To encourage competition in Outpost Rush, we’ve slightly reduced the Coin and Azoth rewards for the losing team.
I appreciate the team’s effort to reduce the number of AFK people and alike. However, to someone who only cares about rewards and not the effort, they won’t care about a required increased effort to eventually achieve rewards.
Phrased in examples: someone who AFKs thorugh a game or two, won’t care much if he needs to AFK through 10 games, because after all, the effort of AFKing is close to 0 - whilst at the same time this is penalizes people who actually tries, but still loses, or loses by an almost-draw (900-1000, etc).
A suggestion to solve this (but this is just an example to focus on the core of the idea), is that the minimum rewards could be fixed, whilst the majority of the reward should be provided in a flexible manner depending on the individual contribution of the player in this match.
I get the intent here, but it seems to me that these are 2 separate issues:
Should OR winners get more than OR losers?
Should frequent OR afk-ers have some consequences for actions?
I would hope the majority agrees that winners should get higher rewards.
As to the latter, I would fully support further diminished rewards for people who go AFK at any point in War/Outpost Rush…with eventually locking them from joining for a period of time.
OR is a loot piñata already, however the RNG of the rewards (Other than coin and Azoth) is rather disappointing. I’ve not received a gear drop worth keeping yet.
The (loot) grind aspect of OR is a different topic, I play OR for fun, the loot is welcome and I’d like for it to count towards something because I prefer to grind doing OR than brainless PvE elites - but still not unhappy about “not” getting loot from OR ^^
In any case I agree with your previous post about this being two different issues @GregM GregM
+1 to both @vektrat and @GregM . Good discussion. I prefer the flexible rewards of the winners, in theory, as long as there is a limit.
It seems entirely possible to catch afk’ers using multiple methods (macro detection, player reports, lack of objective interaction). And I also support the idea of placing short OR bans on players labeled as afk in their previous match.
I enjoy OR, when I can get into a game, and I feel that once the exploits and bugs are fixed, it will be a much more enjoyable experience. I expect Wars will also be greatly improved.
If a team wins, it’s because their total value of Contributions was greater than the opposing team’s. So, in a way, they’re already getting more out of it. But I see your point. How about this…
Rewards based solely on contribution, let’s say 500:1. That way, a person with 100,000 pts of Contribution is rewarded with 200 gold, a person with 500,000 pts of Contribution gets 1,000 gold.
Winning team’s rewards get multiplied by 1.2, so the same 500,000 points on winning team would earn them 1,200 gold instead.
…numbers are arbitrary, it’s the principle that I think would work.
is just for badge