Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
USSWest_Virginia

Bad Team Compensation (not a rage thread)

57 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

93
[BOOTY]
Beta Testers
385 posts
9,627 battles

I just wish there was something to make up for those games where you do exceptionally well and still lose. Those games where everything is going right, but then half your team disappears because of poor judgement or performance.

 

It could be a simple reward, or a boost in income for the top player of a team that is doomed to fail. Or, it could be something more difficult to achieve, but yield higher rewards. Maybe a major reward for a player that kills more than the rest of the team combined, or gets 500 more base experience than the second best player.

 

A down side is this might be counterproductive to good team play and encourage players to be selfish. But, from what I've seen from most teams not much would change in the average player's behavior. 

 

​I don't think the best option would be to reward a player for simply being the best loser. But, have something for a player who has one of those really exceptional games that cant even be accomplished with a team of half decent players who are pulling a little weight.

 

I don't know. I just wish there was something to make games like this, less bitter. 

aBE16wF.jpg

 

Or these

 03dYRuI.jpg

 

 7fHcIuw.jpg

What do you guys think? Am I just being selfish and salty?

Edited by USSWest_Virginia
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,605
[HINON]
Beta Testers
3,931 posts
8,150 battles

The Olympic event for Gold, Silver, and Bronze XP was really good. Even if your team was getting destroyed, it gave you a reason to keep fighting and try to do your best.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,840 posts
2,716 battles

It's a team game.  Your team lost.  You obviously did what you could to avoid that.  Be proud of your performance and move on.

 

So no, I disagree with the notion of rewarding the top xp earner on the losing team with say, avictory bonus, for example.

 

Getting 12 people to care enough to work together for 15 minutes of their lives is already hard enough as it is....this seems to encourage even more selfish behavior.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,026 posts
30,668 battles

No. You lost. You do not deserve to be rewarded like a winner. You earned far too much that game, considering you lost it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
380 posts
3,279 battles

It's a team game.  Your team lost.  You obviously did what you could to avoid that.  Be proud of your performance and move on.

 

So no, I disagree with the notion of rewarding the top xp earner on the losing team with say, avictory bonus, for example.

 

Getting 12 people to care enough to work together for 15 minutes of their lives is already hard enough as it is....this seems to encourage even more selfish behavior.

 

 

Its not a "Team" game in Pubs. There already is selfish gameplay. Its not a "Team" game when 1/2 of your "Team" are nearly Brain Dead. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
380 posts
3,279 battles

No. You lost. You do not deserve to be rewarded like a winner. You earned far too much that game, considering you lost it.

 

Far more reason to be rewarded. If someone is going to try and carry and earn many kills and Dmg that is commendable. In WoT there is Battle Hero if you score an Top Gun or something and lose you get credits and XP if it was a win. You want to encourage trying during an unwinnable fight.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
373 posts
5,398 battles

No. You lost. You do not deserve to be rewarded like a winner. You earned far too much that game, considering you lost it.

 

He didn't lose.  His team lost.  And he had no control over his team.  

 

His bitterness over not receiving some recognition for the best performance on either team is entirely understandable.

 

WoT eventually provided bonuses to players on the losing team who got battle hero medals ("Courageous Resistance" they called it).  The Olympic Medal event was most welcome in WoWS, and I agree that something along those lines should be a permanent part of the game.

 

This has nothing to do with "rewarding losers."  It's about rewarding maximal performance.  Merit, in other words.  Because let's face it: "Wins" in this game depend on the fortuitous confluence of players who had no control over being put in the same lineup, no opportunity to gel as a unit and no opportunity to develop a common plan.  While it's true that losing can in some cases be pegged on an individually bad play, it's definitely not the rule.

 

To those concerned about "rewarding losers," consider this: People need incentives to keep playing to keep the population high.  It's no answer to say "well win next time" because that is not within the player's individual power.  Only his individual performance is, and that should be recognized when he has objectively done a fantastic job. 

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
344
Members
1,797 posts
7,977 battles

It would be nice.  My last match, I knew three minutes in that it was lost.  It's not hard to read a poor team deployment and do the math - unless the other team is garbo/unlucky or your team goes Super Sayan (sorry on the spelling, not really a DBZ geek), it's a done deal.  Running a DD, my only real incentive at that point was maybe sneak a kill, cap an OBJ and try to survive...because an L is an L.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
93
[BOOTY]
Beta Testers
385 posts
9,627 battles

Starting to thinks it's going to be one of those days. This was literally the next game.

 pw0Emc0.jpg

 

 I can see both sides of the argument, but I really don't think the team work can get much worse in this game.

Edited by USSWest_Virginia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
777 posts
1,515 battles

I know that exact feeling as OP

Old pictures, but still related.

 

 g7dn0Qg.png

 7626ceaa188b40ffaf05f1e94ba11d13.png

Even scored higher than the top player on the opposing team.

 cd0b48eb426a46c18149bf3d1607e303.png

 

All because of, One. AFK (the entire match). Omaha on the enemy team.  Won by points...  Luigi won by doing NOTHING.

 

Edited by Ephemeric

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,026 posts
30,668 battles

 

He didn't lose.  His team lost.  And he had no control over his team.  

 

His bitterness over not receiving some recognition for the best performance on either team is entirely understandable.

 

WoT eventually provided bonuses to players on the losing team who got battle hero medals ("Courageous Resistance" they called it).  The Olympic Medal event was most welcome in WoWS, and I agree that something along those lines should be a permanent part of the game.

 

This has nothing to do with "rewarding losers."  It's about rewarding maximal performance.  Merit, in other words.  Because let's face it: "Wins" in this game depend on the fortuitous confluence of players who had no control over being put in the same lineup, no opportunity to gel as a unit and no opportunity to develop a common plan.  While it's true that losing can in some cases be pegged on an individually bad play, it's definitely not the rule.

 

To those concerned about "rewarding losers," consider this: People need incentives to keep playing to keep the population high.  It's no answer to say "well win next time" because that is not within the player's individual power.  Only his individual performance is, and that should be recognized when he has objectively done a fantastic job. 

 

The "official" objective is to win. Not to deal damage.

 

He did not meet the "official" win condition. He displayed no "merit".

 

The fact that the reward structure fails to match the stated objectives is it's own problem. The solution isn't to pull the two farther apart.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
373 posts
5,398 battles

 

The "official" objective is to win. Not to deal damage.

 

He did not meet the "official" win condition. He displayed no "merit".

 

The fact that the reward structure fails to match the stated objectives is it's own problem. The solution isn't to pull the two farther apart.

 

If you don't think the results he displayed aren't merit compared to the performance of others on his team or even the winning team, you have a very perplexing view of things...

 

By your reasoning, a player who hits .390 a season but isn't on the World Series team doesn't deserve a Batting Crown.

 

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,026 posts
30,668 battles

If you don't think the results he displayed aren't merit compared to the performance of others on his team or even the winning team, you have a very perplexing view of things...

 

By your reasoning, a player who hits .390 a season but isn't on the World Series team doesn't deserve a Batting Crown.

 

But we aren't talking about recognition.

 

We're talking about rewards.

 

He did not do anything that merits a reward, because he did not win.

 

Compared to the rest of his team, did he do better? Certainly. 

 

Compared to any in=dividual on the enemy team, did he d better? Certainly.

 

But he. Did. Not. Win.

 

Therefore, he does not deserve to be rewarded like he won.

 

Want to add some notice that player X was MVP? Go ahead. But he does not deserve, and should not receive rewards equalling or exceeding that of the actual winners.

Edited by issm
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59
[AFW-]
Members
297 posts
16,819 battles

agreed with issm. your team lost and you get the rewards allowed in a lost. there is no reason to make the top player of the losing team feel better of their loss imho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
344
Members
1,797 posts
7,977 battles

Consider this - I just closed WoWS and will not be going back tonight.  Playing on bad teams is just not much fun...

 

There are numerous thread on this forum about when it's time to put down the mouse and keyboard for the night because losing, repeatedly, isn't appealing to many players.

 

It might, maybe, sort of, be worth sweetening the pot a bit to keep folks in the queue and engaged with the game.  Incentives, humans like them.  

 

Ultimately, we're talking about a game played by individuals by choice.  Incentivizing that choice is worth consideration.  Throwing a bone to players a la WoT is not that much of a stretch since WG is already doing it.  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,026 posts
30,668 battles

Consider this - I just closed WoWS and will not be going back tonight.  Playing on bad teams is just not much fun...

 

There are numerous thread on this forum about when it's time to put down the mouse and keyboard for the night because losing, repeatedly, isn't appealing to many players.

 

It might, maybe, sort of, be worth sweetening the pot a bit to keep folks in the queue and engaged with the game.  Incentives, humans like them.  

 

Ultimately, we're talking about a game played by individuals by choice.  Incentivizing that choice is worth consideration.  Throwing a bone to players a la WoT is not that much of a stretch since WG is already doing it.  

 

Of all the bones you could throw at players, rewarding losers is the last thing I would go to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
255
[2GOOD]
Members
970 posts
24,010 battles

I just wish there was something to make up for those games where you do exceptionally well and still lose. Those games where everything is going right, but then half your team disappears because of poor judgement or performance.

 

I suggested the same mechanism as WoT some time ago, no doubt it's on their to do list but as it's a nice to have I'm not expecting anything from them. Of course that's a shame as with the amount of bad players around WoWs is starting to fee like WoT.

 

--------------------

 

Consider this - I just closed WoWS and will not be going back tonight.  Playing on bad teams is just not much fun...

 

There are numerous thread on this forum about when it's time to put down the mouse and keyboard for the night because losing, repeatedly, isn't appealing to many players.

 

It might, maybe, sort of, be worth sweetening the pot a bit to keep folks in the queue and engaged with the game.  Incentives, humans like them.  

 

Ultimately, we're talking about a game played by individuals by choice.  Incentivizing that choice is worth consideration.  Throwing a bone to players a la WoT is not that much of a stretch since WG is already doing it.  

 

I could not agree more.

Edited by collisionSpace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
93
[BOOTY]
Beta Testers
385 posts
9,627 battles

Hey issm I always wanted to ask you how you manage to play so many games. We've been playing around the same amount of time and you've managed to play nearly four times as many games as me.

 

Just out of curiosity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,026 posts
30,668 battles

Hey issm I always wanted to ask you how you manage to play so many games. We've been playing around the same amount of time and you've managed to play nearly four times as many games as me.

 

Just out of curiosity.

 

My credit grinding strategy, i.e., yolo in, get a kill and a bit, die, repeat. Have 4 ships in battle at the same time, easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
93
[BOOTY]
Beta Testers
385 posts
9,627 battles

 

I suggested the same mechanism as WoT some time ago, no doubt it's on their to do list but as it's a nice to have I'm not expecting anything from them. Of course that's a shame as with the amount of bad players around WoWs is starting to fee like WoT.

 

It doesn't even have to be just be best player on the losing team. It could be something like kill half the enemy team and still lose or have over 1500 base xp on the losing team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
380 posts
3,279 battles

 

But we aren't talking about recognition.

 

We're talking about rewards.

 

He did not do anything that merits a reward, because he did not win.

 

Compared to the rest of his team, did he do better? Certainly. 

 

Compared to any in=dividual on the enemy team, did he d better? Certainly.

 

But he. Did. Not. Win.

 

Therefore, he does not deserve to be rewarded like he won.

 

Want to add some notice that player X was MVP? Go ahead. But he does not deserve, and should not receive rewards equalling or exceeding that of the actual winners.

 

Then where is the incentive to do well then? 

What about people on the winning team doing Jack squat? Just because one is on winning team should not be rewarded if they do nothing. 

 

If we are not going to reward for doing well on losing team. We should not reward doing jack squat on a winning team then. 

Edited by A_FIELD_MARSHAL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×