with ER LL doing pitiful damage, but not dying is how to achieve the top score.

But I'm digressing from Incursion feedback. My only hope is that this thread spurs someone at PGI to clean up their matchscore formula a little bit.

Edited by Jman5, 28 March 2017 - 08:31 AM.

[Tier5ForLife]

Big Tin Man, on 27 March 2017 - 03:49 PM, said:

This has been a problem for a long time.

Conquest (got better after they added conquest speficic rewards after what, 2 years?)
Assault
Scouting (worst offender)
Invasion/Siege (not bad if you're a loyalist doing a gen rush)
Domination

And now Incursion

If you play the objective straight up, you get hosed. PGI can't seem to figure out how to make a game mode specific scoring formula, or can't be bothered to do it. It is badly needed in many places.

I cannot believe that PGI cannot "code" or figure out how to make objectives worth something. It is like the chat rooms which are better but still can be improve by allowing people to put links in them. Does PGI need to hire a couple of 13-15 year olds to do this for them?

If they can code the games as it is, they can make changes. If not, they are idiots who should be replaced. It like asking a normal person to step on a 2X4 lying flat on the ground.

So either no one knows who to do anything or THEY DO NOT CARE ENOUGH TO DO IT. It's that simple. It reminds me of Ronald Reagan "testimony" at the end of the Iran/Contra scandal. He was given the question beforehand and was allowed to answer without any questions, in fact, it was done by video.

He answered "I do not know" or "I do not remember" 74 times. For me, that meant he was either stupid or lying.

So when I see a lot of players asking for what seem to be good changes made to the game, it either means that you cannot do it or you do not care enough to do it. If you have another answer, please let me know.