Give players credits as incentive for swapping to a team with fewer players.

(Talak) #1

I just finished a match on Terminal. We had six players at the start of the match, but they disconnected a few minutes in. My team and I spent the rest of the game shorthanded three players with no one on the opposing team willing to swap over.

I think Splash Damage should award any player who swaps over to a team with fewer players to even it up. It would have to be on an hour long cooldown to prevent abuse.

At the moment, none of the servers have any kind of automated team balance and with no server admins in sight. There has to be something that can be done about this issue.

(Jostabeere) #2

No. it should be forced by the system.
And rather punishing if people don’t do it than rewarding if people do it.

(Talak) #3

How is it punishing players for making a match more fair player count wise?

People get upset when the system chooses them and places them on the losing side. I’ve seen plenty of matches where a shuffle team vote passes and the players that are placed from the winning side to the losing one often leave the match.

Having a credit incentive on a hour or longer cooldown will keep players in a server instead of them abandoning it when something doesn’t go their way. I’m not saying give 1,000 credits to a player for swapping. 100 credits is a reasonable amount. It’s not going to break the economy of the game.

(Black) #4

[quote=“Talak;128179”]How is it punishing players for making a match more fair player count wise?

People get upset when the system chooses them and places them on the losing side. I’ve seen plenty of matches where a shuffle team vote passes and the players that are placed from the winning side to the losing one often leave the match.

Having a credit incentive on a hour or longer cooldown will keep players in a server instead of them abandoning it when something doesn’t go their way. I’m not saying give 1,000 credits to a player for swapping. 100 credits is a reasonable amount. [/quote]

I don’t reward should be given.
I’m for a no tolerance rule when it comes to the balance of teams.

If a team is that horribly balanced like a 6v3 then the team with 6 players should be given an xp reduction or the inability to interact with the objectives until the balance is restored.

Totally unacceptable.

(Amerika) #5

When it comes to game design I think keeping things positive and giving players incentive to do something is always better than punishing and taking things away from them. In this case an incentive to switch teams so that players are falling all over each other to make sure teams are balanced to get a little credit boost isn’t a huge deal, is a positive event and helps everyone and hurts nobody. And there isn’t any saltiness at all in that scenario. It’s the very definition of a win/win.

(Xan) #6

well. some people value wins more than anything such as voting no on shuffle team even we are playing 2v7 the whole game
iDont think credit will change anything

(torsoreaper) #7

I vote to go above and beyond and reward the top player on the losing team. This would encourage a player to potentially carry a losing team to victory rather then rage quit at his teams’ ineptitude. In addition, it would at least encourage the top 3 players to try hard in general because they would all want to get the best player on the losing team bonus.

(Daergar) #8

Regardless, it should be automatic, and rapid, in public matches.

Though I am hesitant when it comes to stopwatch games, working your behind off for 15 minutes during a defensive hold, only to end up switched would stinkum biggus.

(RyePanda) #9

Another idea I like is only allowing equal numbers of players on each team to be alive at the same time. So in a 6 v 3, 3 of the 6 are waiting to spawn. One of the 3 that is in dies, the one at the front of the waiting list goes in. If they want to play, they can switch to the other team. So it doesn’t force them, just encourages.

(Jostabeere) #10

That’s good too. Anything, but balance stomps.

(bontsa) #11

Been suggested multitude of times in the past, good thing it keeps coming up still.

Abusal you already mentioned in the poll could be easily avoided in my opinion by making the switch reward one-time-per-match. That way you can’t keep switching back and forth whenever opportunity arises. And reward should only be given in situations like balancing 6v4, not switching in 6v5.

And yea, reward >> punishment

(Tayski) #12

In Quakelive if a team is unbalanced in public, the last player(s) on the scoreboard of the team which has more players go to the team with less players or they get kicked.
So for example in a 6vs4 situation, the 6th player on the scoreboard goes to the team with 4 players to make it 5vs5. Otherwise he gets vote kicked.
People are used to work that way in Quakelive, and after getting kicked a couple of times for not doing it, you just learn and know what you’re supposed to do in this situation.
This game and its players need the same mentality.