Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Eviscerador

Add a courageous resistence award for loser team

8 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[PACOS]
Weekend Tester
656 posts
6,004 battles

Hello! Am I the only one fed up with losing games while getting high calibers, confederates, dreadnought or other similar heroic achievements when the team just melts around you in the nowadays so standard 12-1 or 12-2 losses?

 

Why don't WG add a courageous resistence award to people that get heroic medals while losing? at least you are rewarding people that try to win the game instead of just derping around.

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[S-O-M]
Players
657 posts

Something has to be done, it’s simply not fair that a player or players carrying cling ons and doing far more (damage, capping and spotting etc) receive less rewards than opponents who did sweet FA on the victorious red team.

 

Again MM is the biggest bug Bare, 1 loss saw 4 low ranked team mates, while red team had 3 gold top ranked players alone, despite being bottom tier I finished 3rd, my reward sweet FA while several reds who did zero still got more than I; so what’s the friggin point of busting a game when team mates lemming train within 5 mins ?,  where the incentive WG ?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PGT2P]
Players
102 posts
7,456 battles

I sometimes feel this way too, but I suspect there's a difference, one that I've yet to identify, between doing well as a single player and being a good team player. 

 

Theoretically, it should be possible to end up with a low personal score but to have played an excellent strategic game and thereby been instrumental in securing your team's victory,  and vice-versa (sink a few ships, both dish out and heal a ton of damage, take a cap or two, but still fail to play strategically in a way that would have allowed your team to win).  

 

Anyhow, the argument for not rewarding a loss is probably based on the assumption that your individual score and achievements aren't necessarily a reflection of how useful and strategic you've been... 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,985 posts
19,699 battles

It would certainly be nice to have some sort of achievement for when you have a higher base XP score than that of the leader of the winning team. If nothing else to show you pulled your weight.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BFS]
Beta Tester
2,061 posts
13,891 battles

I think it would encourage play that we hear so much about in ranked where one player farms damage because they've stayed far enough away to not attract return fire and relies on the team mates to spot and take damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
5,661 posts
2 minutes ago, BrusilovX said:

I think it would encourage play that we hear so much about in ranked where one player farms damage because they've stayed far enough away to not attract return fire and relies on the team mates to spot and take damage.

 

Well, if the game could actually figure out how much all of that contributes to the result, it could reward all of them appropriately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
131 posts
5,214 battles
4 hours ago, Birkebein said:

I sometimes feel this way too, but I suspect there's a difference, one that I've yet to identify, between doing well as a single player and being a good team player. 

 

Theoretically, it should be possible to end up with a low personal score but to have played an excellent strategic game and thereby been instrumental in securing your team's victory,  and vice-versa (sink a few ships, both dish out and heal a ton of damage, take a cap or two, but still fail to play strategically in a way that would have allowed your team to win).  

 

Anyhow, the argument for not rewarding a loss is probably based on the assumption that your individual score and achievements aren't necessarily a reflection of how useful and strategic you've been... 

Agreed. The XP system is mostly fine but you can't always rely on individual score to properly define how much of an implication a player had on a game.

As an example, playing the Chapayev those days, I usually use my radar to fend off enemy DDs from caps. There are cases where I'm not able to damage them much (bad aim, islands in the way or just too risky to shoot) but forcing them out of their smoke and out of the cap is usually enough to give an edge to my team. However this doesn't give you much of a reward in terms of XP.

 

I like the idea of an achievement if, on a loss, you manage to get more base XP than the best player on the enemy team. That's exceptional enough to be worth a tiny reward.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,106 posts
9,568 battles
10 hours ago, Eviscerador said:

Hello! Am I the only one fed up with losing games while getting high calibers, confederates, dreadnought or other similar heroic achievements when the team just melts around you in the nowadays so standard 12-1 or 12-2 losses?

 

Why don't WG add a courageous resistence award to people that get heroic medals while losing? at least you are rewarding people that try to win the game instead of just derping around.

Like this one?

 

kraken1.jpg

 

Not sure if I missed some achievement. Maybe that was the reason for losing... :cap_fainting:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×