|
|
Post by mijapi300 on Feb 22, 2017 18:52:28 GMT -5
The big fat ugly elephant in the room. Tanking.
How do we fix it? Revamp the entire MM system, again! Aladeen! (That one is a NO)
Let's take a closer look at the problem. What players or actions, specifically, are the most people complaining about? Anyone that chooses to tank, right?? Aladeen!!!
The problem - the real problem - is the large amount of people tanking by ditching matches. Tanking, in general, isn't the issue. People are going to find a way to tank, regardless of the system. In the current system, tanking by doing zero damage doesn't ruin the game, as long as the person tanking partakes in the other objective of the game, capturing beacons.
So then what do you do? How do you persuade people that want to tank to actually partake in the main objective of the game? First, look at their motivation, and then their options. Their motivation is simple - lower your tier, and then seal club for 20 or so games to gain gold fast. Now, what is the most enticing [easy (people like easy - I know, crazy right?)] option available? Yes, that was a notation inside of a notation (notationception, if you will). The easiest option is to leave games after 30 seconds. Why? Because Pixonic has it set up where you get credit for a game, good or bad, as long as you spent at least 30 seconds in that game. With this limit, including load times, you can tank all the way to zero average damage in 45-50 minutes.
The solution? Maybe you're ahead of me by now. Increase the amount of time you need to spend in a game to get credit. My suggestion is three minutes, or the conclusion of the game, whichever occurs first. At this limit, it would take over three hours to tank to zero by ditching games. Three hours being attached to your device without one second of actual playing the game. At that point, you're better off running for beacons at least, thus not ruining the experience for your teammates. Actually helping them, nonetheless.
What about the people that will ditch games at 2:59 if they're losing to avoid the loss? Here you go - any game that is left prior to 3:00 elapsing counts as a loss, but does not count towards your damage. This, you can't leave early to avoid a loss, AND you can't leave early to lower your average damage.
There may be some minor flaws in this solution. But it covers most of the glaring issues. And it's extremely easy to implement. What are your thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Conflict's Student on Feb 22, 2017 19:06:11 GMT -5
Easier to align higher rewards with higher levels of gameplay. E.g. make the biggest payouts available at the levels with the most competition. People would still be free to 'tank' down to lower levels of competition, but would not profit.
Simply make payouts for killing 8/8 hangars 10x bigger than 4/4 hangars but 10x smaller than 12/12 hangars, for example - then make upgrade prices reflective of potential payout by level to mitigate any concerns about in-game currency "inflation" (aka escalation). By linking battle rewards to the quality of hangar you defeat, the incentive is to play against the best hangars possible. The gradient should be appropriately steep to discourage people from choosing "automatic" victories against newbies over challenging matches... would take some time to establish an optimal gradient but you could initially err on the side of rewarding more difficult gameplay.
|
|
|
|
Post by SGT D00M! on Feb 22, 2017 19:11:59 GMT -5
Leave Game before 3 minutes? No rewards (MoD or MoC) and NO LEAGUE POINTS or count towards your damage average (yes this means you could bail on a bad game to avoid negative league points if it was a blow out early on. Only get 25% or less of your average damage? You can still earn rewards (such as Moc), and it counts towards your damage average, but no league points. Bam, ditching and extreme smurfing solved.
|
|
|
|
Post by mijapi300 on Feb 22, 2017 19:36:20 GMT -5
Easier to align higher rewards with higher levels of gameplay. E.g. make the biggest payouts available at the levels with the most competition. People would still be free to 'tank' down to lower levels of competition, but would not profit. Simply make payouts for killing 8/8 hangars 10x bigger than 4/4 hangars but 10x smaller than 12/12 hangars, for example - then make upgrade prices reflective of potential payout by level to mitigate any concerns about in-game currency "inflation" (aka escalation). By linking battle rewards to the quality of hangar you defeat, the incentive is to play against the best hangars possible. The gradient should be appropriately steep to discourage people from choosing "automatic" victories against newbies over challenging matches... would take some time to establish an optimal gradient but you could initially err on the side of rewarding more difficult gameplay. In what way is this "easier"? You're suggesting changes to almost every piece of the game. I'm simply suggesting changing the number of one IF function of the code. Obviously that oversimplifying it. But you're suggesting converting back to the old tier system, changing rewards, and changing price algorithms. With that many major changes to that many facets of the game, many players would just leave altogether. |
|
|
|
Post by mijapi300 on Feb 22, 2017 19:37:54 GMT -5
Leave Game before 3 minutes? No rewards (MoD or MoC) and NO LEAGUE POINTS or count towards your damage average (yes this means you could bail on a bad game to avoid negative league points if it was a blow out early on. Only get 25% or less of your average damage? You can still earn rewards (such as Moc), and it counts towards your damage average, but no league points. Bam, ditching and extreme smurfing solved. The problem is people leaving early to intentionally lower their average damage. Thus, having an early leave before three minutes count as nothing but a loss solves the problem. No rewards. No win. No silver. No gold. No affect to your average damage. You simply get a loss and nothing else. It completely removes the benefit to leaving early from any scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by SGT D00M! on Feb 22, 2017 19:40:57 GMT -5
Leave Game before 3 minutes? No rewards (MoD or MoC) and NO LEAGUE POINTS or count towards your damage average (yes this means you could bail on a bad game to avoid negative league points if it was a blow out early on). Only get 25% or less of your average damage? You can still earn rewards (such as Moc), and it counts towards your damage average, but no league points. Bam, ditching and extreme smurfing solved. The problem is people leaving early to intentionally lower their average damage. Thus, having an early leave before three minutes count as nothing but a loss solves the problem. No rewards. No win. No silver. No gold. No affect to your average damage. You simply get a loss and nothing else. It completely removes the benefit to leaving early from any scenario. That's exactlty what I said. |
|
|
|
Post by launchpad on Feb 22, 2017 19:54:55 GMT -5
Let devs worry about it. They were paid to do that....
|
|
|
|
Post by SGT D00M! on Feb 22, 2017 20:00:48 GMT -5
Let devs worry about it. They were paid to do that.... This is a community forum. Meaning the community that plays the game. Meaning the devs client base. Meaning what we say has value, even when your troll 「bum-bum」 doesn't like attempts to bring play balance to a game or to close your little cheating troll loopholes. Don't you have to get back in your cave before you turn to stone? |
|
|
|
Post by launchpad on Feb 22, 2017 23:34:06 GMT -5
Let devs worry about it. They were paid to do that.... This is a community forum. Meaning the community that plays the game. Meaning the devs client base. Meaning what we say has value, even when your troll ?bum-bum? doesn't like attempts to bring play balance to a game or to close your little cheating troll loopholes. Don't you have to get back in your cave before you turn to stone? Yup. Trying to make devs listen to your request, wrapping it in forms of suggestions to "make it better". Better for who? You? The gamers? Developers? |
|
|
|
Post by mijapi300 on Feb 23, 2017 3:38:58 GMT -5
This is a community forum. Meaning the community that plays the game. Meaning the devs client base. Meaning what we say has value, even when your troll ?bum-bum? doesn't like attempts to bring play balance to a game or to close your little cheating troll loopholes. Don't you have to get back in your cave before you turn to stone? Yup. Trying to make devs listen to your request, wrapping it in forms of suggestions to "make it better". Better for who? You? The gamers? Developers? I'm not sure if you're an idiot, or you're just asking out of jest. But the suggestion was to "make it better" for the overall majority of the players. |
|
|
|
Post by frunobulax on Feb 23, 2017 7:54:51 GMT -5
The problem is people leaving early to intentionally lower their average damage. Thus, having an early leave before three minutes count as nothing but a loss solves the problem. No rewards. No win. No silver. No gold. No affect to your average damage. You simply get a loss and nothing else. It completely removes the benefit to leaving early from any scenario. Why "3 minutes"? Just condition on "leave early". No mm adjustment, no gold, no silver, just repair costs. Players can still start a match and come back 10 minutes later, but honestly I don't know how to prevent this. |
|
|
|
Post by critter667 on Feb 23, 2017 8:57:17 GMT -5
Why set a time limit at all? Why not track player time in match, then instead of using average damage over 50 matches, do average damage over time over 50 matches?
If someone ditches in 30 seconds, they did 0 damage over 30, netting no improvement or change in rank. Yet most actual players will put in say 100K damage over 5 minutes.
One other advantage of average damage over time is that if you stomp your opponent in 1 minute, you'll still rank up.
In order to tank you would have to do a little damage and then nothing for the whole match. Yes people can still tank but it will be a long task and the moment they hit a low level, they will quickly stomp their way back up.
|
|
mr7q
Destrier
Posts: 71
Karma: 48
Pilot name: mr7q
Platform: Android
|
Post by mr7q on Feb 23, 2017 10:52:25 GMT -5
I think it's as easy as:
1) No rewards (silver, gold, league point adjustment, etc...) if you leave the game prior to three minutes in.
2) If you leave after the game has been going for three minutes, you can no longer join a game until the one you were in finishes.
|
|
|
|
Post by blastronaut on Feb 23, 2017 11:19:08 GMT -5
IMO it is pointless to talk about fixes when we have no power to implement them. So what can we do?
The solution to Tanking is to stop playing solo and start playing in squads of 6. Sure tanking will still exist but you won't be playing a man down if you are squadding, matches should be fun if your whole squad is in the same league.
If anyone else is in Gold III league PM me and I'll add you as a friend for squadding.
|
|
|
|
Post by agentfilthy on Feb 23, 2017 11:41:26 GMT -5
I think a lot of people tank their games to lower their "tier" because they're tired of mismatches. The gold people get is almost nothing in reality. What people want is to win games and destroy other bots. Winning 5-10 gold at a time is no motivation at all imho.
Lots of people like to run light bot hangars, myself for example. I hate the slow plodding of most other bots and love to play fast movers. When I'm matched against nothing but medium to heavy bots it becomes very frustrating to play and I'm good. I don't mind saying it and don't care what others think. I usually rank in the top 3 but there are often long stretches where I'm rendered ineffective. When this happens for say...6-10 games in a row why wouldn't I tank my score? Why should I have to constantly play against bots that have a massive amount more firepower and range than I do? Because I'm skilled at the game I get punished? Because it's unfair that bots on an equal footing don't win?
People throw the term "seal clubbing" around as if it's the end all justification for this last bunch of ridiculous changes. If Pix was really concerned about protecting noobs they could have easily placed them in a "safe space" where only light bots and low level players can enter. Someone wants to run an Aphid Gep they automatically can't enter the "safe space". There...done. No need to destroy every other aspect of the game. The noobs are safe and the rest of us could have continued on playing.
With the current system every time I level up my hangar to the point that I can battle said medium/heavy bots I'm almost immediately placed into yet another higher tier. I don't care about gold. I just want to win and I shouldn't be handicapped because of some ridiculous "Fairness Doctrine".
People tanking their numbers is nothing more than a side effect from all the ridiculous changes of late. It doesn't need a "fix". The fix should be unscrewing all of the recent updates and to stop penalizing people based on good performance, but rather have matches based on hangar strength. Take into account the amount of damage a bot can do per second, not what the player is able to do with said bot. Don't penalize good performance.
Just my .02
|
|
|
|
Post by mijapi300 on Feb 23, 2017 11:56:35 GMT -5
I think a lot of people tank their games to lower their "tier" because they're tired of mismatches. The gold people get is almost nothing in reality. What people want is to win games and destroy other bots. Winning 5-10 gold at a time is no motivation at all imho. Lots of people like to run light bot hangars, myself for example. I hate the slow plodding of most other bots and love to play fast movers. When I'm matched against nothing but medium to heavy bots it becomes very frustrating to play and I'm good. I don't mind saying it and don't care what others think. I usually rank in the top 3 but there are often long stretches where I'm rendered ineffective. When this happens for say...6-10 games in a row why wouldn't I tank my score? Why should I have to constantly play against bots that have a massive amount more firepower and range than I do? Because I'm skilled at the game I get punished? Because it's unfair that bots on an equal footing don't win? People throw the term "seal clubbing" around as if it's the end all justification for this last bunch of ridiculous changes. If Pix was really concerned about protecting noobs they could have easily placed them in a "safe space" where only light bots and low level players can enter. Someone wants to run an Aphid Gep they automatically can't enter the "safe space". There...done. No need to destroy every other aspect of the game. The noobs are safe and the rest of us could have continued on playing. With the current system every time I level up my hangar to the point that I can battle said medium/heavy bots I'm almost immediately placed into yet another higher tier. I don't care about gold. I just want to win and I shouldn't be handicapped because of some ridiculous "Fairness Doctrine". People tanking their numbers is nothing more than a side effect from all the ridiculous changes of late. It doesn't need a "fix". The fix should be unscrewing all of the recent updates and to stop penalizing people based on good performance, but rather have matches based on hangar strength. Take into account the amount of damage a bot can do per second, not what the player is able to do with said bot. Don't penalize good performance. Just my .02 You're speaking in wild hypotheticals here. I'm not talking about major changes or alternative matchmaking systems, which the developers wouldn't be likely to implement. I'm simply making a suggestion to patch the biggest problem of the current system. If you want to suggest brand new matchmaking systems, then I'd be glad to discuss that in a thread that's actually for that. I formulated this idea specifically for the here and now situation. |
|
|
|
Post by Vindictive999 on Feb 23, 2017 11:58:30 GMT -5
In reply to OP, Kick them in the nuts...
|
|
|
|
Post by mijapi300 on Feb 23, 2017 12:07:10 GMT -5
In reply to OP, Kick them in the nuts... Until we've figured out how to send virtual nutshots, we'll have to settle for a much less satisfying solution ? |
|
|
|
Post by agentfilthy on Feb 23, 2017 12:12:37 GMT -5
I think a lot of people tank their games to lower their "tier" because they're tired of mismatches. The gold people get is almost nothing in reality. What people want is to win games and destroy other bots. Winning 5-10 gold at a time is no motivation at all imho. Lots of people like to run light bot hangars, myself for example. I hate the slow plodding of most other bots and love to play fast movers. When I'm matched against nothing but medium to heavy bots it becomes very frustrating to play and I'm good. I don't mind saying it and don't care what others think. I usually rank in the top 3 but there are often long stretches where I'm rendered ineffective. When this happens for say...6-10 games in a row why wouldn't I tank my score? Why should I have to constantly play against bots that have a massive amount more firepower and range than I do? Because I'm skilled at the game I get punished? Because it's unfair that bots on an equal footing don't win? People throw the term "seal clubbing" around as if it's the end all justification for this last bunch of ridiculous changes. If Pix was really concerned about protecting noobs they could have easily placed them in a "safe space" where only light bots and low level players can enter. Someone wants to run an Aphid Gep they automatically can't enter the "safe space". There...done. No need to destroy every other aspect of the game. The noobs are safe and the rest of us could have continued on playing. With the current system every time I level up my hangar to the point that I can battle said medium/heavy bots I'm almost immediately placed into yet another higher tier. I don't care about gold. I just want to win and I shouldn't be handicapped because of some ridiculous "Fairness Doctrine". People tanking their numbers is nothing more than a side effect from all the ridiculous changes of late. It doesn't need a "fix". The fix should be unscrewing all of the recent updates and to stop penalizing people based on good performance, but rather have matches based on hangar strength. Take into account the amount of damage a bot can do per second, not what the player is able to do with said bot. Don't penalize good performance. Just my .02 You're speaking in wild hypotheticals here. I'm not talking about major changes or alternative matchmaking systems, which the developers wouldn't be likely to implement. I'm simply making a suggestion to patch the biggest problem of the current system. If you want to suggest brand new matchmaking systems, then I'd be glad to discuss that in a thread that's actually for that. I formulated this idea specifically for the here and now situation. Wild hypotheticals? I was speaking from personal experience and from what others have said. Nothing wild at all. My point was that tanking is a side effect caused by the recent changes. Just because I happen to think that changes to the matchmaking system is the easiest manner of fixing the "tanking problem" doesn't make it any less relevant to the topic. Do you have any idea what would be involved in tracking and penalizing player drops? That's not some simple bit of code you're looking at. That's a huge modification. Certainly more invasive than implementing what metric the MM uses, which is what I suggested. My idea just requires tweaks of the current system. Nothing major at all. |
|
|
|
Post by mijapi300 on Feb 23, 2017 12:18:36 GMT -5
You're speaking in wild hypotheticals here. I'm not talking about major changes or alternative matchmaking systems, which the developers wouldn't be likely to implement. I'm simply making a suggestion to patch the biggest problem of the current system. If you want to suggest brand new matchmaking systems, then I'd be glad to discuss that in a thread that's actually for that. I formulated this idea specifically for the here and now situation. Wild hypotheticals? I was speaking from personal experience and from what others have said. Nothing wild at all. My point was that tanking is a side effect caused by the recent changes. Just because I happen to think that changes to the matchmaking system is the easiest manner of fixing the "tanking problem" doesn't make it any less relevant to the topic. Do you have any idea what would be involved in tracking and penalizing player drops? That's not some simple bit of code you're looking at. That's a huge modification. Certainly more invasive than implementing what metric the MM uses, which is what I suggested. My idea just requires tweaks of the current system. Nothing major at all. Currently, the code has a threshold of 30 seconds. Leave at 29 seconds, your game doesn't count towards average damage. Leave at 30 or more seconds, it counts. My suggestion simply changes that 30 in the code to 180. This makes tanking ineffective basically, unless they want to spend three hours doing it. And if someone spends three hours tanking, I say they deserve the fifteen to twenty minutes of easy games they'll get before their damage starts rising again. The hypothetical I was referring to was your suggestion to go back to the old MM system and then modifying that. I completely agree that would be the best solution in the long run. But I wasn't suggesting a new MM altogether. I was suggesting an easy way to fix what we have. In the long run, I think a matchmaker that takes several factors into account would be ideal. Some say DPS potential of a hangar, which wouldn't work. If that were the case, people could put two beasts in their hangar with three level 1 Ecu Cossacks. It's gotta be some combination of factors, taking into account your hangar as well as your performance. |
|
|
|
Post by agentfilthy on Feb 23, 2017 12:32:27 GMT -5
How ever much the maximum damage of the single "Beast" robot is will determine what tier they go in. If the player doesn't want to get hammered they level their hangar evenly. Using the max bot as the baseline for your placement should keep people from running one or two high level bots against other low level hangars.
It would also allow you to switch up your hangars and not be stuck in whatever "league" or tier you were in.
Aaaaand now we're going off topic a bit. It's hard for me to contemplate any "fixes" for the various problems because I think the entire MM system is crap in it's current form. From lag to mismatches it's just broken.
I like the idea of changing the threshold for bailing to 180. I still don't think it will stop the tanking though. People will just run around for a bit and then bail.
|
|
|
|
Post by mijapi300 on Feb 23, 2017 12:40:16 GMT -5
How ever much the maximum damage of the single "Beast" robot is will determine what tier they go in. If the player doesn't want to get hammered they level their hangar evenly. Using the max bot as the baseline for your placement should keep people from running one or two high level bots against other low level hangars. It would also allow you to switch up your hangars and not be stuck in whatever "league" or tier you were in. Aaaaand now we're going off topic a bit. It's hard for me to contemplate any "fixes" for the various problems because I think the entire MM system is crap in it's current form. From lag to mismatches it's just broken. I like the idea of changing the threshold for bailing to 180. I still don't think it will stop the tanking though. People will just run around for a bit and then bail. I agree the current MM isn't the most ideal. I personally like it better than the last, because it's easier to work with for the lower tier players. I've played in the under 100k, 100-150k, 150k-200k, 200-250k, and now 250-300k average damage. And I haven't hit a single game that I felt entirely outmatched in. As far as the people running around a bit, 30 seconds to three minutes is a big difference. What tankers used to be able to do in about 35-40 minutes would then take over three hours. Of course some people will still tank. But I think it would encourage a lot of tankers to actually participate in games (beacon cap) since they have to sit around for at least three minutes anyways. I'd rather have someone do 0 damage and capture 8 beacons than someone that sits there for 30 seconds and ditches. |
|
|
|
Post by agentfilthy on Feb 23, 2017 13:03:28 GMT -5
I didn't mind the last MM only because I knew where I was and it was consistent. I could vary my hangar and my game setting would change accordingly. Now it's a crap shoot.
Honestly, I don't want Pix to implement any new changes. So far I have not been impressed when they roll them out. I'd much rather have them fix all of the current issues, lag and bugs etc. Stop nerfing weapons and bots and create new maps.
Sorry for the off topic.
|
|
poisonelf
Destrier
4 fair matches, not what exists today
Posts: 43
Karma: 10
|
Post by poisonelf on Feb 23, 2017 14:14:16 GMT -5
I find some flaws here I don't think was considered. The beginning players with one bot hanger can be out of the game easily before three minutes. This would likely alter back to squad tanking in 15 seconds. Hours would just probably mean someone making macros and going off to work and see how it is when they get home. People will find ways around being mismatched. While 12s get handed easy matches and wins, the more people will look.
|
|
[AurN] perfectlyGoodInk
Aurora Clan Moderator
Posts: 729
Karma: 556
Platform: Android
Clan: leader of Aurora Nova [AurN]
League: Gold
Server Region: North America
Favorite robot: Bishop from Aliens, although WALL-E is a close second
|
Post by [AurN] perfectlyGoodInk on Feb 23, 2017 14:21:04 GMT -5
IMO it is pointless to talk about fixes when we have no power to implement them. I wouldn't be so sure. There are Pixonic insiders that frequent this forum, and many of the features of this MM were mentioned in discussions here long before the case. And did you notice that the Devs added a link to this forum in the game? I disagree with the OP, though. Tanking is not the elephant in the room because nobody talks about that elephant. It seems that EVERYBODY is talking about tanking. |
|
|
|
Post by mijapi300 on Feb 23, 2017 14:33:38 GMT -5
I find some flaws here I don't think was considered. The beginning players with one bot hanger can be out of the game easily before three minutes. This would likely alter back to squad tanking in 15 seconds. Hours would just probably mean someone making macros and going off to work and see how it is when they get home. People will find ways around being mismatched. While 12s get handed easy matches and wins, the more people will look. I don't think a very large portion of tankers are using macros. And those capable of using macros can't be stopped by any matchmaking system. Once they understand a new system, they adjust their macro and are back at it. There's no point in even considering them. |
|
|
|
Post by mijapi300 on Feb 23, 2017 14:36:18 GMT -5
IMO it is pointless to talk about fixes when we have no power to implement them. I wouldn't be so sure. There are Pixonic insiders that frequent this forum, and many of the features of this MM were mentioned in discussions here long before the case. And did you notice that the Devs added a link to this forum in the game? I disagree with the OP, though. Tanking is not the elephant in the room because nobody talks about that elephant. It seems that EVERYBODY is talking about tanking. I was using a dumb play on words, assuming that would be clear lol. I know everyone is talking about tanking, but the majority aren't providing ideas for solutions. (Other than "I want my old MM system back that I figured out how to club in!!!") |
|
|
|
Post by notyetnotsosoon on Feb 23, 2017 14:47:42 GMT -5
Yes, just implement a quick fix like what OP suggested.
Frustrated with the recent updates to say the least and I know it's merely a band-aid on cancer but at least there's an attempt at making the gaming experience that much better.
|
|
|
|
Post by launchpad on Feb 24, 2017 8:28:58 GMT -5
Yup. Trying to make devs listen to your request, wrapping it in forms of suggestions to "make it better". Better for who? You? The gamers? Developers? I'm not sure if you're an idiot, or you're just asking out of jest. But the suggestion was to "make it better" for the overall majority of the players. Owh... so you are the hero, making suggestion for the benefit of everyone, using your OWN JUDGEMENT.... Lol |
|
|
|
Post by mijapi300 on Feb 24, 2017 11:20:07 GMT -5
I'm not sure if you're an idiot, or you're just asking out of jest. But the suggestion was to "make it better" for the overall majority of the players. Owh... so you are the hero, making suggestion for the benefit of everyone, using your OWN JUDGEMENT.... Lol Using common sense and reasoning. This actually doesn't benefit me at all, because I've experienced no problems with the new MM. I haven't heard anyone refer to something so trivial as "heroic" since the last time I saw my six year old niece. |
|
![[AurN] perfectlyGoodInk Avatar](http://storage.proboards.com/6607038/avatar/40AmBXNiR1xsOVmOvxBp.jpg)