47 replies to this topic

[ArmyOfWon]

http://mwomercs.com/...y-as-it-stands/

Did you happen to read my post, Mustrum? Sounds like we are trying to work towards similar goals, albeit with somewhat different approaches.

(I'm not certain if I'm too hot on the idea of points for time alive. All I see that resulting in are farmers running away, hiding, and powering down....)

[MustrumRidcully]

ArmyOfWon, on 17 November 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...y-as-it-stands/

Did you happen to read my post, Mustrum? Sounds like we are trying to work towards similar goals, albeit with somewhat different approaches.

(I'm not certain if I'm too hot on the idea of points for time alive. All I see that resulting in are farmers running away, hiding, and powering down....)

I am not that worried about that -simply because that means standing around in your mech for 15 minutes. The other rewards will still make it more economical to fight. But if the combat takes that long, at least you get some extra benefit out of it.

One of the biggest problem IMO is that you can already get a lot for investing little time and little effort. That's why suicide running is attractive to some. Force them to spend more time, they might as well actually fight and get more.

[Taemien]

I'm glad to see there is more constructive ideas here. Normally when talking balance people just go the 'PGI sucks' route.

I do like the idea of rewarding people for fighting. Especially those that hang back and defend. Defense is almost more important than attacking and that should be rewarded. Perhaps something where while in the base cap point, all scoring elements are doubled. This was how it was in BF2142. There you wanted to fight in bases, not out in the middle of nowhere.

I think new players should get a token at the start to purchase a mech right off the bat. Not any mech but some of the more basic ones. They would be responsible for the upkeep right off the bat.

If they got themselves in a rut and cannot repair (usually unlikely, but for some, it could happen) then they would have a trial mech to use. But I'd like to see the trial mech rewards nerfed a bit so that after 2-3 games you have just enough to get that mech you started with repaired and go back to normal play.

We need a reason to get people out of Trial mechs quickly and keep them out of them as much as possible.

Another thing we could do is use a system like Everquest did. In EQ you could lose EXP on death and possibly lose levels. You wouldn't need to worry about this at the lower levels since they took it as you're just learning. But once you hit a threshold, you would be penalized for dying.

Something similar could be done here. Until a player has 5,000 or 10,000 experience, repair costs are mitigated. Total exp is tracked on an account already. Login, go to profile then stats.

This would allow a new player to experience all the glory of MWO with none of the bad for the beginning of their career. Once they get enough exp, they would be considered vets and would be subject to the repair costs like the rest of us. For some players they would reach 10,000 exp quickly and if they can do that, they're pretty decent and wouldn't have an issue continuing as a Vet. Struggling players would not get to 10,000 as fast and would be in more matches, Learning the game, without being penalized for it.

For a newbie that wins every one of their matches. It would take about 10-15 matches. For one that loses most of them, it would take 35-50 before full repair costs would kick in.

[Jennest]

Vlad Ward, on 17 November 2012 - 09:34 AM, said:

The Devs could just base nearly all of the per-match rewards on performance, but the forums would explode. Why? Two reasons:

1) New/Bad players would never, ever make any money whatsoever. They're already practically indistinguishable from farmers.

2) Most players, even the good ones, are straight "doing it wrong" from a BT standpoint and would make significantly less money than they're making right now.

That's one theory. Is there any way to test it?

How about if we found a vehicle-based online-only competitive multiplayer game which bases rewards almost entirely on performance? Is there such a game? There is! World of Tanks gives a small, almost worthless amount of xp and credits for showing up in a match based on the tier of vehicle fielded, but everything else is based on performance. There isn't even a flat bonus for winning. Instead, winning adds a percentage to the player's gains.

Do new/bad players make no money in this system? No. The rewards and costs are tuned so that new and bad players can progress, but much slower than good players. This worry has to do with income and expenses. It has nothing to do with whether rewards are purely performance-based or not.

Do even good players suffer because they're "doing it wrong?" Of course not, because they play so that they're doing it right. They take actions that get them rewarded under the existing system. The only way there can be a problem is if the developers reward bad play, such as giving rewards for killshots but not damage done.

Are there still farmers? Yes, absolutely. However, they come almost exclusively in the form of afkers and bots. There is very little suicide farming by active players because that is simply not rewarding. The only reason to engage in that kind of behavior is if you're not actually playing at all and therefore don't care if your rewards are high or low as long as you take in more than you lose over time. Farming cannot be abolished, but it can be curtailed.

Rewards based on performance alone work great as long as you're sure to reward performance you want players to exhibit. Even the OP's suggestions don't go far enough. As long as there's a flat bonus for winning or losing, you'll get suiciding. Consider a new or bad player who does his utmost in a trial mech and gets 1 kill, 1 assist, 100 damage, and loses. He gets 2,000 points for performance and 2,000 points just for losing, plus maybe 240-480 points for survival time. If he manages to die in half the time and does any damage at all, he comes out ahead in income. Plus, if he gets into a bunch of matches, he's bound to win some of them even if he barely contributes . . . probably more than he would if he were actually trying to win, albeit a lower percentage of them. Every one is a massive payday for a player like that.

That's why there shouldn't be a flat bonus for winning. There's also no point rewarding kills and assists if you're rewarding damage and component destruction. Rewards for base capture should be based on the number of points captured.

[Robdillard]

Let us please stop beating around the bush. Wot did a lot of stuff right. The reward system was one of them. Mwos isn't as comprehensive as it is....yet. It should be.


Botters get basically nothing and get blown to pieces. That system is the best one on the market and one other games pushing organized vechicular combat should really takes notes.

They obviously cannot copy it wholesale. Due to no tiers but MWO is already emulating so much found in WoTs rewards system. They just need to invest more time in tweaking it for this game

Edited by Robdillard, 17 November 2012 - 03:58 PM.

[MustrumRidcully]

I am kinda partial to forget giving base XP for winning or losing, and instead apply just a multiplier to all the other earnings (with the added bonus that winning means salvage.)

So,
You lost: 50 % of the Performance Rewards.
You won: 150 % of the Performance Rewards.
You tied: 100 % of the Performance Rewards.

[zverofaust]

In my opinion the progression and unlock system in MWO is possibly the biggest indicator of PGI's inexperience in this genre of gaming as they seem to have completely missed the point.

[Stone Wall]

I feel the XP system needs a revamp since this isn't a FPS.

[Asmosis]

I would like to see the spotting exp reward changed to only count when the mech actually gets shot.

Its extremely frustrating to target a spotted mech, only to have the scout cycle target as soon as he gets the spotting reward, rince and repeat as fast as possible. If the rest of the team is more than half awake, you get 100+exp each time you target something. I dont think thats exp earned, unless lrms (or other indirect fire) hits the mech while you still have it targeted.

I've also gotten spotting rewards without LOS because i was within 750m and had it targeted (thanks to someone else).

Edited by Asmosis, 17 November 2012 - 04:20 PM.

[Tuhalu]

I think a real solution would have to take into account the upcoming (nigh mythical) ELO-Based Matchmaking system. Now I'm not saying that the following are great solutions, but they seem more relevant than proposing solutions based on a gaming environment that is doomed to vanish! Design decisions need to be predictive, not reactive.

What if the game modified the cash rewards based on the quality of the opposition?

Farmers would be putting an LB-10X to their foot and pulling the trigger. They _might_ get more credits per hour regardless, but eventually they'll want to actually use the credits they've been making and play with those shiny new mechs. At which point their rewards will be poor and their repair bills will be the same. At least until they play a lot of games and pay for their indiscretions.

I'm assuming that a new player starts at "average" and rises or sinks in the pool according their own personal skill over time. Part of what makes this attractive for players who actually play is that they don't wind up playing against comparitively "bad" or "elite" players except for the first few games the matchmaking system needs to sort out their skill level.

What if the game awarded bonuses to the best 4 players on each side in addition to win/lose, kill, cap and damage rewards?

Farmers would never get those bonuses until they man up and start playing. And everyone on their side would actually have a higher chance of getting that sweet sweet performance candy! Excellent. Naturally, the amount of times you get the bonus would tend towards an average the more you actually play and wind up playing with and against players/teams of your own skill level.

[JebusGeist]

MustrumRidcully, on 17 November 2012 - 05:38 AM, said:

Now, you can pull out the thumb screws and all and ban people for this kind of behaviour, but this is just the big, obvious thing people can use to exploit the rewards. Trying to moderate this behaviour or auto-detect can get more and more complex and ultimately, you have to ask yourself, is it really worth it?

I have a hard time seeing how this line of reasoning isn't just as applicable to hacking, and yet, bunkbuster, VAC, and all sorts of other detection methods have been developed and continue to be developed for games, because ultimately, people will try to cheat a system regardless of how the system works, you can either decide "oh well, let it be Cheat Warrior Online then" or you can actively seek to detect and punish it.

[Ricama]

Vlad Ward, on 17 November 2012 - 09:11 AM, said:

The problem with the vast majority of these threads is the fact that most people have absolutely no idea how the Salvage bonus system works. Hell, it wasn't even mentioned in your OP.

Rewards for dealing damage make absolutely no sense in the context of Battletech, and the game already rewards high performance in the form of massive Salvage bonuses for accurate pilots/teams.

Short version: The game already rewards the kind of play that the Devs want to encourage. The problem is that most players lack either the skill or inclination to perform to those standards.

Um no, the problem with the current system is Trial mechs don't get any salvage bonus or anything similar. They have no incentive to do well because the paltry sum they gain from assists or kills pales in comparison to the earning power of dieing quickly and running a different trial mech. I do hope that when trials have their own sandbox they get full salvage type rewards so they actually want to finish the match, learn and develop instead of trying to dig their way out as fast as possible.

[Allekatrase]

Trial mechs don't get salvage bonus? I hadn't noticed that. You realize you only get salvage bonuses if you win, right?

Several have suggested that people will find a way to cheat the system no matter what. I really don't think that's true.

First, you need to deal with the repair/rearm issue. It's broken currently. You shouldn't get anything for free. There should be no free repair or rearm. If your mech is disabled you are paying to fix it. If you don't pay for ammo then you're launching without ammo.

Second, you remove the loss bonus entirely.

Third, you make a passive bonus (call it a contract bonus) slightly below what it would cost to fully repair/rearm the mech you launched with assuming it was totally destroyed and you expended all ammo. Note, this is the mech you launched with, meaning you subtract the value of any repairs/ammo you didn't have when you launched. You get this for every match no matter what. As a mercenary you would never accept a contract that wouldn't cover your costs.

From there, balance the win bonus to a good level and increase participation bonuses significantly. Also, make sure the participation bonuses are rewarding things that should be rewarded, base defense included. Salvage bonuses seem good where they're at, but awareness of them is very low. Maybe that could be worked into the tutorial if that ever happens.

Trial mechs need to be reworked entirely. They are a terrible system right now. Until they're worth playing there's no point in figuring out how to reward them. In the model I've outlined, assuming you don't change trial mechs at all, they should probably get no contract bonus, meaning on a loss where they didn't contribute anything they get nothing. Change them so they have to be repaired/rearmed and they'd fit in the system fine, even though they'd still suck. Make them customizable and they wouldn't suck anymore.

Edited by Allekatrase, 17 November 2012 - 06:25 PM.

[Draco Argentum]

Mustrum is of course 100% correct. I don't even remember what month I first made this point in, I think before July. The current reward system is incredibly poorly done.

[CocoaJin]

How about a reward modifier for damage, component destruction and kills(maybe spotting assists too) based on your team's numerical disadvantage? Basically, the farther down you teams is(less players left), the more points/XP/Cbills you get for current rewards.

[Teralitha]

Vlad Ward, on 17 November 2012 - 09:34 AM, said:

If they did, they'd find that this game actually has a very high skill/reward ceiling..

No it does not have a very high skill/reward ceiling.

2000 per kill/assist
2000 per spotting

Maximum possible with that alone is 32000

Then you have damage x10 Whats the average amount of damage per game? Ill just say 300.
so another 3000 cbill for that.

Salvage... Not sure what the maximum is for this... but its more than 35000. But the average salvage is how much? Ill just say 15000 as a guess.

So, for a player that gets 8kills/assist, spots every enemy target and get an average salvage bonus =
50000.

Now there is also a cap bonus. But you dont get that if you kill everything. So, lets say you kill/assist 7 and get the cap.

14000 kill/assist
16000 spotting
15000 salvage
5000 capping
2500 capping assist
3000 damage
Total = 55500

That is aprox the best your gonna get, possibly a bit more salvage though. So maybe as much as 75000 total if you max out salvage too.

75000 + 100000 = 175000 for winning. That is about the maximum you can expect as a free non premium, non founder mech "ACE" player who kills the entire enemy team themselves all headshots. All that work for little reward...

Now on the flipside of that scenario... The team that loses to that ACE in retrospect has a very small repair bill because all they lost was a cockpit, and they can disconnect after they die and already be in the next game or even 2 games dying quickly and cheaply getting at least 75000 for each match x2-3 150000-225000 cbills for doing nothing but showing up and dying as fast as possible.

Point is... Performance rewards are way too low and unrewarding while dying as quickly and as cheaply as possible is more efficient at makinbg cbills than being an ace pilot.

We dont really need MORE rewards... we just need less for losing.... the losing team gets too much free cbills.

Edited by Teralitha, 18 November 2012 - 12:15 AM.

[Sean von Steinike]

Kdogg788, on 17 November 2012 - 09:11 AM, said:

It's really just the win/loss Cbill rewards that need to adjusted, and way way down, and make any in game action worth more Cbills. I've seen people literally wait around on our base with an unrepaired mech and reap the benefits of their victory after I've died for the cause.

-k

Pretty much, that would solve a lot of it I think.

[FunkyFritter]

Stardancer01, on 17 November 2012 - 09:24 AM, said:

Trial Mechs should do as much damage as their tonnage or suffer a 75% profit loss
This will not only stop Trial Mech suicide rushing but encourage newbs to use the smaller mechs rather that assaults all the time

The last thing this game needs is more mechanics that punish new players.

[Ricama]

Teralitha, on 18 November 2012 - 12:07 AM, said:

No it does not have a very high skill/reward ceiling.

2000 per kill/assist
2000 per spotting

Maximum possible with that alone is 32000

Then you have damage x10 Whats the average amount of damage per game? Ill just say 300.
so another 3000 cbill for that.

Salvage... Not sure what the maximum is for this... but its more than 35000. But the average salvage is how much? Ill just say 15000 as a guess.

So, for a player that gets 8kills/assist, spots every enemy target and get an average salvage bonus =
50000.

Now there is also a cap bonus. But you dont get that if you kill everything. So, lets say you kill/assist 7 and get the cap.

14000 kill/assist
16000 spotting
15000 salvage
5000 capping
2500 capping assist
3000 damage
Total = 55500

That is aprox the best your gonna get, possibly a bit more salvage though. So maybe as much as 75000 total if you max out salvage too.

75000 + 100000 = 175000 for winning. That is about the maximum you can expect as a free non premium, non founder mech "ACE" player who kills the entire enemy team themselves all headshots. All that work for little reward...

Now on the flipside of that scenario... The team that loses to that ACE in retrospect has a very small repair bill because all they lost was a cockpit, and they can disconnect after they die and already be in the next game or even 2 games dying quickly and cheaply getting at least 75000 for each match x2-3 150000-225000 cbills for doing nothing but showing up and dying as fast as possible.

Point is... Performance rewards are way too low and unrewarding while dying as quickly and as cheaply as possible is more efficient at makinbg cbills than being an ace pilot.

We dont really need MORE rewards... we just need less for losing.... the losing team gets too much free cbills.

No, less for loosing means more hiding because you can't repair/rearm at a loss and Trials still won't care (they are sometimes on the winning side even after they've screwed over their team). What you need is less up front reward and more skill reward. I like the shared damage reward idea as well, especially if you only earn it as long as you're connected. So if you run off and die before much of the damage is done you loose out on the shared damage reward, but if you're one of the last mechs to fall you get most of it anyway, and are more likely to stick around for the last minute. If you're on the receiving end of a reaming, you're team is probably not going to do much damage so you can still safely quit out for a new game.

[Lavrenti]

Stardancer01, on 17 November 2012 - 09:24 AM, said:

Trial Mechs should do as much damage as their tonnage or suffer a 75% profit loss
This will not only stop Trial Mech suicide rushing but encourage newbs to use the smaller mechs rather that assaults all the time

I can see what you're saying, and I'd like to see less assault mechs in matches (it's just boring). But I think it might be too harsh on people who aren't very good at the game. Even in a medium mech I sometimes have games where I don't do 50 points of damage. Reward effort and good fights, I agree. But tying it so completely to how much damage is done doesn't seem like a good idea, and it'll be even less good when there are objectives other than "kill everyone on the opposite team".