Foambreaker Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 (edited) People are not even trying, and openly admitting in chat there is no need because they get their conquest points either way. Its 500 now, win or lose, make it 1000 win / 0 Lose. What kind of conquest gets paid to lose? Edited September 4, 2014 by Foambreaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infernixx Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 People are not even trying, and openly admitting in chat there is no need because they get their conquest points either way. Its 500 now, win or lose, make it 1000 win / 0 Lose. What kind of conquest gets paid to lose? They've already said that they're going to be changing WZ Conquest stuff to emphasize winning over simply participating in 2.10. So, next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlienEyeTX Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Definitely should not be about winning only. Too many variables and bad PUGs and all that. Way too much time invested to get nothing in a close loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkerus Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 (edited) Definitely should not be about winning only. Too many variables and bad PUGs and all that. Way too much time invested to get nothing in a close loss. Exactly. Take POT5 for example. The reps rarely win. I can see reducing the win award to 250 but to give nothing? Nope, bad idea. Edited September 4, 2014 by Arkerus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottythebod Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Exactly. Take POT5 for example. The reps rarely win. I can see reducing the win award to 250 but to give nothing? Nope, bad idea. Yeah I would say tying it too much to winning is a bad idea. A better idea IMO would be to tie it either to medals earned during the WZ or by tokens earned. Anyone doing anything is going to get tokens or medals so that eliminates people just standing around but rewards people actually trying even if their team doesn't win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foambreaker Posted September 4, 2014 Author Share Posted September 4, 2014 (edited) Exactly. Take POT5 for example. The reps rarely win. I can see reducing the win award to 250 but to give nothing? Nope, bad idea. Being a past UO PK I would also like to loot them dry, but if you guys think a consolation prize is in order... Edited September 4, 2014 by Foambreaker shpeeleng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reno_Tarshil Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Exactly. Take POT5 for example. The reps rarely win. I can see reducing the win award to 250 but to give nothing? Nope, bad idea. POT5 Still exists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APCrol Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 (edited) Exactly. Take POT5 for example. The reps rarely win. I can see reducing the win award to 250 but to give nothing? Nope, bad idea. You loosing not because republic characters have advantages right? You loosing only because of high amount of people who don't care about wining while they will anyway get conquest points and wz comms Of course there are some additional problems like no ban for leavers from queue or no basic skill based matchmaking system. The best way to force people fight for win is to remove rewards for loosing. But if u so care about losers maybe at least rewards must depend on medals. But again it won't solve problem while on some maps u all can just stay on captured point and farm medals. Edited September 4, 2014 by APCrol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlienEyeTX Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Yeah I would say tying it too much to winning is a bad idea. A better idea IMO would be to tie it either to medals earned during the WZ or by tokens earned. Anyone doing anything is going to get tokens or medals so that eliminates people just standing around but rewards people actually trying even if their team doesn't win. Absolutely agree with this. Tie it to medals or objective points... or both! Win/Loss is too much of a flaky thing to go by in this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkerus Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 You loosing not because republic characters have advantages right? You loosing only because of high amount of people who don't care about wining while they will anyway get conquest points and wz comms Of course there are some additional problems like no ban for leavers from queue or no basic skill based matchmaking system. The best way to force people fight for win is to remove rewards for loosing. But if u so care about losers maybe at least rewards must depend on medals. But again it won't solve problem while on some maps u all can just stay on captured point and farm medals. Reps losing 3 out of 4 matches was a problem on our server long before conquest. There isn't a problem to solve. Some of you guys are making a problem to solve. BW obviously wants to award participation in PvP. That was the entire point. Yes, the rate may be too high right now but removing the points completely is an even worse idea. Quite honestly, I don't see these AFKrs and dancers. Not once. I'm sure they exist but in my 10 matches I typically play every day, I don't see them. Pissing and moaning about PvP players getting conquest points is like complaining they get their own set of gear. It was designed that way...on purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediMasterSLC Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Just make a new obj, in addition to the existing participation one, that awards 500-1000 points for a win; or lower the participation reward to 250 and have the "winning" obj be worth 250-500 points. There should be a healthy balance between rewarding winning and not disincentivizing staying in a losing game. @ people complaining that their faction's pugs suck worse than the other faction's on their server: do something about it. Carry the bads. Premade with your guild. Do group ranked to avoid the pugs. Conquest is guild v guild but it is also faction v faction. If one faction dominates the warzones they deserve to be rewarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustTrio Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 All of the future objectives are out there for the browsing. There is an instance where you are rewarded 1k (500x2) for playing and an additional 2k (1kx2) for winning, but it certainly isn't every week. And if you are in a situation where you are getting rolled by ranked-geared players, what's the point of prolonging the time it takes you to get your 1k? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediMasterSLC Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 (edited) All of the future objectives are out there for the browsing. There is an instance where you are rewarded 1k (500x2) for playing and an additional 2k (1kx2) for winning, but it certainly isn't every week. And if you are in a situation where you are getting rolled by ranked-geared players, what's the point of prolonging the time it takes you to get your 1k? Yes, there are 2 weeks that very heavily incentivize winning. 2 or 3 others incentivize it to a much lesser degree (if you won every warzone you played that week, most of the points you racked up would still come from the participation objective). However, winning needs to be rewarded to some reasonable degree every week, or else you'll continue to have people afking in corners and throwing games to end them as quickly as possible during less pvp-oriented event weeks. Edited September 5, 2014 by JediMasterSLC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discbox Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 (edited) Better solution than win = 1000 pts and lose = 0 pts: Conquest achievement 1: play a warzone match ∞ 250 pt Conquest achievement 2: win a warzone match ∞ 500 pt 250 if you lose, 750 if you win. Edited September 5, 2014 by discbox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prisoner Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 (edited) There isn't a problem to solve. Some of you guys are making a problem to solve. BW obviously wants to award participation in PvP. That was the entire point. Yes, the rate may be too high right now but removing the points completely is an even worse idea. Quite honestly, I don't see these AFKrs and dancers. Not once. I'm sure they exist but in my 10 matches I typically play every day, I don't see them. Agreed. I don't see them either. Either the server I play on is PVP Narnia (unlikely) or this is a problem that's been way overblown. Are there derps? Sure. PVEers with 600 expertise? Yes. Noobs who run around like headless chickens? Of course. But for the most part people do seem to be trying to play even if they are hilariously terrible sometimes. That's just a growing pains problem that will fade away as noobs get experience and gear. I could see tying conquest points to getting a minimum number of medals. although that will suck for those games you queue into one minute before they end because of rage quitters. Or incentivising wins by rewarding them with more points (a loss 500, a win 1000 for example). But rewarding only wins would be a really, really terrible idea on Bioware's part and all you're going to see are teams of PVEers playing ranked at 5 am /stucking out for quick matches as they win trade. Edited September 5, 2014 by Prisoner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
branmakmuffin Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 People are not even trying, and openly admitting in chat there is no need because they get their conquest points either way. Its 500 now, win or lose, make it 1000 win / 0 Lose. What kind of conquest gets paid to lose? The kind connected to a computer game based on arbitrary rules. Suck it up, buttercup. It's just a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
well Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 You do know that groups are short handed many times. Great so now more folks will bail out. There is enough folks that leave as is. I don't care if they are in there to do the twist. At least they are a target for the other team to focus on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FalmeseReb Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 how about no. on Pot5 unless you roll with a premade as a pub you will win maybe 1/5 random warzones. there's just so many pub bads that it'd be insanely unfair to make losing give nothing or basically nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Exactly. Take POT5 for example. The reps rarely win. I can see reducing the win award to 250 but to give nothing? Nope, bad idea. I'm a Rep on POT5... If they remove the points for a loss, you'd have players quitting the second a WZ presents a challenge. Reducing it to 250 might be too few...that's 140 WZ's to hit 35k... PvP isn't always active like a FP or Ops is...you need 8-16 players for a PvP match to happen...250 is too low imo. I'd rather see them reward wins more (750?) because I honestly do not feel that PvP is rewarded too highly, even in a loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kantaso Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 You loosing not because republic characters have advantages right? You loosing only because of high amount of people who don't care about wining while they will anyway get conquest points and wz comms Of course there are some additional problems like no ban for leavers from queue or no basic skill based matchmaking system. The best way to force people fight for win is to remove rewards for loosing. But if u so care about losers maybe at least rewards must depend on medals. But again it won't solve problem while on some maps u all can just stay on captured point and farm medals. That is ridiculous, no all players are experts PVPeers, rather give points for participation, you join you get 250 points, you win you get 1000, you participate get points according with victories, damage done, healing done, assists, etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kantaso Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 People are not even trying, and openly admitting in chat there is no need because they get their conquest points either way. Its 500 now, win or lose, make it 1000 win / 0 Lose. What kind of conquest gets paid to lose? How those kids in school that all get a little trophy even if they loose? C'mon there is a ton of points to make and PVP is the only way to make some quick points. Plus introduces PVE players who would never PVP to how to PVP and the fun on doing it, by rewarding them, you increase the amount of players who in the future may get more actively involved in PVP. Think about it cherry cup, someone already called you butter cup, so I had to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 That is ridiculous, no all players are experts PVPeers, rather give points for participation, you join you get 250 points, you win you get 1000, you participate get points according with victories, damage done, healing done, assists, etc So, just to be clear...you're suggesting 250 for participating, maybe like 100 for 4 medals (350), another 150 for 8 (500), and a bonus to make it 1000 if you win? Or are you simply saying 250 for a loss, 1000 for a win? I'd be fine with rewarding based on medal count - that indicates participation...but I'm 100% opposed to reducing the amount to 250 total if you lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Plus introduces PVE players who would never PVP to how to PVP and the fun on doing it, by rewarding them, you increase the amount of players who in the future may get more actively involved in PVP. THIS is exactly why I would hate to see the points diminished at all. I am all in favor of exposing players to PvP, however that happens. For the very few that game the system, I would hate to see Bioware punish the masses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kantaso Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 (edited) So, just to be clear...you're suggesting 250 for participating, maybe like 100 for 4 medals (350), another 150 for 8 (500), and a bonus to make it 1000 if you win? Or are you simply saying 250 for a loss, 1000 for a win? I'd be fine with rewarding based on medal count - that indicates participation...but I'm 100% opposed to reducing the amount to 250 total if you lose. I am saying you start both team with a line base of 250 points, then your participation will increase that number, but if you just hide or sit you only get 250, if you participate, like assists, healings, damage, kills, you get extra amount of points for that, you team may loose but your participation in combat may give you up to the 1000 points (1000 points been the max number achievable) Edited September 5, 2014 by Kantaso Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 I am saying you start both team with a line base of 250 points, then your participation will increase that number, but if you just hide or sit you only get 250, if you participate, like assists, healings, damage, kills, you get extra amount of points for that, you team may loose but your participation in combat may give you up to the 1000 points assigned to the winning team. OK cool, I'd be fine with that. As long as it balances out to 500 for an active loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts