On Warzone Scoring and Rewards

[oLoSteR]

I Think the biggest Issue they did with warzone's is the AFK Vote to kick player... They totally failed this feature, For I have seen people just afk and if you vote them all they do is shoot someone quickly and go back to the AFK spot again.... This feature is a TOTAL FAIL!!!!

 

You guys need to change it if the Majority of the 8man... lets say 5 people Vote to kick someone... it should be an automatic KICK by you guys making a 3 medal minimum its actually hurting the Active people... Cause if you get faced up against a very strong team your gonna get no medals almost if u keep dieing... Your afk feature is totally messed up... you guys get paid millions of dollars to screw eeverything up... i love it

[Varicite]

The old system was working just fine. I can understand the the change in medals. But nerfing the rewards like that was just bone headed misstake.

 

It wasn't working just fine though, it was rewarding people for doing nothing but joining, farming 4 medals, and afk'ing the rest of the match.

 

Maybe that was "fine" for you, but a lot of people (including myself) didn't like that winning didn't mean squat.

[Gonewild]

Hey folks,

 

Some follow up news from observations of play and feedback over the weekend. In the next couple of days we will be deploying a small patch that will address the following issues:

 

• As discussed, minimum medals to gain rewards will go from 3 to 1 to better reward those who are backfilled.
  
• Warzones will once again be shutting down when population imbalance is detected. This was an unfortunate bug where a feature of Ranked Warzones (in full team play it is not desirable to let one team end the game prematurely by quitting out) was incorrectly implemented globally.
  
• Completion of Warzones will gain a large increase in the percentage of rewards it represents, so while scoring is still the primary driver, you will cease to see games that give no rewards if players have a minimum of 1 medal earned.
  
• We are extending the time we wait for a full team of eight to better make sure Warzones pop with complete teams.

 

A huge thank you to everyone who played this weekend and provided valuable feedback and analysis.

 

Credit distribution should be reconsidered and returned to pre 1.2 levels, as well. Give player multiple options to earn credits doing what we ENJOY: Not forcing us to perform regurgitated PVE content in order to fund our PVP.

 

You're on the right track. Give us the ability to mirror our level 50s on test so that content can be thoroughly tested in the future.

[RealGoldlantern]

Also, QUIT LEAVING WARZONES. If you're just playing to get the max amount of commendations possible in a short time, what is the point? That's boring as hell. Have a sense of honor. Go down with the ship or don't get on it. Leaving when you're down 1-0 in Huttball? Really? You won't play unless you won't have to work for your win? Honestly, I wish you lost a valor level for every match you voluntarily left early. For somebody like me, who has NEVER rage-quit even once in a warzone, you people are the most frustrating thing in existence. You complain about wasted queue when you get into a match where you're losing 5-0 already, so your answer is to leave? Do you know WHY there's an open spot? Because SOME OTHER IDIOT DID THAT. Quit wasting my time, my team's time, and the person's time that has to take your spot and gets their queue wasted. MAN UP AND STAY.

[sharkfinsix]

 

In some respects I agree with you. It really depends on the specific "rewards" doled out. I think it is patently absurd to place the best players at an advantage over the worst players. Again, no one wants to see a paraplegic play 18 holes with Tiger Woods - except maybe a sadist.

 

PvP should be a competition - not class warfare. P

 

That said - legitimate victory and talent deserve recognition and reward! I don't think the reward should be of a character that places the better players at an additional advantage over weaker players, but a reward is called for: cooler looking gear, credit bonuses, valor spikes, unlocks for exclusive puchases that don't provide stat buffs, etc.

 

No one should want to see Michael Jordan get a 20-point headstart in a basketball game against a blind midget, but MJ deserves a recognition for his skill and achievements. On the other hand, if all Michael ever did was win games in which he had been given an advance advantage, then there would be no need to recognize him - he didn't accomplish anything.

 

When you shoot an unarmed man, you have not proven that you are stronger than he is. Similarly, when a player decked out in War Hero armor kills someone wearing recruit armor, he doesn't deserve anything. When someone wearing recruit armor beats someone wearing War Hero, however, that is a different story.

 

The bottom line: only in a level playing field does skill decide the contest. Don't be too quick to clamor for an edge in PvP or you will rob yourself of any real/meaningful victory. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be handing out trophies to the winners, though.

 

 

You sir, win best post of the day. Here is your Trophy New players should start with War Hero and earn your way down to Recruit, because if you truly are the best, you need less to win right?

Edited April 16, 2012 by sharkfinsix

[AnEvilBus]

" Even if your team is losing, the closer you can make the game the better your rewards will be"

 

very little noticeable be much time efficient to lose quick rather than stall. and unless you make any progress at all it all depends on medals when you could of got the 2k valor and 40 commendations and lost in 2 mins, rather than spend 15 mins.

 

main issue i have is huge grind to get gear, i like to play on more than 1 account but kinda forces me to grind on one account first unless i want to be behind everyone

Edited April 16, 2012 by AnEvilBus

[Daecollo]

Rewards for losing should be 3 times as much as it is now, its absolutely rediculous, I WANT BM gear some time so I can compare to the imperials.

[karsusk]

Originally Posted by DralenBrand

 

 

In some respects I agree with you. It really depends on the specific "rewards" doled out. I think it is patently absurd to place the best players at an advantage over the worst players. Again, no one wants to see a paraplegic play 18 holes with Tiger Woods - except maybe a sadist.

 

PvP should be a competition - not class warfare. P

 

That said - legitimate victory and talent deserve recognition and reward! I don't think the reward should be of a character that places the better players at an additional advantage over weaker players, but a reward is called for: cooler looking gear, credit bonuses, valor spikes, unlocks for exclusive puchases that don't provide stat buffs, etc.

 

No one should want to see Michael Jordan get a 20-point headstart in a basketball game against a blind midget, but MJ deserves a recognition for his skill and achievements. On the other hand, if all Michael ever did was win games in which he had been given an advance advantage, then there would be no need to recognize him - he didn't accomplish anything.

 

When you shoot an unarmed man, you have not proven that you are stronger than he is. Similarly, when a player decked out in War Hero armor kills someone wearing recruit armor, he doesn't deserve anything. When someone wearing recruit armor beats someone wearing War Hero, however, that is a different story.

 

The bottom line: only in a level playing field does skill decide the contest. Don't be too quick to clamor for an edge in PvP or you will rob yourself of any real/meaningful victory. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be handing out trophies to the winners, though.

 

 

 

Awesome post, I only hope BW keeps this thread up, but i doubt it. See you guys in GW2!

[Daecollo]

The reward for winning should be: MORE VALORE/CREDITS/War Hero Commendations, NOT Warzone Commendations, LET US get a chance to get on par with these people.

[Lokai]

These changes are rather absurd, what your doing is creating a " gap " in the player base. Those that have gear will steamroll those that don't, pugs unfortunately are ones get punished the most. I never walk into a warzone expecting to win in a pug but i was always comforted by the fact still get enough rewards to get my bags and such.

 

It is even WORSE while leveling up! as someone that finds heroics take to long to find people to do it gather up, and generally when leveling i just want to get to 50 on an alt story i've already done. Thus more often then not... i skip heroics! which is fine, again i USE to supplement pvp matches when i was below level for an area... which happens every so often! BUT now basically condemning low levels from warzones by saying " you will get no rewards for a losing game " and thus punishing lowbie warzones the most.

 

Face facts it is FINE to punish losers in rated games, but its terrible idea to punish normal warzone players by nerfing there rewards into the ground for a loss or logging into a losing game... i guess i won't be playing any warzones while leveling now... as its a waste of time and effort to " hope "for a winning game, or pray other team isn't a premade...

 

seriously i thought 1.2 was suppose to revive the game? from what i am seeing you had great legacy system, cool raid content and then you KICKED everyone in balls with nerfs... then you further kick pvpers in balls its like you want to alienate your player base....

[IShinmenI]

Gonna be honest, I am somewhat confused by a lot of the logic here. "If it looks like were out numbered or too many new 50's I'm leaving"??? That = 0 reward- now you sit in queue and hope you get into a WZ that fits your liking and if not you bail again....= 0 reward. You keep bouncing out like this and before you know it an hour or 2 have passed and you have gained nothing yet those who stuck it out pull that much further ahead...sorry, the quitters logic is flawed.

 

I honestly don't think the changes are bad ; yes will take some getting used to considering the reward system we had prior and the over all unbalance of some classes that once single handed could make or break a WZ... we have to actually work more as a team to succeed now and I think it is bruising some ego's. Hell, healers actually need protection now or you die; imagine that.

 

Just curious, how fast do you think you should be able to gear out? I like the feeling of accomplishment personally and the old system reflected time played and not gainful rewards IMO.

 

In closing, I do 100% agree with the case that the reduction in credits earned is not warranted. As someone stated, a lot of us play to pvp and shouldn't have to suffer because of this. Christ, the economics are so effed up with the patch you have to craft, or pve just to buy vendor junk.

[LarryRow]

1.

Going to 1 medal instead of 3 is a good move but you need to tweak further. See, more medals is still better than less. And that 2-1 cap Alderaan or Novare game against a much better team is going to take the same amount of time no matter how hard I try. (to reply to your statement about not letting the other team 'win faster')

 

So we will all just turtle the one cap point for our defender medals. Boring. It needs to be easier to get max loss rewards and they need to be decent. Then you will see people trying harder because the opportunity cost of failing is low. THAT is the key. Imagine how lame world pvp would be if you had to repair gear when you died. No one would do it because the risk is too great.

 

I know some hard core (aka "anti-welfare") players will disagree here but if you were really hardcore you would push for the opposite: equal gearing. Think about it.

 

2.

Put credit rewards back to where they were, and the cost of WZ medpacs and adrenals too. Right now the people who need them most are having the hardest time affording them. Sheesh.

 

3.

Reinstate the "participation" daliies and weeklies of 30 kills and 150 kills (aka 10 WZs and 50 WZs). Many of us were doing those through WZs anyway and there was no reason to remove them. And people are FAR less likely to drop a WZ if they get credit for one or both of those quests. Make the rewards the same: 99 of each comm.

 

4.

Allow people to copy level 50 characters to PTS for real testing of endgame balance and mechanics. You basically did a month of useless testing and then a week of real testing on Live.

 

5.

I would be remiss if I didn't say thanks for reacting quite quickly to feedback on 1.2 live. Let's hope the steps you propose and others mentioned in this thread make a difference so we can all keep enjoying SWTOR.

[DralenBrand]

That.. really doesn't answer the question at all, though.

 

I get that people are unhappy, but the old system wasn't that great either.

 

 

Agreed there - the old system isn't the answer. It was better than the present system at incentivizing losers to keep playing, though.

 

 

 

It basically made everyone feel like a winner, because actually winning didn't mean jack aside from 1 daily quest.

 

I wouldn't go so far as to say it made everyone feel like a winner, but I agree with you that winning doesn't mean jack when there are no losers. When everyone is special, no one is special. However, that is an extreme position to take here.

 

I don't want everyone to be rewarded equally. I just don't want the rewards to handicap the losers by giving the leaders rewards that unnecessarily give them any advantage over weaker players. It is possible to have rewards that do affect how level the playing field is.

 

Priority one is having a system that keeps both the winners and the losers playing. Otherwise, pretty soon you won't have anyone to pwn. That doesn't mean that there won't be losers. There will always be winners and losers, and I do not support a system that encourages mediocrity and eliminates competition.

 

Quite the contrary: I want to see increased competition through a system that keeps everyone equally competetive in terms of stats, gear, etc. The only deciding factor in a true competition is SKILL. It must be a test of SKILL, not of who has the best gear, credits, or whatever - but who has the best SKILL. That means who is using tactics, who is using the environment, who has the best rotation, who is playing real chess in the warzones. Not who had time to grind all the necessary commendations.

 

And I still hear 0 suggestions for something that addresses both issues, making winning important, and still keeping a good reason for people to play their little hearts out for the entire match.

 

 

Simple suggestion(s):

 

-Everyone has equal access to gear progression for legitimate participation/effort (being the first and second defender, healing, tanking, DPSing at objectives, capping,, etc) in pursuing objectives that benefits the team with diminishing returns for repeated dueling especially (and for being the 3rd and 4th and sucessive defenders - we don't need 6 peeps on 1 node in Alderaan folks).

 

-Rewards for winners in the way of trophies, valor, exclusive unlocks for shells without buffs, and other sorts of prestige items that do not give the winner an advantage. Heck, I think it would be cool to have leaderboards that give special achievements/prestige to HC players that win with crappier gear (i.e., they go dominate in recruit armor on purpose).

 

-Credits for all participants with a credit bonus to the victors,

 

-Special speeder skins available only to those with a certain win/loss ratio.

 

-Optional win/loss ratio display for nameplates.

 

-More options for sharing bragging rights.

 

-Literal trophies that are unique items passed around and displayed as an icon over the character's nameplate, armor, speeder, etc.

 

-For the truly AWESOME players, a debuff (counter-intuitive but think about it - Halo had an option to do this and it was fun - the more you get ahead, the more you get handicapped, the bigger the bragging rights).

 

Honestly, I think we are looking at rewards backwards. If Michael Jordan beats me in basketball, he doesn't get anyything. But when he beats other NBA players, he gets items named after him l;ike a line of Nike Air Jordans. Also, when he plays a guy like me, he has to play at a handicap, but that is just a testament to his awesome skill.

 

That last bit I like: if a player wins to a certain measurable, astronomical degree, then that player gets to have stuff in game named after him (like renaming Carrick Station or something). That would be awesome.

 

[KassKass]

ALso: You will find there's no incentive to work harder a s team when you are playing against cheats that use exploits and hacks to win night after night in PvP

[Kabaal]

Something a bit more than this needs to be done as rewards are awry even for winning. Some of the hardest fought matches in huttball that go right down to the wire end up giing silly rewards like 79 comms on the win.

[hargrave]

The problem is you turned afker's into quitters.If theirs the slightest chance your side is going to lose the former afker's/bots just quit.

 

Ive given up with warzones though every time ive tryed to be posiitive and do them its always some exploit or hackfest.

 

This is why open world is better the people cant quit its fight or die.

[DralenBrand]

New players should start with War Hero and earn your way down to Recruit, because if you truly are the best, you need less to win right?

 

 

I stopped short of going that far, actually, although that does actually have some logic to support it. My friend Rob used to be a lot better @ Halo 3 than me - a LOT better. The game had a handicapp system. I forget the exact details, but he'd essentially get nerfed when he took the lead. It was fun b/c I had a snowball's chance fo ebating him, but when he beat me it was: (1) undeniable bragging rights for him; and (2) hilarious even to me.

 

Point is, he was so good that he could take a huge handicap and still win sometimes - and he enjoyed the challenge more than just steamrolling me all the time. Also, because everyone knew he was playing at a disadvantage, his superior Halo abilities were a known quantity to all involved either as players or spectators (yes he would do this even with 3+ other players involved).

 

I am not saying we need to do this in SWTOR. I know some people would scream at the thought of having to play at a handicap. BUT, denying the clearly superior players further advantage via gear is only fair.

 

Concerning gear I am only recommending equal acccess to winners and losers, given time invested, to accumulate it. That way, casual players know that eventually they will catch up if they persist. Gear should only be denied to those who are AFKers, who do not contribute meaningfully to objectives, etc.

 

Just because I have put the possibility of a very visible debuff out there as a sort of badge for the super hardcores to wear when pwning us lesser nerds, do not think that I am recommending this be mandatory. It should be mandatory that they not get any kind of buff tho, that weaker players are denied. Simple logic.

 

 

 

[kickinhead]

That's a pretty neat Idea conserning rewards for winning in Theory, but it simply does not work on servers were there are 3 times the amount of imps playing PvP! On our server, as reps, we can start dreaming about PvP at maybe noon. At this time, the Imps already have 2 teams playing huttball and gearing themselves up. Then, we have 4-6 hours of pure fun were we play with 4-6 ppl on our team, getting steamrolled by the imps with a full team (and 2 other teams playing huttball, novare or Voidstar).

 

How is it possible to reward players for winning, if the reps can't even fill a freaking team of 8?

 

Are you really forgetting how many ppl have the most frustrating time on low-pop server with a very skewed balance of imps/reps?

 

It was horrible with Ilum and quite bad with WZ's, then, right before 1.2. it actually was fine: we were able to get good rewards for playing well, even if we were outnumbered and we knew that we are not gearing up the imps ten times faster then we gear up ourselves.

 

As it is now during 5+ hours of the afternoon: we get in, see that there are only 6 players, we leave and w8 15 mins and try again. Why should we also give the imps medals for steamrolling a team of 4-6 players when we get nothing in return?

 

How are we supposed to get points for scoring in huttball or planting bombs or capturing and holding points, when it's simply impossible to do these objectives in a heavily outnumbered team?

 

At first, merge servers, let ppl transfer chars and give us global ranked PvP and 8-man premades: Until then, don't try and reward players for winning, because you basically reward a MMA-champion for beating up a child in a wheelchair.

Edited April 16, 2012 by kickinhead

[Daecollo]

So...

 

basicly:

 

Increase Rewards for Winners.

 

Losers have the same reward.

 

 

WHAT!?

[davedorman]

This WZ change has basically spoiled playing in them for me. As a Jedi Sage just at level 50, not having the power armor nor the ability to get any at this point because I am so weak compared to the other power players that have been grinding valor and armor since the beginning of the game. The is no way I can even get 1 award point in the WZs now let alone the 3 or 4 I need to get any rewards from playing in the WZ. This past week since the start of 1.2 I have played in dozens of WZ trying to figure out how I can advance. I have been on 0 winning teams ( my server Darth Malack is 3-1 IMP and the WZ teams are unbalanced) I have received 2 medals in all that play time and 0 ZERO rewards for my time playing.

 

Sorry guys, if this is the way you want to nerf the endgame for players hitting 50 and putting them in overpowered WZs so they can not advance at all, then you have lost me as a player of this game.

 

The previous incarnation of awards worked fine. I was happy with at least getting Valor, commendations and credits, even if they were minor, for at least my participation int he WZ.

 

Now I look at the stats at the end of the play and ZEROs across the board!!! I'm done. Thank you for ruining my experience.

[Daecollo]

LET your valore rank decrease the cost of BM gear, 1% per rank. Edited April 16, 2012 by Daecollo

[Varicite]

The is no way I can even get 1 award point in the WZs now let alone the 3 or 4 I need to get any rewards from playing in the WZ.

 

Why not?

 

There are a LOT of medals. Most of them don't require you to be geared.

 

So again, why can you not get 1 medal, let alone 3?

 

You can't be near an objective? Heal? Pass the ball? Peel for other players? Stop caps on turrets/doors? Distract enemy players from objectives?

 

You can't do any of that?

 

Edit: I just reread your post and saw that you mentioned you're outnumbered 3:1 on your server. That explains it; disregard my drivel. : )

Edited April 16, 2012 by Varicite

[Mrip]

...

How is it possible to reward players for winning, if the reps can't even fill a freaking team of 8?

 

 

As it is now during 5+ hours of the afternoon: we get in, see that there are only 6 players, we leave and w8 15 mins and try again. Why should we also give the imps medals for steamrolling a team of 4-6 players when we get nothing in return?

 

How are we supposed to get points for scoring in huttball or planting bombs or capturing and holding points, when it's simply impossible to do these objectives in a heavily outnumbered team?

...

 

This. I have stopped playing my Republic character. And it's not a matter of just waiting a bit longer to fill out a team of 8. There just aren't 8 people queueing so you get a team of 5-6 for the whole game. Then one person quits and there is basically no way to get medals. If you hit the minimum tor eceive rewards, you're going to get 20-25 comms. Getting gear is ridiculously difficult and the thought of grinding hundreds and hundreds of crushing losses is beyond depressing.

Edited April 16, 2012 by Mrip

[generalsanmai]

Solutions:

 

1. Completely change the medal system. Make medals provide a bonus to experience/commendations/valor/credits earned, but not be the factor to determine whether a reward is given.
    
   
2. Make warzones provide a fixed number of experience/commendations/valor/credits. Increase the fixed amount by a very minor number, say 10-20%, for the winning team.
    
   
3. Limit the number of players in a warzone by the least populated team. This just seems like common-sense to me, I'm amazed your pvp experts didn't think about this issue. If there are 4 players on the Republic team, then ONLY allow 4 Imperial players in.
    
   
4. Make a deserter debuff like pretty much every other MMO has done so people wont just quit a warzone, causing the population imbalance to become worse.
    
   
5. Fix the bugs that trap you in the starter area of a warzone, so we aren't kicked out of games. This bug has been around since launch, and is very irritating.
   

[Himeji_Endless]

I have a new shadow (lvl 24 w/ 21 valor) on Ajunta Pall and thought the new changes were going to be bad based on all the comments I've been reading. I have to say that right off the bat, my wait times are minimal, although i get into less than 8man groups, it usually fills by the time the event starts.

 

I'm usually tops on medal counts (win or lose) and don't see a big deal w/ the system currently. I know how to get medals and encourage my fellow team mates to play together. Its pretty easy to get 3 medals as I can guard people and absorb damage ... I guess if you dont have healing or any type of protection skills it will be harder to get medals, but if that is the case, you should be dps and burning people down anyways.

 

I did lose w/ no rewards on one game where i got put into a 0-4 huttball match that ended quickly after ... no biggie, just que up again and get going. I used the afk vote once so far and haven't noticed unmotivated teammates very often. Maybe its just the server im on, but pvp overall is pretty healthy on ajunta pall.

 

I do get rolled a bunch on my 50 juggernaut when Vendetta premades log on, but hey, i just gotta L2P better too or get my own premade groups - no big deal. I sell augmented implants to make cash so i rarely have to PVE now ... no big deal to me overall.