On Warzone Scoring and Rewards

[MajinUltima]

Thank you for the explanation. However you're being idealistic and very shortsighted.

 

Gamers will always choose the path of least resistance. -> always <-

 

Even if you drop the medal requirement to 0, people will still leave a losing warzone. They will leave because it's much easier to re-queue for a new match which they can potentially win than to play out a losing match for less rewards and lose 15 minutes of their time.

 

Feel free to add a deserter debuff as well, it wont help. This will just kill PVP pug queues completely. People wont sit and wait out the 10-15 min deserter queue lockout to finish; they'll just choose to stop queueing altogether and spend their time doing something more rewarding.

 

Penalties don't encourage participation, they encourage attrition. If you want to encourage participation, you need to add more incentives not penalties.

 

There's even an old adage about flies, honey, and vinegar. You should look it up.

 

Pretty good summary of my posts. The best way to encourage participation is to make rewards largely be about completion and participation, and not winning/losing.

[Daayz]

all issues that could have been fixed on the ptr and saved tons of subs.

 

same with class balance. class balance is a joke now.

[tordo]

Your main concern although it was obviously not is to satisfy paying customers first and foremost. How 0 in customers that do participate provide value? To you or to anyone?

 

If this is a belief amongst the developers at Bioware just refund the remainder of my account balance and we will call it a day. I howver believe that arrogaunt developer behavior will continue while missing the ball on larger requirements and satisfactory solution that meets everyone's needs. If free loading is a concern use or modify the daily requirements mission to meter out the reward. Basic the terminal is a warzone time card, store what values you wish to reward and supply it that way.

 

I can almost think of a dozen or so ways a system that would mitigate free-loading without pissing off customers that are just trying to play the game is intended.

 

-Tordo

[islander]

Oh god, even longer queue times? I know, I know, you can't please everyone right? Or wait a minute maybe you can....CROSS-SERVER PVP!?!?!!

 

Why do you think they postponed Ranked Warzones anyway, lol.

[tordo]

Pretty good summary of my posts. The best way to encourage participation is to make rewards largely be about completion and participation, and not winning/losing.

 

I completely agree, the goals should be exciting and enjoyable pvp content not essentially kick customers in the pills and give them nothing. Bioware: Customers per your way a little respect now and then instead of BS releases of this nature would be helpful.

-Tordo

[Kellour]

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.

 

You state here that the WZ Shutdown Sequence is an "unfortunate bug where a feature of Ranked Warzones was incorrectly implemented globally." Yet, when you look at the 1.2 Patch notes, under the General Warzone section, the last two Bullet Points clearly state:

 

"Warzones will no longer shutdown early due to population imbalance.

Ranked Warzones have been temporarily disabled."

 

The Patch Notes would have us believe that you actually DID intend for this feature to go Live with 1.2, and be implemented Globally, not just in Ranked Warzones.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm more than happy that you're fixing some of these terrible changes, but I think a little more Transparency might be in order.

[Varicite]

I completely agree, the goals should be exciting and enjoyable pvp content not essentially kick customers in the pills and give them nothing. Bioware: Customers per your way a little respect now and then instead of BS releases of this nature would be helpful.

-Tordo

 

How do you propose BW promotes healthy competition instead of creating a system that only gives incentives for participation?

 

They want you to care about winning, and none of the suggestions I've read thus far even seem to take that into account.

 

People joining matches and "medal-farming" was a huge issue prior to 1.2 (still present in 1.2), because there was very little difference between winning or losing, and rewards were almost entirely based on how many medals you farmed.

 

That is still a problem that needs to be addressed, which was why the emphasis was put on winning/losing, instead of participation. It also coincides nicely w/ Rated WZs' emphasis on win/loss ratio.

Edited April 16, 2012 by Varicite

[zythenzunare]

From playing it seems 100 Coms pre mpv voting seems to be about the top Swtor wants to allow you per pvp match and in losing matches pre 1.2 I was getting 75 - 80 ( on average ) pre mvp.

 

So I would say make the system as simple as possible that rewards participation then rewards MORE for indivuial effort.

 

If you want Max 100 coms a match and you can get up to 40 from medals to me it is VERY simple

 

Winning team 60 Coms ( as long as you got at least 1 medal ) + 5 coms per medal up to 8 medals so you can cap out at 100 Coms a match for the winning team

 

Losing team I would ether do a flat 40 coms or if you want it to be more performance based can do like a 20 - 50 coms depending on the final score ( as long as you got at least 1 medal ) + 5 coms per medal up to 8 medals so the losing team gets at least 45 ( flat system or ) at least 25 - 55 ( on a score based system )

 

Then do the same for Valor.... Credits I think should be a flat value with a small bonus per Medal so that a hour of pvp would net you about the same as 1 hour if you quested at the same level.

[Daayz]

You state here that the WZ Shutdown Sequence is an "unfortunate bug where a feature of Ranked Warzones was incorrectly implemented globally." Yet, when you look at the 1.2 Patch notes, under the General Warzone section, the last two Bullet Points clearly state:

 

"Warzones will no longer shutdown early due to population imbalance.

Ranked Warzones have been temporarily disabled."

 

The Patch Notes would have us believe that you actually DID intend for this feature to go Live with 1.2, and be implemented Globally, not just in Ranked Warzones.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm more than happy that you're fixing some of these terrible changes, but I think a little more Transparency might be in order.

 

Thats what happens when you release things with 0 testing err sry they have their "internal testers" who have never failed us in the past.

[ekaikaforge]

Didn't see any mention of the reduced quality of matches due to Expertise affecting damage/mitigation/healing.

 

With increased damage % from expertise stat being increased, while damage-mitigation and healing effectiveness %'s left untouched, the matches have become less about using strategy/tactics (pre1.2 to some extent) and more about zerging/respawning.

 

Please consider leveling the ratios of damage/mitigation/healing as it was pre-1.2, for the improvement in the quality of matches.

---------------

edit: Also would point out that (in my opinion) much of the conversation about recruit/pvp/pve/etc gear is also rooted in the Expertise ratio imbalances. While Centurion gear was also inferior, the forums did not implode daily about pvp 'gear' problems.

 

Again, please consider balancing Expertise effect on damage/mitigation/healing to pre 1.2

Edited April 16, 2012 by ekaikaforge

[Zionicest]

The new PVP system is flawed and creates a larger gap between players who have gear and those that do not. The pre 1.2 system for rewards was far superior it rewards participation in the event and it did not matter if you were winning or losing. Now players leave WZ's on my server the moment we start to lose just because they do not want the WZ com reduction and would rather wait in queue then spend 15 to 20 minutes in a match for such low rewards if you happen to be on the losing side.

 

What she said. The lack of reward for the losing side is hurting gameplay, not helping it. The balance was fine in the previous patch before 1.2. You've taken a hammer to kill an ant with these changes. Afking in warzones was a problem, but you don't fix that by nerfing rewards for the losing side. Tie medals to individual and team achievements. But reward credits, xp and comms based on the previous levels.

 

As it is now, on the Veela server we are constantly seeing wz's begin with 5-6 players and people leaving if the team isn't well geared or high valor. Again, don't confuse players leaving and groups not being full with the rewards for losing. Even if we fight with 5 players and get rolled, we should still see significant rewards for our efforts.

[Sianclare]

I would like to see it explained VERY CAREFULLY how ZERO rewards because you are outclassed by the opponents kit in a WZ is meant to be an incentive to continue to try to build kit so as to become competative?

 

Or is the current thinking designed to have a couple of hundred well equipped players enjoy PvP whilst the rest can leave the game so you don't need to support a large community. Just rely on new players to pay for a sub before they realise it is pointless continuing.

[nakomaru]

Giving up and letting the other team 'win faster' is now the worst possible route you can take to rewards.

 

This may be the intention, but it is not the implementation.

 

Example: losing 6:0 Huttball in 6 minutes vs losing 6:0 in Huttball 12 minutes. Same reward: 40 comms for the losers, 100 for the winners. Please consider closing this gap across the board and reward the losing team for dragging out the game.

Edited April 16, 2012 by nakomaru

[Varicite]

I would like to see it explained VERY CAREFULLY how ZERO rewards because you are outclassed by the opponents kit in a WZ is meant to be an incentive to continue to try to build kit so as to become competative?

 

Or is the current thinking designed to have a couple of hundred well equipped players enjoy PvP whilst the rest can leave the game so you don't need to support a large community. Just rely on new players to pay for a sub before they realise it is pointless continuing.

 

Gear is not the only reason people lose WZs.

 

Far from it, from what I've seen, really.

[Blaac]

What she said. The lack of reward for the losing side is hurting gameplay, not helping it. The balance was fine in the previous patch before 1.2. You've taken a hammer to kill an ant with these changes. Afking in warzones was a problem, but you don't fix that by nerfing rewards for the losing side. Tie medals to individual and team achievements. But reward credits, xp and comms based on the previous levels.

 

As it is now, on the Veela server we are constantly seeing wz's begin with 5-6 players and people leaving if the team isn't well geared or high valor. Again, don't confuse players leaving and groups not being full with the rewards for losing. Even if we fight with 5 players and get rolled, we should still see significant rewards for our efforts.

 

This is the effect that "everyone deserves a trophy" events are having on society. Currently I get almost (almost) as many medals when I lose as when I win... I dont see a problem with the system atm. If your servers players are quitting perhaps the issue isnt how the game calculates rewards, but that your teammates are more concerned with being carried to victory than leading the way...

[Trews]

Didn't see any mention of the reduced quality of matches due to Expertise affecting damage/mitigation/healing.

 

With increased damage % from expertise stat being increased, while damage-mitigation and healing effectiveness %'s left untouched, the matches have become less about using strategy/tactics (pre1.2 to some extent) and more about zerging/respawning.

 

Please consider leveling the ratios of damage/mitigation/healing as it was pre-1.2, for the improvement in the quality of matches.

---------------

edit: Also would point out that (in my opinion) much of the conversation about recruit/pvp/pve/etc gear is also rooted in the Expertise ratio imbalances. While Centurion gear was also inferior, the forums did not implode daily about pvp 'gear' problems.

 

Again, please consider balancing Expertise effect on damage/mitigation/healing to pre 1.2

 

+1

nicely said

[LordbishopX]

All I can say is thanks for listening!!! GG!!!! Reward effort and life is good again... Edited April 16, 2012 by LordbishopX

[hypershadowcat]

Thank you for the explanation. However you're being idealistic and very shortsighted.

 

Gamers will always choose the path of least resistance. -> always <-

 

Even if you drop the medal requirement to 0, people will still leave a losing warzone. They will leave because it's much easier to re-queue for a new match which they can potentially win than to play out a losing match for less rewards and lose 15 minutes of their time.

 

Feel free to add a deserter debuff as well, it wont help. This will just kill PVP pug queues completely. People wont sit and wait out the 10-15 min deserter queue lockout to finish; they'll just choose to stop queueing altogether and spend their time doing something more rewarding.

 

Penalties don't encourage participation, they encourage attrition. If you want to encourage participation, you need to add more incentives not penalties.

 

There's even an old adage about flies, honey, and vinegar. You should look it up.

 

100% Agree

 

But it back the way it was eveyone was happy with that.

[hypershadowcat]

How do you propose BW promotes healthy competition instead of creating a system that only gives incentives for participation?

 

They want you to care about winning, and none of the suggestions I've read thus far even seem to take that into account.

 

People joining matches and "medal-farming" was a huge issue prior to 1.2 (still present in 1.2), because there was very little difference between winning or losing, and rewards were almost entirely based on how many medals you farmed.

 

That is still a problem that needs to be addressed, which was why the emphasis was put on winning/losing, instead of participation. It also coincides nicely w/ Rated WZs' emphasis on win/loss ratio.

 

I would lose 4-6 WZ's in a row but never quit under the old system now there is no reason to stay.

[Varicite]

100% Agree

 

But it back the way it was eveyone was happy with that.

 

I wasn't happy w/ medal farmers not caring about winning and just getting their comms/valor and afk'ing until the match ended.

 

I much prefer the new system. It has some kinks in it, but they can be worked out.

[Heideggar]

I forgot to mention the credit reduction in a previous post. It's pretty bad. It should be the same for a win or loss as a lvl 50 daily (~7-8k credits I believe). If we don't do really well in PvP we actually lose money instead of making it, if we send out our 5 companions on crew missions.

 

Listen Daniel, I used to play a game called World of Warcraft, and that game wanted me to do monotonous dailies for everything. I loath daily quests.

 

Queuing for PvP and sending out minions, was an enjoyable way to make money. The only probably I had was the crew pop-up window when they returned, and you guys finally got a hold of a C++ book and fixed it!

 

So you can understand why I have a dislike for you, and your company, when you take my enjoyment away. You still have my money, right? ok, good, because you haven't given me a reason to play today.

[Lowlightx]

I just played my first warzone since 1.2 hit and we got steamrolled by the other team. Our team comprised of only 6 members with levels ranging in the 20's and 30's. The other team was full with levels all in the high 40's (as far as I saw while getting destroyed). The warzone played was the new map and things got so bad that we were being camped at both gates out of the spawn point.

 

We worked hard and tried to push through, but could not do anything. I ended up with 2 medals for all my healing, damage dealing, and hard work. Sadly, that meant no rewards what so ever.

 

Basically I waited 20min in que and played 10min to get absolutely nothing for my time. I understand that a change such as this caters to the hard core pvpers in an attempt to keep things intense. Casual players such as myself who only have limited time to play in between work and family are very discouraged by these changes.

 

I liked the way the rewards were based on how many medals you received pre-1.2. If you only got 1 medal your rewards were low, but at least you got something for your time.

 

Please readjust this soon. I love PVP in this game way more than I ever did in the 7 years of playing World of Warcraft. However, I can not justify wasting what limited time I have playing warzones if it gives no rewards when my team gets steamrolled.

 

P.S. to trollers: If you're a hard core pvper looking to troll me for being casual, keep in mind that casual players make up a large portion of the players in this game as well as contribute to the money going into the game. If you want your game to prosper and continue to make Bioware/EA money (which leads to more resources to continue adding to the game), then "throwing us a bone" is not a bad thing.

[Varicite]

I would lose 4-6 WZ's in a row but never quit under the old system now there is no reason to stay.

 

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

 

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.

Edited April 16, 2012 by Varicite

[hypershadowcat]

I just played my first warzone since 1.2 hit and we got steamrolled by the other team. Our team comprised of only 6 members with levels ranging in the 20's and 30's. The other team was full with levels all in the high 40's (as far as I saw while getting destroyed). The warzone played was the new map and things got so bad that we were being camped at both gates out of the spawn point.

 

We worked hard and tried to push through, but could not do anything. I ended up with 2 medals for all my healing, damage dealing, and hard work. Sadly, that meant no rewards what so ever.

 

Basically I waited 20min in que and played 10min to get absolutely nothing for my time. I understand that a change such as this caters to the hard core pvpers in an attempt to keep things intense. Casual players such as myself who only have limited time to play in between work and family are very discouraged by these changes.

 

I liked the way the rewards were based on how many medals you received pre-1.2. If you only got 1 medal your rewards were low, but at least you got something for your time.

 

Please readjust this soon. I love PVP in this game way more than I ever did in the 7 years of playing World of Warcraft. However, I can not justify wasting what limited time I have playing warzones if it gives no rewards when my team gets steamrolled.

 

P.S. to trollers: If you're a hard core pvper looking to troll me for being casual, keep in mind that casual players make up a large portion of the players in this game as well as contribute to the money going into the game. If you want your game to prosper and continue to make Bioware/EA money (which leads to more resources to continue adding to the game), then "throwing us a bone" is not a bad thing.

 

lol, Hardcore player is what runied EQ2.

[DralenBrand]

Seems like a core issue is the reward system has been designed for Ranked Warzones. Since there are different levels of WZ pvp, maybe the reward system needs to be tiered for those levels (10-49, 50, ranked).

 

That being said, I think it is beneficial to lower rewards for losing.

 

 

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.