+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Can we fix Warfronts?

  1. #1
    Rift Disciple
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    117

    Default Can we fix Warfronts?

    So i did warfronts 10 times as a little experiment to make sure i wasnt exaggerating. I kept track of the results of the warfronts. Out of the 10:

    * I was on the winning team twice
    * Seven times i was thrown into a warfront already in progress.
    * 6 of the 7 times i was on the losing team as soon as i entered.
    * 4 of 6 of the time i was on the losing team, they were losing by a large amount.

    Statically speaking i should land on the winning side about half the time...but it seems that teams are quite lopsided and i get tossed on the wrong side of that most of the time. I also noticed, and this is at 65, that a decent amount of the players on the other side hit me for 8-10k while i hit them for 2-4k with my most powerful spells.

    My gear is good enough to run NTEs. A mix of blue and purples with a couple of oranges. I also notice in these landslide warfronts the other side tends to have several players that do in the millions for damage while the highest on the losing side tends to be around 500k maybe one pushing 750k.

    It makes warfronts a rather frustrating waste of time. I dont at all mind losing here and there. But 80% of the time when we are suppose to be added randomly is ridiculous. One of the obvious problems is people quitting in a WF because their side started to lose a little bit. Though you have to ask yourself would so many people quit in the middle if the WF were more balanced? I doubt it.

    So some changes i think would improve warfronts.

    1) A checkbox that allows you to only queue for WF that are not in progress.

    2) Gear ratings: Each piece of gear has a gear rating that derived from all the primary and secondary stats of that piece added together. (IE: Chest that has 100 wis, 100 int, 100 end, 100 SP, 100 hit would have a gear rating of 500.) All the pieces are added together and then applied runes are added to that to give a final character's gear rating. When placing people in WFs, the game keeps the sides within 10% of each other.

    3) In warfronts in which you accumulate points, if the losing side has less than half of the winning side points, all members on the losing side receive a "Last Stand" buff in which they receive a 10% bonus to damage and healing and a 10% damage reduction until they catch up to a point greater than 1/2. (IE: Blue team has 200 points and the red team just hit 401. Blue team gets the buff and continues to lose points. After a couple of minutes, blue team starts to make a comeback and now the red team has 600 points as the blue team passes over 300 and loses their buff).

    In capture warfronts such as whitefall steppes, The buff is only applied if one side has 2/3 and the other has 0/3.

    Edit: the buff would only go into effect once the conditions are met AND the warfront has been in progress 60 seconds.

    * the idea of all this is to keep warfront fairly matched Instead of the one side having 94 and the other having 500 or one side having 1000 and the other have 213 like i have seen so many times especially since hitting 65.

    and i get tired of being forced into WF in which the score is 620 to 140 not in my favor and either having to stick it out for 5-6 minutes while we lose or take the deserter hit. I shouldnt have to do 70 warfronts a week to get the rewards for 7,then the odds of winning upon entering are 50/50.

    Edit: 4) Groups of 3 or more are not put in warfronts unless a group of 3 or more is put on the opposite side. It gives an unfair advantage to one side.
    Last edited by Thorian; 02-23-2015 at 07:49 PM.

  2. #2
    Champion of Telara
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,220

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thorian View Post
    Statically speaking i should land on the winning side about half the time...
    No. Players join WFs to win, just like almost every other activity. If they see they are on the losing side with virtually no chance of overturning it, they simply leave, take the 15min debuff, and do other stuff that will help them instead of being farmed by the enemy team. If they're on the winning team, then unless some other important reason arises, they will not leave. Which is why player slots are almost always open on the losing team.

    1) A checkbox that allows you to only queue for WF that are not in progress.
    Noone then would want to join a WF that isn't new. This option would see 100% usage, not even 99%. It would also mean that in a WF that someone left due to a legitimate reason and not because they were losing, then that team would be "doomed" to a defeat simply because noone would ever fill in the empty slot.

    2) Gear ratings:
    Gearscore can be exploited. Players would come up with ways to join the better geared team most of the time.

  3. #3
    Rift Disciple
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thorian View Post

    1) A checkbox that allows you to only queue for WF that are not in progress. .
    I agree with this one. Trap the premade group in a WF with 1 to 2 hardcore non-quitting never-say-die pvpers (aka AFKers in spawn) to the very end so I can get a fairer match in a fresh new game of random pugs vs pugs.
    Last edited by Observers; 02-24-2015 at 01:59 AM.

  4. #4
    Champion of Telara Veldan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    1,353

    Default

    There is of course a way to fix most of this. It's very simple: remove the "hot join" part of warfronts. Don't replace players that leave. I believe this would greatly improve PvP in general.

  5. #5
    Rift Disciple
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    117

    Default

    If they see they are on the losing side with virtually no chance of overturning it, they simply leave, take the 15min debuff, and do other stuff that will help them instead of being farmed by the enemy team.
    Which is part of the reason why i made the suggestions i did. On top of that, now that i think about it i would make the deserter penalty 1 hour instead of 15 minutes.

    Noone then would want to join a WF that isn't new. This option would see 100% usage, not even 99%. It would also mean that in a WF that someone left due to a legitimate reason and not because they were losing, then that team would be "doomed" to a defeat simply because noone would ever fill in the empty slot.
    That is a large assumption. If warfronts were more balanced so one doesnt always enter on the losing side of 600 points vs 140, people would be more apt to join a warfront in the middle. As it has benefits. Shorter warfront means get in and out faster and get paid. Also i rather be one person short on a balanced team than have equal numbers and one side have mostly raid gear and the other side have mostly world and expert gear.

    Gearscore can be exploited. Players would come up with ways to join the better geared team most of the time
    You mean queue with crappy gear or no gear so they have a low score. A good number of people would have to do that in the same warfront. And the game mechanic would attempt to balance the sides out. Short of that you could simply lock gear to your character when you queue and not allow it to be removed until you leave the warfront. Problem solved.

  6. #6
    General of Telara Sheo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    975

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thorian View Post
    You mean queue with crappy gear or no gear so they have a low score. A good number of people would have to do that in the same warfront. And the game mechanic would attempt to balance the sides out. Short of that you could simply lock gear to your character when you queue and not allow it to be removed until you leave the warfront. Problem solved.


    I hope trion will never do that: neither in bgs nor in dungeons, locked soul or gear.
    Sheona/Faynee <VANEN> , <Apotheosys>

  7. #7
    Shadowlander Feraldira's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    43

    Default perhaps a smaller change

    I know the pain of joining a warfront only to see that I've been put on a team with almost no chance of winning, but many of the above suggestions could be easily manipulated. here are a few ideas

    instead of giving people the option to only join new WFs, perhaps put a block on people entering when the winning team has 75% of the winning score.

    perhaps when filling teams give precedence to losing team (teams 7-7? next person to enter is on the losing team giving numbers advantage)

    I like the "last stand" buff idea. perhaps also include an increase in favor gains and have it come in as a function of how close the other team is to winning. (if the winning score is 1000 and team 1 has 500 and team 2 has 200 then once team 2 is 50% of team 1 they lose buff. if team 1 is at 850, and team 2 is at 500, they get the buff until 75% etc. (actual values more nuanced of course))

+ 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