+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Should Warfront rewards be based on participation?

  1. #1
    Ascendant Jeremiahcp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,705

    Default Should Warfront rewards be based on participation?

    AFK leeches have always been a problem in the WFs, but they seemed to have increased since the addition of Rank 8 gear and weekend bonus. Not only that, but people give up way to easy, many people just give up whenever the other side shows significant resistance. They make excuses, claiming this or that and saying the match can not be won. I have seen many, many WFs thrown when the score was tied, simply because lamers give up. They just want to burn as many WFs as they can so they can get the ending bonus, they have no care for actually PvPing. Many are there simply for the gear and they don't want to work for it.

    I suggest that the WFs work like rifts and invasions; where your rewards are based on you participation. If you don't fight then you get nothing and if you don't fight the entire match then you don't get the ending bonus. I don't care how bad they are but if you are at least putting in a constant effort only then should you get rewards.

    I am not suggesting a hard level of participation in order to get max bonus, just something that if you try then you will get max rewards. But as of now, the lamers that give up way too easy and the AKFers ruin many WFs matchs and the vote AKF that Trion gave us is not a valid solution to the problem

  2. #2
    Ascendant Violacea's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    12,128

    Default

    It took me 2 months of average play time (some days only 2 - 4 hours, sometimes 7 hours till 5am). But this is also with quests done daily and plenty of solo overworld pvp killing. If someone wanted to afk the whole thing they'd never get Unseen faction, so maybe they half afk it. So if when they do WF's, if they really want to afk their way to p8 for 2 months. And pay their sub to not even play the game for a few months, sounds like they already lose. Not to mention half the time afk'ers get kicked pretty easy so that delays the procress even longer. Sounds like a load of fun.

    This is the bad apple minority though, I rarely have seen more than 2 people AFK in my warfronts and it still seems most of the time everyone is there. A small minority of bad apples who are probably having no fun anyway shouldn't ruin the fun others are actually already having by rewards changing over them.

  3. #3
    General of Telara phyraxian's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    903

    Default

    That would further promote zerging and defending nodes would never happen.

  4. #4
    Prophet of Telara
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,079

    Default

    The problem is that Trion doesn't know how to value contributions from healing and support specs. Theoretically, healing and damage can be graded on a curve based on the relation to the wf population, but how would one value support specs, stone running specs, etc...?

    Until Trion can figure some way to do that, we're stuck with everyone getting the same rewards.

    Honestly, I'm not concerned with AFKers. They only cheat themselves, and other players already have the tools to kick them out of a warfront.

  5. #5
    Plane Walker Gazrael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    484

    Default

    There's a reason why the beta/headstart rift participation boards were taken out. A participation system is too easily circumvented or, in some cases, was penalizing people for playing certain roles.

    -A system based on # of casts would be too easily worked around. Someone insistent on nannying an AFK character could just as easily spam heals/buffs on themselves through the course of the match.

    -A system based on damage/healing numbers would, too, do more harm than good. There are more than enough players now relying on AOE specs to post their hallowed board numbers. Competitive play in a PUG environment is incredibly hard to find on a meaningful basis. If it was based on pure output, 51 wardens, DSing mages, cabalist/Oblivion-spamming Inquisitors would all get more rewards by default- not through better play, but just because they cherrypicked a spec that has the most raw output. Soul pigeonholing is bad enough as it is (read: warriors).

    -Shard runners would be penalized on an action-based system, considering in WF dedicated runners spend most of their time ferrying back and forth across the map.

    -Defenders of nodes that are not under constant attack would be penalized. A reward like the Wrath WoW update (increased honor gains for having the 'node defender' buff) would be abused in maps that already encourage stonewalling and zerg-holding 2 points/1 point for the win.

    That isn't to say that Trion couldn't sweeten the pot when it comes to rewarding people who defend/cap/hold fang/run shards/flip a node, but I very much doubt they would add incentives to the actual nuts-and-bolts utility of winning Warfronts.
    Last edited by Gazrael; 09-06-2011 at 09:53 AM.
    M'Nope.

  6. #6
    Ascendant Ajax1114's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2,576

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaedyan View Post
    Honestly, I'm not concerned with AFKers. They only cheat themselves, and other players already have the tools to kick them out of a warfront.
    ^This.

    Honestly, this garbage about "lamers" is just that... garbage. First, getting PvP gear in this game is not hard and is not work. It's just utterly repetitive and time-consuming. Second, many people give up shortly into a match for good reason. I used to be the guy who continued to try, until I started realizing how little player skill even factors in. Many times, all it takes is one zerg fest for one side to realize that they're (overall) woefully undergeared and outmatched. Anything beyond that is just a vain attempt to punch through a brick wall.

    Don't blame the players for the flaws in the system.

  7. #7
    Rift Disciple
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    107

    Default

    Afkers cheat the entire team. You have to work harder because your outnumbered now with someone sitting at GY. Thats extra heals, dps, support, that's just being completely wasted. And I find it even more annoying is when we're winning and people START going afk just to sit back and reap rewards.

  8. #8
    Ascendant Original_Hellfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    In your mom's bed
    Posts
    2,525

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremiahcp View Post
    AFK leeches have always been a problem in the WFs, but they seemed to have increased since the addition of Rank 8 gear and weekend bonus. Not only that, but people give up way to easy, many people just give up whenever the other side shows significant resistance. They make excuses, claiming this or that and saying the match can not be won. I have seen many, many WFs thrown when the score was tied, simply because lamers give up. They just want to burn as many WFs as they can so they can get the ending bonus, they have no care for actually PvPing. Many are there simply for the gear and they don't want to work for it.

    I suggest that the WFs work like rifts and invasions; where your rewards are based on you participation. If you don't fight then you get nothing and if you don't fight the entire match then you don't get the ending bonus. I don't care how bad they are but if you are at least putting in a constant effort only then should you get rewards.

    I am not suggesting a hard level of participation in order to get max bonus, just something that if you try then you will get max rewards. But as of now, the lamers that give up way too easy and the AKFers ruin many WFs matchs and the vote AKF that Trion gave us is not a valid solution to the problem
    Participation based reward systems always screw over those that heal or tank in favor of dps. A bad idea for this case.

  9. #9
    Ascendant Jeremiahcp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gazrael View Post
    There's a reason why the beta/headstart rift participation boards were taken out. A participation system is too easily circumvented or, in some cases, was penalizing people for playing certain roles.

    -A system based on # of casts would be too easily worked around. Someone insistent on nannying an AFK character could just as easily spam heals/buffs on themselves through the course of the match.

    -A system based on damage/healing numbers would, too, do more harm than good. There are more than enough players now relying on AOE specs to post their hallowed board numbers. Competitive play in a PUG environment is incredibly hard to find on a meaningful basis. If it was based on pure output, 51 wardens, DSing mages, cabalist/Oblivion-spamming Inquisitors would all get more rewards by default- not through better play, but just because they cherrypicked a spec that has the most raw output. Soul pigeonholing is bad enough as it is (read: warriors).

    -Shard runners would be penalized on an action-based system, considering in WF dedicated runners spend most of their time ferrying back and forth across the map.

    -Defenders of nodes that are not under constant attack would be penalized. A reward like the Wrath WoW update (increased honor gains for having the 'node defender' buff) would be abused in maps that already encourage stonewalling and zerg-holding 2 points/1 point for the win.

    That isn't to say that Trion couldn't sweeten the pot when it comes to rewarding people who defend/cap/hold fang/run shards/flip a node, but I very much doubt they would add incentives to the actual nuts-and-bolts utility of winning Warfronts.
    " beta/headstart rift participation"

    I am not talking about the old system. I am talking about the current system used in invasions and rifts. Which we already know works just fine.

    "-Shard runners would be penalized on an action-based system, considering in WF dedicated runners spend most of their time ferrying back and forth across the map.

    -Defenders of nodes that are not under constant attack would be penalized.
    "


    Well the obvious solution is make those activities add to participation.

  10. #10
    Ascendant Jeremiahcp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Original_Hellfire View Post
    Participation based reward systems always screw over those that heal or tank in favor of dps. A bad idea for this case.
    You mean expect the current one used in invasions and rifts, which works just fine for any role.

  11. #11
    Ascendant Jeremiahcp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajax1114 View Post

    Honestly, this garbage about "lamers" is just that... garbage. First, getting PvP gear in this game is not hard and is not work. It's just utterly repetitive and time-consuming. Second, many people give up shortly into a match for good reason. I used to be the guy who continued to try, until I started realizing how little player skill even factors in. Many times, all it takes is one zerg fest for one side to realize that they're (overall) woefully undergeared and outmatched. Anything beyond that is just a vain attempt to punch through a brick wall.

    Don't blame the players for the flaws in the system.
    Spoken like a true lamer.

  12. #12
    Plane Touched
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Original_Hellfire View Post
    Participation based reward systems always screw over those that heal or tank in favor of dps. A bad idea for this case.
    Try to tell that to Warhammer Online players, lol
    Septica 86 Sorc, Nikola 95 DOK, Karak Norn
    http://gimpchimp.etilader.com/display.php?user=segro

  13. #13
    Plane Walker habby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    421

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremiahcp View Post
    " beta/headstart rift participation"

    I am not talking about the old system. I am talking about the current system used in invasions and rifts. Which we already know works just fine.

    "-Shard runners would be penalized on an action-based system, considering in WF dedicated runners spend most of their time ferrying back and forth across the map.

    -Defenders of nodes that are not under constant attack would be penalized.
    "


    Well the obvious solution is make those activities add to participation.
    The current system is that you just have to do a single action to qualify for the stage. This is basically the same there, a "being there" system for rewards. Unfortunately, there are too many things that will affect the outcome of a warfront that are non-quantifiable, and some of the quantifiable numbers can actually be a detriment, ie chasing a warrior/cleric combo away from the flags, putting up large damage numbers, killing nothing and allowing the node to be taken out from behind.

  14. #14
    Telaran
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajax1114 View Post
    ^This.

    Honestly, this garbage about "lamers" is just that... garbage. First, getting PvP gear in this game is not hard and is not work. It's just utterly repetitive and time-consuming. Second, many people give up shortly into a match for good reason. I used to be the guy who continued to try, until I started realizing how little player skill even factors in. Many times, all it takes is one zerg fest for one side to realize that they're (overall) woefully undergeared and outmatched. Anything beyond that is just a vain attempt to punch through a brick wall.

    Don't blame the players for the flaws in the system.
    This pretty much hits the nail on the head. usually you can tell if its a losing game after the first engagement. Or you can at least tell on if there is a fighting chance

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts