What does it take to get Broadsword to remember that GSF exists?

[Darkestmonty]

48 minutes ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

if you'd like to learn how to play the game do feel free to DM me; i'm happy to offer tips and even review gameplay with a second-by-second breakdown. 

i am not going to go into how you're wrong because that's derailing the thread. 

Anyway this was a good idea with some tweaks: 

 

 

sadly I have pretty good handle on how GSF works.

you get 2 points for a win and 1 point for a loss. You get zero additional points even if you are the top player in the game with the most kills and objective time so there is no point in dragging out a game your team has no chance at winning.

Rules are very simple and don't take into account how well a person plays, only if they are on the winning team or losing team.

Edited February 14 by Darkestmonty

[Toraak]

14 minutes ago, Darkestmonty said:

sadly I have pretty good handle on how GSF works.

you get 2 points for a win and 1 point for a loss. You get zero additional points even if you are the top player in the game with the most kills and objective time so there is no point in dragging out a game your team has no chance at winning.

Rules are very simple and don't take into account how well a person plays, only if they are on the winning team or losing team.

Clearly that shows you are only in GSF because of the rewards and that you don't know how much fun the game is if your actually playing it. The game is so much more then just some random rewards. Learning how the mechanics, and strategies work is so much more then that. 

[Darkestmonty]

5 minutes ago, Toraak said:

Clearly that shows you are only in GSF because of the rewards and that you don't know how much fun the game is if your actually playing it. The game is so much more then just some random rewards. Learning how the mechanics, and strategies work is so much more then that. 

my fun is dailies and weeklies. And I wish my skill was rewarded as much as quickly ending games I have no chance at winning.

[Traceguy]

Bioware forgot GSF existed long before the Broadsword transition. So maybe Bioware forgot to brief Broadsword on the existence of it. 😉

[TrixxieTriss]

On 2/14/2024 at 7:16 AM, DakhathKilrathi said:

That someone in this thread is seriously defending their decision to lose on purpose is why we need a developer solution, here. Clearly there is no convincing players who do it, so the game needs to actively discourage it by letting us kick the people who do it. 

AFKers & game throwers can’t really be policed by the players. It needs to be moderated by the game devs. 

With AI being used for everything these days, surely there’s an AI Moderator option they could employ to do this.

 

Edited February 14 by TrixxieTriss

[DakhathKilrathi]

30 minutes ago, TrixxieTriss said:

AFKers & game throwers can’t really be policed by the players. It needs to be moderated by the game devs. 

I mostly agree with this, though a functioning vote kick system would be a start. Getting people to use it is difficult, however, and I think Ramalina hit on a good idea: some sort of automated system would be better. 

 

30 minutes ago, TrixxieTriss said:

With AI being used for everything these days, surely there’s an AI Moderator option they could employ to do this.

 

This part I don't agree with. AI isn't the solution to every problem. You don't need AI to be able to tell that someone has self destructed and/or respawned six times in two minutes or whatever metric you pick. Assume that Broadsword doesn't have money to throw at problems, because their aggressive monetization lately suggests that must be the case. AI would be an ongoing cost. An automated check is also a cost, but it's the cost of writing and testing it, rather than a long-term one. 

Edited February 14 by DakhathKilrathi

[TrixxieTriss]

2 minutes ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

Assume that Broadsword doesn't have money to throw at problems, because their aggressive monetization lately suggests that must be the case. AI would be an ongoing cost. An automated check is also a cost, but it's the cost of writing and testing it, rather than a long-term one. 

It would be cheaper than paying actual moderators to do it. That’s why we have zero moderation now. 
I know AI isn’t perfect, but something would be better than nothing. Because vote kick doesn’t work in any form or PvP. 

[DakhathKilrathi]

Just now, TrixxieTriss said:

Because vote kick doesn’t work in any form or PvP.

The auto-kick they added to GSF works at least sometimes, since people keep coming to the GSF subforum to complain about how they're being kicked for non contribution. I'm not sure the threshold for it is correct or useful, but it does work. 

[Ramalina]

8 hours ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

This is a good idea. I was assuming the most we'll get out of them is a tweak to what already exists. My only issue is that I'm not sure what values would avoid punishing aggressive play while still limiting SDers. Maybe two different timers? One for TDM, one for domination. I can't speak for everyone but I am more likely to die in domination because I can afford riskier and more aggressive play. TDM on the other hand every point matters. 

I figure that clusters of 3 to 4 deaths shouldn't be punished harshly, and that a good faith noob might easily die 6 to 8 times during a match.   I didn't do any tuning on the math figuring a max of a 15 min match, but in that sort of tuning I'd probably look to not make getting nine plus deaths impossible, but to make it so that by death five or six you're spending some time twiddling your thumbs waiting for the respawn counter, if all five or six deaths are closely stacked on the timeline.   One free death and then one additional un-penalized death every three minutes already puts you at up to 5 deaths with no consequences at all if you spread them evenly through the match.   Depending on your rate of stacking the penalty, that means that 7, 8, or even 9 deaths may be fairly tolerable.    Of course, you could also do non-linear penalty stacking along the lines of .25 min, .5 min, 1 min, 2 min, 4 min.

You could also make the test condition be recent_deaths - 2, or recent deaths - 3, which gives the player more leeway on clusters of deaths before penalties start being implemented.  So your counter is accumulating deaths, but it doesn't do anything about deaths until you've reached a threshold of deaths so quickly that the decrement hasn't had time to lower the counter.

I mean, I feel like 6 or 7 deaths is something that an ace can carry to a win, provided it's just one or two people, it's the stacks of multiple double digit deaths from people who are faceplanting into the cap ship on spawn that really grate.   So an equation that catches max rate deaths, but isn't that fussy about high average deaths seems like the best approach.

 

Interaction with the non-participation timer is a valid concern, but really, spawn waits probably shouldn't count against that in any case, and as long as you're tweaking timers you might as well verify that spawn time isn't getting counted as non-participation while you're at it.

[Urthal]

On 2/13/2024 at 4:31 PM, Darkestmonty said:

I'll end the game by self destructing continuously because there is no chance at winning and there is no reward for dragging the game out.

You claim to value your time, so you'd rather self destruct than waste time on a losing match. Maybe you should stop wasting your time at all playing a game you don't enjoy, sounds like a much better investment.

[Darkestmonty]

3 hours ago, Urthal said:

You claim to value your time, so you'd rather self destruct than waste time on a losing match. Maybe you should stop wasting your time at all playing a game you don't enjoy, sounds like a much better investment.

I enjoy GSF and I enjoy the rewards. What I don't enjoy is delaying a game that is already over. There are no rewards for being the top player on a losing team.

 

Edited February 15 by Darkestmonty

[Toraak]

that depends on what you call rewards. Many people feel it's very rewarding to see how well you can do Vs a very superior team. Setting a goal like see how few times you can die, while still putting up a fight. Or how many of the enemy you can take out even if it is a loss, or even see how close you can make a match. Can you make a 10-50 loss more like a 30-50 loss.

 

Rewards aren't all about conquest or tech frags. There are plenty of ways to make a clear loss feel rewarding

[Darkestmonty]

15 minutes ago, Toraak said:

that depends on what you call rewards. Many people feel it's very rewarding to see how well you can do Vs a very superior team. Setting a goal like see how few times you can die, while still putting up a fight. Or how many of the enemy you can take out even if it is a loss, or even see how close you can make a match. Can you make a 10-50 loss more like a 30-50 loss.

 

Rewards aren't all about conquest or tech frags. There are plenty of ways to make a clear loss feel rewarding

Others find it more rewarding to finish the dailies and weeklies quickly and since the system only cares about a win or loss they will try and end losing games as fast as possible.

The current system for dailies and weeklies doesn't promote playing well or getting better at the game, it promotes AFKing and self destructing since no amount of skill is going to help you on a losing team.

Edited February 15 by Darkestmonty

[Toraak]

4 minutes ago, Darkestmonty said:

Others find it more rewarding to finish the dailies and weeklies quickly and since the system only cares about a win or loss they will try and end losing games as fast as possible.

The current system for dailies and weeklies doesn't promote playing well or getting better at the game, it promotes AFKing and self destructing since no amount of skill is going to help you on a losing team.

Your wrong. It doesn't promote afk'ing or suiciding. People are just using excuses like that for going against the ToS and griefing the rest of the GSF players by sabotaging matches. And yes Griefing is against ToS, and that is exactly the behavior your defending.

[DWho]

5 minutes ago, Darkestmonty said:

Others find it more rewarding to finish the dailies and weeklies quickly and since the system only cares about a win or loss they will try and end losing games as fast as possible.

The current system for dailies and weeklies doesn't promote playing well or getting better at the game, it promotes AFKing and self destructing since no amount of skill is going to help you on a losing team.

This is a big part of the problem. GSF is extremely rewarding for both Conquest and GS (and why people have been pushing for GSF to be part of PVP seasons). People are more interested in getting to their conquest goals quickly for Tech Fragments they can use to buy Embers (and mats) that they can sell on the GTN for credits. The out of control economy along with what are excessive rewards for time spent are creating the problem. AFKing and throwing are not acceptable but as long as the rewards are so far and above any other content in the game, people are going to gravitate to the easy rewards. No amount of monitoring is going to fix that, it's a game of whack-a-mole. Kill one and three others show up because the rewards are so lucrative.

[Darkestmonty]

2 hours ago, Toraak said:

Your wrong. It doesn't promote afk'ing or suiciding. People are just using excuses like that for going against the ToS and griefing the rest of the GSF players by sabotaging matches. And yes Griefing is against ToS, and that is exactly the behavior your defending.

suiciding and AFKing in PvP and GSF wouldn't be an issue otherwise.

  

2 hours ago, DWho said:

This is a big part of the problem. GSF is extremely rewarding for both Conquest and GS (and why people have been pushing for GSF to be part of PVP seasons). People are more interested in getting to their conquest goals quickly for Tech Fragments they can use to buy Embers (and mats) that they can sell on the GTN for credits. The out of control economy along with what are excessive rewards for time spent are creating the problem. AFKing and throwing are not acceptable but as long as the rewards are so far and above any other content in the game, people are going to gravitate to the easy rewards. No amount of monitoring is going to fix that, it's a game of whack-a-mole. Kill one and three others show up because the rewards are so lucrative.

This is my point. The current daily and weekly system promotes AFKing and self destructing because it only tracks wins and losses. Move to a skill based system like earning medals and it becomes a lot harder to join PvP and self destruct or AFK your way through dailies and weeklies.

There needs a big carrot to get people to play PvP. The rewards are fine considering you can earn more tech frags faster running DF/DP story.

Edited February 15 by Darkestmonty

[DakhathKilrathi]

4 hours ago, Darkestmonty said:

skill based

lol

The ideas that medals require skill is very, very silly. Any idiot can farm AFK medals in domination. 

[Darkestmonty]

3 hours ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

lol

The ideas that medals require skill is very, very silly. Any idiot can farm AFK medals in domination. 

Not as silly as the current system which promotes suiciding and AFKing to complete dailies and weeklies in all PvP.

You can't force people to play the way you want by creating rules that punish. You'll end up doing more damage to new players than thwarting AFKing and suiciding. If you want people to play the game it has to be worth their time. Rewarding participation over ending games quickly, win or lose, will promote playing the actual game.

Edited February 16 by Darkestmonty

[Urthal]

7 hours ago, DWho said:

This is a big part of the problem. GSF is extremely rewarding for both Conquest and GS (and why people have been pushing for GSF to be part of PVP seasons). People are more interested in getting to their conquest goals quickly for Tech Fragments they can use to buy Embers (and mats) that they can sell on the GTN for credits. The out of control economy along with what are excessive rewards for time spent are creating the problem. AFKing and throwing are not acceptable but as long as the rewards are so far and above any other content in the game, people are going to gravitate to the easy rewards. No amount of monitoring is going to fix that, it's a game of whack-a-mole. Kill one and three others show up because the rewards are so lucrative.

Then the solution is clear, they should implement an account wide system a that permanently prevents people that engage in repeated self destructing from grabbing the GSF dailies and weeklies.

[Darkestmonty]

39 minutes ago, Urthal said:

Then the solution is clear, they should implement an account wide system a that permanently prevents people that engage in repeated self destructing from grabbing the GSF dailies and weeklies.

what parameters do you suggest before someone permanently banned from ever taking dailies and weeklies and how will you counter the drop in players who are permanently banned from taking dailies and weeklies when they have a bad and self destruct or are just bad and keep crashing because they are avoiding missiles or trying to stay close to the satellite to prevent capture?

You want to create punishments until people play the way you want instead of giving people a reason to play the way you want. Why are you trying to preserve Win/Loss as the only way to completely dailies and weeklies when dailies and weeklies is the only reason a good portion of people even bother PvPing?

Edited February 16 by Darkestmonty

[Anhkriva]

18 minutes ago, Urthal said:

Then the solution is clear, they should implement an account wide system a that permanently prevents people that engage in repeated self destructing from grabbing the GSF dailies and weeklies.

The difference between self-destruction by crashing into an asteroid and turbo flying into the middle of the map and getting shot down without putting up any resistance is only a few extra seconds, and that's enough to bypass your solution.

Do you want to discourage people from self-destruction? The game must reward individual performance, not participation or being a parasite on a winning team. For example, in deathmatch mode, let's make the reward dependent on the K/D ratio. Players with negative K/D would not have a match counted at all for daily/weekly purposes, with a low score they would have it counted as 1 match, and with a high score as 2.

 

[DWho]

33 minutes ago, Urthal said:

Then the solution is clear, they should implement an account wide system a that permanently prevents people that engage in repeated self destructing from grabbing the GSF dailies and weeklies.

The fly X ship 5 times is much more problematic because it is a huge number of CQ points and encourages fast matches. The other issue is how do you differentiate between a player that is just bad at the game mode from someone intentionally crashing (The game calls it a self-destruct if it is intentional or not). What would the crash limit be: 5, 10, or more times per match. Would it require multiple matches to define the player as a self-destructer, how often would that reset. There are some real issues in separating the bad players from the trolls. No one should be punished just for being bad and they shouldn't be expected to go out of their way to get better.

[DakhathKilrathi]

1 hour ago, Urthal said:

Then the solution is clear, they should implement an account wide system a that permanently prevents people that engage in repeated self destructing from grabbing the GSF dailies and weeklies.

You know what, I could get behind this. More than five self destructs in a row in a single game? Get locked out of the weeklies for that week. Keep doing it? No weeklies that month. Still keep doing it? You can't pick up weeklies on that character anymore. Would solve the problem pretty fast. 

That said, Ramalina's suggestion re: stacking respawn timer if you die too much neatly avoids the problem of people just flying into the cloud of red names instead. Maybe combine the two. 

Edited February 16 by DakhathKilrathi

[Darkestmonty]

48 minutes ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

You know what, I could get behind this. More than five self destructs in a row in a single game? Get locked out of the weeklies for that week. Keep doing it? No weeklies that month. Still keep doing it? You can't pick up weeklies on that character anymore. Would solve the problem pretty fast. 

That said, Ramalina's suggestion re: stacking respawn timer if you die too much neatly avoids the problem of people just flying into the cloud of red names instead. Maybe combine the two. 

so you can't see how this will negatively impact new and low skilled players at all? Absolutely no negative effects and no way to bypass the punishments you want to keep stacking on to force people to play the way you think they should?

Here are valid tactics I use to win games. If I am on satellite C and need to get to satellite A quickly on large maps, I will self destruct on C and respawn near A, this works especially well when there is a hyper gate on the satellite. If I run out of missiles and there are no restocks, I will self destruct to respawn with missiles. I've been known to fly into a satellite being camped with multiple bombs, set off my EMP Field and self destruct. Then respawn, fly back in less than 30 seconds and repeat. Doing so lets me keep using EMP Field to clear all bombs and disable turrets every 20-25 seconds instead of flying around waiting 45 seconds for the timer to count down.

But, like I said, I'm sure there are no negative consequences to adding in punishments that can effect new or lower skilled players. Hell, we'll just keep adding complex punishments instead of making playing the game, even when your team is going to lose, worth it.

Edited February 16 by Darkestmonty

[DWho]

They could make it so crashing into something is not an automatic "self-destruct". If they make "self-destructing" harder, less people will find it to be an easy option to speed up matches. Make it so it takes running into things 3 times to "destruct". First time removes your shields, second time half you max hull, third time the rest of your hull assuming no repairs in between.