Voidstar "COINFLIP" tie breaker has no place

[leareth_]

in ranked PVP.

 

Make it a draw. Implement some sort of "Overtime". I don't know, but awarding a "loss" to a ranked group that fought to a standstill is ... not right.

[Gorghte]

From the weekly Q/A June 29th.

 

Rob Hinkle (Senior PvP Designer): Excellent question! We've actually gone through a series of adjustments to improve this very system. As of 1.3, here is how a winner is determined in Voidstar: There are 6 checkpoints inside the Warzone - the 3 sets of blast doors, the bridge in the reactor room, the forcefields in the cargo room, and the datacore itself. The team that gets the furthest wins the Warzone. If both teams get to the same checkpoint, then whichever team gets to that point the quickest wins.

 

When the Warzone figures out that one team has already won the match (since they are the 2nd team on the attack and have exceeded their opponents’ progress, or have gotten to the same spot faster), the match will end immediately instead of playing out the rest of the game to a known ending.

 

Unrelated to the tiebreaker changes (but also exciting), we've made a change to the Hangar inside Voidstar to help prevent stalemates inside the first room. We've added a broken fence down a portion of the middle of the room, which obstructs movement but not vision. The intended result is that the defenders have to commit to defend one side or the other, and can't float between both doors quite so easily.

[Smashbrother]

From the weekly Q/A June 29th.

 

Ya it's still not good enough. If the teams are equal the VS will still stalemate.

[kronomandar]

if no one makes it through the first door, victory is awarded based on accumulated team objective points.

 

it is not a coin toss.

 

 

 

 

it never has been a coin toss.

[myolinyr]

if no one makes it through the first door, victory is awarded based on accumulated team objective points.

 

it is not a coin toss.

 

 

 

 

it never has been a coin toss.

 

This^

[leareth_]

This^

 

I find that ... still wrong. So that awards the team that can just stand at the door to get more points by "defending" (sucking down the damage yet surviving) ...

 

Since there are no "attacker" points (no doors capped).

[leareth_]

I find that ... still wrong. So that awards the team that can just stand at the door to get more points by "defending" (sucking down the damage yet surviving) ...

 

Since there are no "attacker" points (no doors capped).

 

Ok, after reviewing our screenshots and adding up both sides objective points, you guys are wrong.

 

It's random. I would love to hear a dev comment on this.

[-Knuckles-]

The team who defends first ALWAYS wins if neither team can plant a bomb on first door.

[LarryRow]

The team who defends first ALWAYS wins if neither team can plant a bomb on first door.

 

You made that up!

 

Seriously, though, what were they thinking in the Q&A? Obviously this is what the asker was talking about. 0-0 ties, not 3-3 ties or whatever. And particularly if they are different in ranked.

[Synxos]

You made that up!

 

.

it was actually like that at one point lol.

[leareth_]

it was actually like that at one point lol.

 

Correct. For 0-0 Ties, it used to be "first defending wins".

 

Now it appears to be a coinflip from all I can tell. We've compared objective points, etc, and there seems no other reason other than random decision.

 

I would love a dev comment on this.

[Suzina]

My understanding of 0-0 voidstars is that both sides lose in 1.3.

 

 

I had a 0-0 tie, the most common type of tie, and saw the defeat message. The other team started taunting us in chat saying we "got lucky to be awarded the win" and "BS loss" ect... so it was clear their team lost too.

[leareth_]

My understanding of 0-0 voidstars is that both sides lose in 1.3.

 

 

I had a 0-0 tie, the most common type of tie, and saw the defeat message. The other team started taunting us in chat saying we "got lucky to be awarded the win" and "BS loss" ect... so it was clear their team lost too.

 

You are also incorrect, as we have received wins in a 0-0 Voidstar.

 

Still waiting for a dev comment.

[Evil_Santa]

if no one makes it through the first door, victory is awarded based on accumulated team objective points.

 

it is not a coin toss.

 

 

 

 

it never has been a coin toss.

 

O rly?

 

This screenshot was taken Wed. night. http://i.imgur.com/FbEnh.jpg

 

Feel free to take the time to add-up the objective points of both teams, but based on the fact that my team had 7 players with 10k+ objective points, the opposing team had 2 players with 10k+ objective points, and no one breached 20k objective points on either team - there's a pretty good chance that my team had more objective points. But hey - i'm not mathematician.

Edited June 30, 2012 by Evil_Santa

[Cooperal]

From the weekly Q/A June 29th.

 

That quote still does not address 0-0 tiebreakers up to the standard people were hoping. All other ties and scores seem to be fixed but 0-0 stalemates are still very much a common occurence in Ranked. Nobody wants their rating altered on a 50-50 flip.

 

Saying "Hey we put a fence in the way" is not good enough. They modelled (or perhaps recycled) a fence and put it in the way. Anywhere from 3 minutes to half an hours work.

 

Firstly they need to make the winning conditions more clear ingame for the people who can make threads faster than they can think. Then they need to put their foot down on something concrete for 0-0 ties.

 

Maybe weigh them based on objective points and medals. If not implement an actual DRAW system. One that decreases the highest and increases the lowest rating at a reduced amount.

[Sixthy]

I'm not even sure tie breakers outside of 0-0 are entirely clear, either. I propose the following the scenario that recently happened in a ranked game:

 

Team 1 on offense - breaches the first door with 1:30 remaining in the game. The team goes on to unlock the first set of bridges with :45 seconds remaining in the game. The round ends after that.

 

Team 2 on offense - breaches the first door with 2:00 remaining in the game. Team 2 then proceeds to the bridges and successfully unlocks them at :30 seconds remaining in the game.

 

Which team wins?

 

 

From my understanding team 1 should win the game. They completed the 2nd objective with 45 seconds remaining in the game. However, when team 2 unlocked their bridges with 30 seconds remaining (15 seconds slower than team 1), the game automatically ended and awarded the win to team 2. I was on team 1. Explain that one. The only thing I can come up with is regardless of the furthest point, somehow the first door carried more weight in the decision for the game since team 2 got the door 30 seconds faster than team 1, but was slower on the bridge.

 

Edited June 30, 2012 by Sixthy

[Sharee]

I'm not even sure tie breakers outside of 0-0 are entirely clear, either. I propose the following the scenario that recently happened in a ranked game:

 

Team 1 on offense - breaches the first door with 1:30 remaining in the game. The team goes on to unlock the first set of bridges with :45 seconds remaining in the game. The round ends after that.

 

Team 2 on offense - breaches the first door with 2:00 remaining in the game. Team 2 then proceeds to the bridges and successfully unlocks them at :30 seconds remaining in the game.

 

Which team wins?

 

 

From my understanding team 1 should win the game. They completed the 2nd objective with 45 seconds remaining in the game. However, when team 2 unlocked their bridges with 30 seconds remaining (15 seconds slower than team 1), the game automatically ended and awarded the win to team 2. I was on team 1. Explain that one. The only thing I can come up with is regardless of the furthest point, somehow the first door carried more weight in the decision for the game since team 2 got the door 30 seconds faster than team 1, but was slower on the bridge.

 

 

 

If team A extends the bridge 90 seconds after the start of round 1, never planting a bomb on second door, and team B extends the brigdge 89 seconds after the start of round 2, then team B wins as soon as the bridge is extended.

 

If team A extends the bridge 89 seconds after the start of round 1, never planting a bomb on second door, and team B extends the brigde 90 seconds(1 sec slower than A) after the start of round 2, then the game continues until either team B blows up second door(and wins) or fails blowing up the door(and loses, because both sides completed the same objectives, but team A did it 1 sec faster)

Edited June 30, 2012 by Sharee

[Sixthy]

If team A extends the bridge 90 seconds after the start of round 1, never planting a bomb on second door, and team B extends the brigdge 89 seconds after the start of round 2, then team B wins as soon as the bridge is extended.

 

If team A extends the bridge 89 seconds after the start of round 1, never planting a bomb on second door, and team B extends the brigde 90 seconds(1 sec slower than A) after the start of round 2, then the game continues until either team B blows up second door(and wins) or fails blowing up the door(and loses, because both sides completed the same objectives, but team A did it 1 sec faster)

 

Yep, that's what should happen. That's not what happened.

[cyvaris]

Had a game yesterday, the other team had 6 healers, and the game ended in a 0-0 loss. Our sides DPS (including myself) were all up over 600k damage...and about 20 kills between the five of us. We got a "victory" message....and so did the Imperials.

[Gorghte]

Yep, that's what should happen. That's not what happened.

 

File a bug report

[Ossos]

Talk about full of crap. I've been in a ton of VS matches where we blow the other team away in terms of Objective Points but they do a great job of playing the doors, so no one gets passed the 1st set. ...and we lose anyway. Sorry, but it's a freaking coin flip and this guy did a great job at shovelling horse shizz at the player base.

 

Someone even posted a screenshot earlier in the thread showing how you can get more objective points and still lose.

 

This reminds me of the Ability Delay. For weeks and weeks Devs told us it was OUR computers. Fanboys told people shut up and quit hating. Ultimately, there was a delay...a big one, and it took months to fix.

 

Sorry BW but you're phenominally short on credibility, and when I have seen, taken screenshots, made videos, all showing what you say to be false...it's just more proof that your feedback is completely worthless.

 

 

 

 

That is why you fail.

[Sixthy]

File a bug report

 

I did, here is a direct quote of the response:

 

"We do apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.

 

Unfortunately, we will not engage in in-depth discussion of game mechanics or provide advice on character builds or skill rotations. We also will not provide specific information on where or how to obtain specific items or pieces of equipment."

 

It went on to say I could find information on forums and blah blah. But I pretty much read that, rolled my eyes, shook my head and said forget it.

[leareth_]

I did, here is a direct quote of the response:

 

"We do apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.

 

Unfortunately, we will not engage in in-depth discussion of game mechanics or provide advice on character builds or skill rotations. We also will not provide specific information on where or how to obtain specific items or pieces of equipment."

 

It went on to say I could find information on forums and blah blah. But I pretty much read that, rolled my eyes, shook my head and said forget it.

 

Their CSR droids are really good at giving cut-n-paste answers that have nothing to do with the problem described sometimes.

 

I see that a number of people have revived old Voidstar threads, and started their own, so I'm not the only one irritated by the 'coinflip' / RNG victory conditions for ranked warzone play on a 0-0 tiebreak.

[TirjacShiki]

We started a thread about this on our server forums as well.

 

Voidstar has to change, if it's not changed it needs to be removed, at least for rated games.

 

It is 100% random as of now, it is not based off of any type of stat in the match.

 

When your rating gets pretty high you start to get +5 rating for games that you win, so losing a Voidstar because of a gosh darn mother *********** random *** coin flip and losing 20 rating is bull ****.

 

The easiest solution to this is to make the outcome a stalemate, give both teams the same amount of comms you get from a loss and give no change to either teams rating.

Edited July 1, 2012 by TirjacShiki