Victory as a multiplier instead of flat reward

(tokamak) #1

I’ve just been daydreaming a bit and I just thought how great wouldn’t it be if players have the xp they gained throughout the match multiply rather than handing them a flat bonus for winning.

Linking two objectives (working towards a victory and winning) would be the ultimate incentive to do everything within your power to win the game. There would appear a significant difference between players who contributed a lot to the game and those who didn’t. In theory an AFKer wouldn’t be receiving any xp at all even if his team won.

(DepressedOptimist) #2

I actually like that idea. Becase it does piss you off when you have one person on your team taking up a slot on the roster but thats all they’re doing. I doubt they’ll implement it because it would deter new and bad players… And it seems they really want that market.

(Atavax) #3

doesn’t this only work if the objective system works flawlessly? if the objectives aren’t exactly what your team needs, you’re not going to give a damn about what your team needs at that moment for victory, you only care about completing the objective and earning xp… it would also probably promote teams that are dominating the other to draw out the match to complete as many objectives as possible before victory.

(tokamak) #4

Actually that was the problem I tried to solve.

Only caring about completing the objective and earning xp would be stupid as objectives that don’t contribute to the victory don’t guarantee your xp being multiplied. Which is what you’re after.

it would also probably promote teams that are dominating the other to draw out the match to complete as many objectives as possible before victory.

Valid point. But this will only happen if the attacking team is winning. A winning defender dragging out the game is doing a fine job. Perhaps a bonus modifier for completing the objective as fast as possible will negate this behaviour.

(Atavax) #5

[QUOTE=tokamak;250174]Actually that was the problem I tried to solve.

Only caring about completing the objective and earning xp would be stupid as objectives that don’t contribute to the victory don’t guarantee your xp being multiplied. Which is what you’re after.

Valid point. But this will only happen if the attacking team is winning. A winning defender dragging out the game is doing a fine job. Perhaps a bonus modifier for completing the objective as fast as possible will negate this behaviour.[/QUOTE]

i’m not sure about the details about the maps, but a winning defender might purposely let the attacking team complete objectives to add time to the round in order for the defender to complete more objectives… if your team is at a position where victory is inevitable, the emphasis on objectives for xp would promote them to farm objectives instead of simply ending the match.

(SockDog) #6

I’ve said in the past that you should be presented at the end of the match with a scoreboard and each player can anonymously assign other players points. The system then tallies it up, does some overly complicated maths and then creates an XP bonus. This way you can attribute a bonus to the player/s you feel helped you and the team most from your point of view and it helps cover situations where the objectives or xp system is flawed and doesn’t reward players for playing well within the defined “good play” model. It may also encourage players to stick with losing teams until the end as they’d have a chance to gain additional XP for continuing to try and win.

(tokamak) #7

You can distribute the xp per main objective then. Your contribution to one chapter in the map says nothing about your contribution in the other part of the map.

(LyndonL) #8

Yeah… no. By the time players get to the point where they have played enough matches to be able to steam roll, they’re not going to care less about XP.

(Cankor) #9

Nice idea, but people will probably just boost their clan mates first and others second.

As far as the original idea: completing primary objectives is your march towards victory (for the attacker). The way SD is doing it now I believe is trying to make sure all those actively involved in making that happen (or not happen for the defenders) get XP multipliers for their actions along the way. So if you rez the soldier next to the door that needs to get blown up you get more XP than rezzing another guy, particularly if he is far away. I’m guessing they put quite a bit of effort into making this work (actually, it’s most likely part of the tuning in progress as we write).

So I believe the multiplier is already built in. And I also think it’s a better implementation because it rewards everyone who is at least trying despite how their team may be doing over-all. So good players on poor teams who can’t manage to do the objective will still do well. I suspect there is additional XP doled out to those helping with the primary objective when it is actually completed, so making sure it actually gets done (as opposed to just trying really hard and failing) is also rewarded. This is coming from the perspective of having a lot of confidence that SD gets the “XP rewards which promote team play” working really well with Brink.

Also, putting an overly strong emphasis on winning the map will most likely encourage stacking.

That said I do think there should be some kind of come from behind bonus (and maybe that’s the XP multiplier), where if you were getting totally trounced but still manage to pull of a win you get an extra reward. This may encourage guys to switch to a loosing team (anti-stacking reward).

(Nail) #10

meh, the only bonus for winning is being alive at the end

:penguin:

(Atavax) #11

if experiance is going to be useless after the first week, why even have it in the game? and who cares whether its a multiplier or a fixed amount for victory if it is useless except for the first week?

(LyndonL) #12

Because it will train people who are new to the game to work as a team, and that should then stick with them as habit.

(tokamak) #13

Sure, but the dynamic xp distribution (which is awesome) would work perfectly with a a victory multiplier on top.

(brbrbr) #14

thats actually, HOW ETQW scoring/xp systems works after some patches[1.4 ? 1.5 ? can’t remember exactly].

(tokamak) #15

Really? I thought you won a flat amount like 20 xp or something.

(Cankor) #16

You don’t get any XP for winning in ETQW. What happens is all defenders get XP for completing a defend the objective mission. You know, defend the objective for 4 minutes, get 10 XP. What happens is when you win as defender it gives you the XP for completing this mission. So people think they get XP for winning the map, but they don’t. Winners get nothing, defenders get a mission completion XP award (so in effect they do get an award for winning, but again it’s only the defenders).

BTW, this is one of those things that really skews the XP awards heavily towards a strong defnding team. If you full hold the first objective everyone on the team gets and extra 60XP
10 for the first 4 minutes
20 more after 8 more minutes (clock is now at 12 minutes)
30 more when the map ends (clock at 20 minutes)
Total 60, even if you did nothing for your team.

BTW, the XP goes to your class category, so if you are planning to play a different class the next map what you do is switch right before the map ends and you will start the next map with the first unlock for your class. Also makes it harder for attackers to get the medals for being best in class at the end of the map (best medic, best soldier, etc), because they have no equivalant award.

There’s no equivalent for attackers. There’s supposed to be a mission to help take the objective, and it’s even listed as giving 10 XP, but it doesn’t work, no XP is ever awarded.

(tokamak) #17

Right, that’s messed up. Even fluffwise it doesn’t matter how many objectives you completed, in every map it’s always only about the last objective.

(DarkangelUK) #18

Always great in ETQW when you’re just about to finish completing the last objective (hacking the sewer controls being a perfect example), and a team mate shoots you so they can complete it.

(LyndonL) #19

That’s just BS… Seriously? No wonder devs put FF-off by default these days.

(Atavax) #20

rewarding completing objectives and rewarding winning, is going to train people to do it, whether victory is a multiplier or a flat reward…