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

Rewarding Good players on Losing Teams

66 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
624 posts
2,032 battles

So with all the threads complaining about fellow teammates lack of skill and with some people wanting to punish poor players for bad gameplay I though of a simple idea to stop all the ranting and accusations by players that there teams let them down not them.

 

Why not reward the top 3 players on the losing-side with a bonus of not having a defeat on there stats and also grant them the same rewards in xp and credits as the victors I will explain my reasons for this I know it sounds daft but I really think this could work.

 

1/ It doesn't reward poor players.

2/ It stops static games , people will try harder for there teams if you camp you might not make the top 3

3/ Reduces the stress of being a good player but RNG hates you when you go in random.

4/ Could possibly increase the player base

5/ Poor DD players might actually want to cap for a change (joking on this one)

 

In a nutshell it would reward people who are good at the basics but have just had rotten luck with teams . Should they really be punished by having a large losing streak just because RNG hates them?.

 

What you guys think?. 

  • Cool 3
  • Bad 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONUS]
[BONUS]
Beta Tester
2,635 posts
6,853 battles

Because they'll play to pad damage rather than playing to win.  Winning should be the only thing that matters.  Campers are the last to die and therefore rack up more damage than the aggressive players who go in and get killed early.

 

 

 

  • Cool 10
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
6,937 posts
13,435 battles

Did you even read anything about how the economy in this game works or did you just skip everything in your blind crusade about "hurr durr if it weren't for bad players you wouldn't be unicum!!1111"?

The current economic system does not reward good play. In fact, it even punishes playing for the team as it puts its primary emphasis on damage while giving out meager rewards for anything else. This means that, for example, from an economical perspective camping in the back while farming damage is precisely what BBs need to do if they want to see big numbers on the score screen.

 

The current economic system encourages the very bad behaviors we all hate to see. To build even further on that is nothing short of absolutely daft.

 

I know I'm being rude here but I have stated this numerous times just recently in a thread I'm sure you have followed. We have also been shown just how ludicrously insignificant the rewards for spotting and killing planes are in a thread approx. two weeks ago.

There is no excuse for your ignorance.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,499 posts
4,650 battles

"Good play" in "bad team" still gives a good player 1000+ base XP and bunch of credits so no additional rewards for losing is necessary.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[H-M-F]
Players
3 posts

This could be done like in WoT. When earning „battle hero” medal it rewards you like you’d be in winning team. Quite fair solution imo.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
460 posts
5,069 battles
5 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

Did you even read anything about how the economy in this game works or did you just skip everything in your blind crusade about "hurr durr if it weren't for bad players you wouldn't be unicum!!1111"?

The current economic system does not reward good play. In fact, it even punishes playing for the team as it puts its primary emphasis on damage while giving out meager rewards for anything else. This means that, for example, from an economical perspective camping in the back while farming damage is precisely what BBs need to do if they want to see big numbers on the score screen.

 

The current economic system encourages the very bad behaviors we all hate to see. To build even further on that is nothing short of absolutely daft.

 

I know I'm being rude here but I have stated this numerous times just recently in a thread I'm sure you have followed. We have also been shown just how ludicrously insignificant the rewards for spotting and killing planes are in a thread approx. two weeks ago.

There is no excuse for your ignorance.

 

This is so true !!

 

Been doing nothing special in my Iowa just shooting every now and than and was surprised to getting so much xp ( around 1300-1700 base xp ) because I work my [edited]of in Hindi trying to support my team DDs, dealing big numbers on enemy DDs, getting a lot enemy fire on me, dealing big dam. on enemy BBs  with fires and so on, contest cap, defend cap, holding enemy flank ect..ect..  and getting almost the same maybe 1500-2000 - for that I need only a few good shoot on enemy cruiser and i will brake there cit and make like 50-70% dam on them but my influence on battle was almost none, one good fight I had with 7-8 cits I got 2500xp in that fight I did a little tanking and pushing just to try it how Iowa will endure that ....

 

So you don't have to be to bright to know why all /most are playing BBs and being passive and shoot every now and than ,...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,296 posts
6 hours ago, MacFergus said:

Why not reward the top 3 players on the losing-side with a bonus of not having a defeat on there stats and also grant them the same rewards in xp and credits as the victors

:Smile_facepalm: As England/UK turned into the land of the snowflake in the last 20 or so years because the PC brigade decided that kids should not learn how to lose but 'everyone should be treated as a winner' etc, etc yawn, ending up with a generation of people who can't handle losing at anything......I vote sod off. 

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
460 posts
5,069 battles

why would you get penalty of "i don't give a " team while you and  2-3 of your teammates been working so hard to win trying to do everything and give all the best you can and you still lose because you had 1-2 afk players, 3 yolo that died in first 2 min and 5 total passive players  ..

 

even in competitive ranked you have that top player in losing team don't lose the star so why not in random that top 3 have normal wining bonus in xp and credit and have like 0 i win/lose  statistic ( not win, not lose ) 

 

and last 3 i losing team should get 50-75-100xp so it would make you work a little bit and learn to play not just be carry around by others, and if you yolo or lost your ship early you would get punishment in that way..

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,296 posts
26 minutes ago, Cime said:

 

even in competitive ranked you have that top player in losing team don't lose the star so why not in random that top 3 have normal wining bonus in xp and credit and have like 0 i win/lose  statistic ( not win, not lose ) 

 

You lost so it's a loss. :Smile_facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
460 posts
5,069 battles
7 minutes ago, bushwacker001 said:

You lost so it's a loss. :Smile_facepalm:

 

And that's why no one want to learn - why would you try to be best when all you have to do is to play enough of games and you will have a big nice shiny T10 ship and than you can sail around and shoot your big canon every now and than - while all of us who try to win and give the best of us every game are [edited] obviously  ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PKTZS]
Weekend Tester
2,399 posts
14,242 battles
7 hours ago, Hedgehog1963 said:

Because they'll play to pad damage rather than playing to win.  Winning should be the only thing that matters.  Campers are the last to die and therefore rack up more damage that the aggressive players who go in and get killed early.

 

 

 

1st, explain this to the good player that sees that by minute 5 his team is 4 ships down (usuallly all DDs in his team).

 

2nd, an aggresive player dead by minute 5 is not a "I play to win" player. He's just an idiot that YOLOs.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONUS]
[BONUS]
Beta Tester
2,635 posts
6,853 battles
27 minutes ago, JapLance said:

 

 

2nd, an aggresive player dead by minute 5 is not a "I play to win" player. He's just an idiot that YOLOs.

 

 

Or he was promised support he didn't get.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SNUBS]
Players
1,242 posts
6,386 battles
16 minutes ago, Hedgehog1963 said:

Or he was promised support he didn't get

it would most of the time still be the dd's mistake then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
7,970 posts
11,391 battles
15 minutes ago, Hedgehog1963 said:

 

Or he was promised support he didn't get.

And that's the problem, relying on friendly support means you take a risk as if they suck or don't turn up then the rest retire to the borders and waste 20 mins of everyone's lives.

 

Once folk are bitten that way a few times they adopt the safe approach and hang back.

 

This cycle makes the meta more and more passive.

 

I'll give WoT some credit as at least there the games usually resolve a lot quicker. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PKTZS]
Weekend Tester
2,399 posts
14,242 battles
18 minutes ago, Hedgehog1963 said:

 

Or he was promised support he didn't get.

If you check the minimap regularly (something a good player will do) you know whether you have support or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONUS]
[BONUS]
Beta Tester
2,635 posts
6,853 battles
1 minute ago, JapLance said:

If you check the minimap regularly (something a good player will do) you know whether you have support or not.

 

Yeah I can tell where all the guns of the ships behind me are pointing from the minimap.  Thanks.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
18 posts
9,007 battles

We already have enough  players  camping in the  back  with their BB's    milking  the  DD'd  and CA   for  their  scores  and not playing  to  win . All this  would  do  is  have  even  more players playing  BB's . It much easier to   farm EXP   as a BB   than any other  ship . The problem  is  and has  been , winning  is not good  reason  to  move up  and play as a  team .Players  play  for EXP   not  to  win . Players  that talk about  people  dying in  the  first   5 mins   are  the same players playing BB's camping  the  back  while the DD'S and  CA  push trying  to  cap . Funny   part is if  as a DD   you  do not  push up   the  same players  [edited] about the DD's  not  spotting  for  them . 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SICK]
Weekend Tester
4,645 posts
9,216 battles
8 hours ago, MacFergus said:

Why not reward the top 3 players on the losing-side with a bonus of not having a defeat on there stats and also grant them the same rewards in xp and credits as the victors

 

Except that it does reward poor players.

In facerolls battles, the top XP players are those who survive the longest.
ie: those moronic BB players who stayed really far and got lucky with one salvo
In lesser numbers, the idiotic yolo rush DD who got lucky with a torpedo salvo

 

As soon as you give them a treat for those sorts of battle, it's all over. It *can't* be them the problem, they got super duper special rewards for playing well !

 

 

Just like ranked where the top XP on the losing team didn't lose a star.

 

 

3 minutes ago, Hedgehog1963 said:

Yeah I can tell where all the guns of the ships behind me are pointing from the minimap.  Thanks.


Critical thinking is your friend.
If your closest teammate is 20km away and he has enemy ships close to him, chances are he's not pointing his guns to help you.

Too bad for you that there's no module for that 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EST]
[EST]
Players
713 posts
17,669 battles
14 minutes ago, JapLance said:

If you check the minimap regularly (something a good player will do) you know whether you have support or not.

Fun fact from Ranks: both enemies same distance from cap, 2 Lo Yangs spotted by eachother sonars. 1 team kills DD, other shoots BB far back. I would say the DD who died had every right to believe he was supported.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
350 posts
3,426 battles

I don't agree with this proposal for a number of reasons:

 

- A similar tool is used on ranked, with a lot of complaints for people who play selfishly for saving the star.

- A loss is a loss, why it should not be counted as a loss?

- From credits point of view, you are rewarded with damage planes etc, so if you win or lose earnings remains the same (i am not sure about this)

 

the only drawback is if you lose you got no bonus for first win, but overall i can pass over it.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
493 posts
9,215 battles

Its often difficult to tell who was the best player on the loosing team, and why should the BB sniping from the back who racked up the largest damage, simply by being alive longer, be rewarded more than the players who tried to cap / push a side and died quickly when the rest of the team hid behind an island rather than supporting, 

Random is supposed to be a team game, you win as a team, you loose as a team 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[XODUS]
Players
725 posts
3,916 battles

Battleships need to have more rewards for tanking Damage rather than dealing it
If i have £1 for every time i saw a GERMAN Battleship sniping at T6+ matches, i'd have enough to buy a new car. (and i like function of my cars over being an [edited]in an Audi or a BMW)

Some people on here with vastly more games could prob get a brand new BMW or Range Rover if they had a £1 for every German BB sniping. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
3,187 posts
5,583 battles
3 hours ago, Cime said:

even in competitive ranked you have that top player in losing team don't lose the star

 

This is the worst thing implemented anyway, and should be removed IMMEDIATELY. Ppl dont play to win, they play NOT to lose a Star. So there is options a) get carried to a win or b) dont lose a Star because i camped in the back sniping like a selfish bastard.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,146 posts
8,325 battles
1 hour ago, Profilus said:

Fun fact from Ranks: both enemies same distance from cap, 2 Lo Yangs spotted by eachother sonars. 1 team kills DD, other shoots BB far back. I would say the DD who died had every right to believe he was supported.

 

Both DDs are idiots and deserve to lose. 

You don't suicide like that. 

 

One should only commit Loyang vs Loyang in an advantageous situation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×