+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: Trion: here's a constructive suggestion

  1. #1
    Plane Touched Jural's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    283

    Default Trion: here's a constructive suggestion

    Dear Trion,

    If the gameplay objective in a warfront is that both teams have a chance to win, here is a suggestion.

    Monitor the "damage ratio" between the teams in real time. When one team begins to totally dominate the other team with, say, a 20 to 1 damage ration, it is obvious that the underdog team has essentially no chance to win the match.

    What has happened is that the queue has created a lopsided matchup, most likely due to one faction having less-geared and less experienced players queuing up at the moment.

    So, at this point, quietly start applying a buff to the underdog team member's damage and heal ability until their damage improves to, say, 80% of the stronger team. Don't broadcast it. Just adjust it.

    Now the match is roughly even, but the stronger team is still stronger, and has an advantage.

    But the underdog *can* win if they play smart.

    Both sides will enjoy the match. It will be a real battle. There will be excitement and hope. And the winner will feel like they accomplished something.

    The only players who would oppose this are those who really don't *want* an even match. They want an unfair match that they are assured of winning. Total domination.

    But such warfronts are bad for the overall economics of the game: people stop playing, and you lose the subscription.

    Better to have close matches that are exciting.
    Last edited by Jural; 09-15-2011 at 05:42 AM.

  2. #2
    Ascendant
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4,349

    Default

    No, sorry. PvP isn't supposed to be about level playing fields and blue ribbons for all attendees. If people get sufficiently tired of losing they'll either learn to play better or stop queuing.

    I've been in too many warfronts with groups on my side who had all the tools they needed to succeed and just made extremely poor use of them which in turn led to a loss. As much as some people want to assume the only reason they lose is because the other team outgears them or the other team has a premade or or or...they usually just need to play better.

  3. #3
    Telaran
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    92

    Default

    I think a better suggestion would be to pit Rank 1 players against Rank 1. It is extremely lopsided when you have Rank 1's joining in an attempt to gain more prestige - but the other team is Rank 3+. It's a slaughterhouse.

  4. #4
    Plane Touched Jural's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    283

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zehla View Post
    I think a better suggestion would be to pit Rank 1 players against Rank 1. It is extremely lopsided when you have Rank 1's joining in an attempt to gain more prestige - but the other team is Rank 3+. It's a slaughterhouse.
    That would have been my first choice, but there are simply not enough people PvPing, and the queues are having to draw from very small "pools" of people waiting. That's why you get the imbalances now: you get "clumps" of highly-geared, or high-ranked players in the waiting pools, so they end up being put into a match with lower-geared, lower-ranked players.

    So the queues would take forever until you finally found an even matchup.

    What I suggested would essentially create something closer to "Guild Wars 2" on the existing warfronts.
    Last edited by Jural; 09-15-2011 at 08:20 AM.

  5. #5
    Plane Touched Jural's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    283

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Licentia View Post
    No, sorry. PvP isn't supposed to be about level playing fields ...
    This is what you hear from people who want to believe they are super skilled heros. But in reality we know that it really IS about rank/gear stats, and faster team coordination (in the case of a premade on Vent).

    In my suggested "competitive balance" suggestion, the more highly geared and skilled team would still retain their skill edge and would be likely to win, but the match would be closer and more of a fight. And if the team with the advantage screws up, the weaker team can still win.

    Not a boring stomp fest that skilled players find as boring as using cheat codes in a console game.

    Essentially, I am suggesting making an R7 vs R1 match into an R7 vs R6 match so it becomes an interesting challenge, and where the win means you used your skill.
    Last edited by Jural; 09-15-2011 at 08:28 AM.

  6. #6
    Plane Walker
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    469

    Default

    Unfortunatley you cant do this and as harsh as it sounds you have the stupid factor in Wfs

    port scion perfect example
    20 people in wf 15 running directly into fields of AoE over and over again
    5 people doing quests kill 10 run back to boss lol

    And you also have to take other factors in
    most people just simply do not spend any time at all on learning their class

    some people just want to go into a wf and pew pew until they die over and over again
    I see no reason to reward them for it

  7. #7
    Plane Touched Jural's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    283

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barsh View Post
    Unfortunatley you cant do this and as harsh as it sounds you have the stupid factor in Wfs

    port scion perfect example
    20 people in wf 15 running directly into fields of AoE over and over again
    5 people doing quests kill 10 run back to boss lol

    And you also have to take other factors in
    most people just simply do not spend any time at all on learning their class

    some people just want to go into a wf and pew pew until they die over and over again
    I see no reason to reward them for it
    Good points, and frustrating to be sure.

    But when I am assigned to that team of the clueless in a PuG, *I* don't want to be penalized. I DO know my class. I'd enjoy having some chance of affecting a win in those circumstances.
    Last edited by Jural; 09-15-2011 at 09:01 AM.

  8. #8
    Prophet of Telara Corian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,186

    Default

    I don't feel I should be punished for being successful.
    This is why we can't have nice things.

  9. #9
    Plane Walker
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    469

    Default

    I hear ya but I just do not see anything viable

    With the community the way it is you have to create a warfront with no pve and no objectives
    That way all you do is go in and pvp and thats it

    I have seen no many illogical things in WF I wouldnt even know where to start and I'm done with it now

    But the whole quote keep it simple, stupid is the best quote I can give Trion on creating warfronts

    Cause 90% couldn't care less about goals and objectives or even winning its just a pew pew fest for most

  10. #10
    Ascendant
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4,349

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barsh View Post
    I hear ya but I just do not see anything viable

    With the community the way it is you have to create a warfront with no pve and no objectives
    That way all you do is go in and pvp and thats it

    I have seen no many illogical things in WF I wouldnt even know where to start and I'm done with it now

    But the whole quote keep it simple, stupid is the best quote I can give Trion on creating warfronts

    Cause 90% couldn't care less about goals and objectives or even winning its just a pew pew fest for most
    And the solution to this is to not rely on PUGs, yet sadly it would appear there are enough people averse to treating it like the group content it is that they'd rather see it dumbed down beyond reason so they can queue solo AND win on a regular basis. It just gets old after a while. Cake on the table, cake in the mouth? Yay! Cake on table OR in the mouth? AMG fix it!

  11. #11
    Champion of Telara
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zehla View Post
    I think a better suggestion would be to pit Rank 1 players against Rank 1. It is extremely lopsided when you have Rank 1's joining in an attempt to gain more prestige - but the other team is Rank 3+. It's a slaughterhouse.
    No one should stay R1 for very long. I can see them cutting 50 PvP into 2 different tiers, but anything more than that would be overdoing it.

    A R1 vs a R3 is not that big of a deal stop thinking bad.

  12. #12
    Plane Touched Jural's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    283

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Corian View Post
    I don't feel I should be punished for being successful.
    When that success is due to being matched against extremely weakly geared, lower-level players, it's no more success than is playing a console game with a cheat code.
    Last edited by Jural; 09-15-2011 at 01:51 PM.

  13. #13
    Plane Walker
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    429

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zehla View Post
    I think a better suggestion would be to pit Rank 1 players against Rank 1. It is extremely lopsided when you have Rank 1's joining in an attempt to gain more prestige - but the other team is Rank 3+. It's a slaughterhouse.
    Cool idea, but then a lot of people will whine because they won't be able to faceroll undergeared noobs -- and after all, that's what they did the PVP grind for.

  14. #14
    Ascendant Ajax1114's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2,576

    Default

    I like that you're trying to come up with a solution, but I'm afraid this would just be too hard to code and would probably cause more imbalance than balance. For example, Team A gets destroyed. Team A gets a boost to compensate. The boost is too large and Team A destroys Team B. Now Team B gets a boost, but it's also too large to compensate and Team A gets destroyed again.

    And so on... and of course there are less controllable factors to consider like people joining and leaving warfronts, a 4v2 skirmish as opposed to a 6v6, skilled vs unskilled players, etc.

    Not to mention that no one could really feel satisfied with a win, knowing that their win may have been affected by a hidden boost to their team
    Last edited by Ajax1114; 09-15-2011 at 02:13 PM.

  15. #15
    Plane Touched Jural's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    283

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajax1114 View Post
    I like that you're trying to come up with a solution, but I'm afraid this would just be too hard to code and would probably cause more imbalance than balance. For example, Team A gets destroyed. Team A gets a boost to compensate. The boost is too large and Team A destroys Team B. Now Team B gets a boost, but it's also too large to compensate and Team A gets destroyed again.

    And so on... and of course there are less controllable factors to consider like people joining and leaving warfronts, a 4v2 skirmish as opposed to a 6v6, skilled vs unskilled players, etc.

    Not to mention that no one could really feel satisfied with a win, knowing that their win may have been affected by a hidden boost to their team
    Well, it's really just a more effective version of "Ascended Power" that all x6 and lower players get now.

    I have been a software engineer for many years. I think you could take the score screen data and use it to calculate the damage ratio almost instantly a few minutes after the teams were full, then adjust the buff. Kind of like a "damper" that would ease off as the ratio approaches 80% for the weaker team.

    It doesn't have to be complex or perfect.

    The entire idea is to keep battles as, well, real battles. Not effortless stomps.
    Last edited by Jural; 09-15-2011 at 02:31 PM.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

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