The penalties for losing are TOO severe

I think a simple fix would make everybody's day better...just make the WZ comms back to the way they were before, BUT the winning team could get a bonus 10 comms so they feel rewarded. I would be happy with this. Who's with me?

The new WZ rewards seem to be getting at the right idea (rewarding victory more than defeat), but seem to be approaching that idea without some key components.

First, most in this thread would seem to agree that there needs to be an incentive for participation in PvP, particularly in the 'losing effort' scenarios (especially in cases of 'late join-ins'), thus, there needs to be a floor for participation-based rewards; the 4 medal count seems to be a generally-acceptable benchmark.

Proposal: Set the reward for 4 Medals (winning or losing team) to 20 Comms (5/Comm). Thus, a player who only gets 4 Medals in a losing effort ends up with a base reward of 20 Comms.

Second, reward for additional contributions to the WZ should be taken into consideration, whether the team wins or loses. Even in the most severe beatdowns that have been levied against teams on my server (and, due to a significant population imbalance, this occurs with regularity), some of the most satisfying experiences are the matches where our team gives it their all, even when defeated, we can hold our heads high and know that we made our opponents earn their victory.

Proposal: For the winning team, Medals 5-8 would reward 15 Comms each, while, for the losing team, Medals 5-8 would reward 10 Comms each. At this point, a winning player with 8 Medals would end up with 80 Comms, while the losing player would end up with 60 Comms (thus, two players of roughly equal contribution to a match would end up with 60/80 Comms, with the winner having a 33% greater take than the loser, and winning a match takes on value). Finally, Medals above that 8 Medal threshold should offer some benefit, even if it is simply a massive amount of extra Valor; this would allow those that consistently achieve at the highest level to attain those upper Valor ranks more quickly, and display the titles that let them know they (usually) are among the PvP elite of their server.

Alternative Proposal: Keep the 'normal' Medal rewards as they are now (rewarded for up to 8, at 5 Comms per Medal), and make the Objective-based Medals reward their Comms separately, either at the 5/Medal rate or even increasing the rate to 10/Medal (thereby awarding an even greater incentive to give 100% effort, even in a 'losing scenario'). Even if I only get one or two Objective medals in a steamroll, if, combined with the 4+ normal Medals, and end up with ~50 Comms, it has been a successful match (from a strictly reward-oriented viewpoint, I much prefer to play to win, but giving maximum effort in a defeat can be nearly as satisfying, if I can see that the effort I exerted was suitably rewarded).

Finally, there MUST be a 'quitter' penalty instituted, or, even with the extra incentive of objective-based rewards, there will remain those players that choose to handicap their teammates by leaving a match (either at the start, especially in Huttball, or mid-match). Do I like to PuG and get my teeth kicked in by a pre-made for 10 matches in a row (usually early morning, when my own team is off-line)? No, and all but the most masochistic amongst us would likely agree; however, even in PuGs, I will give 100% effort, no matter how badly we are getting trounced, because I play for the fun... Reasonable rewards go hand-in-hand with that 'fun factor', however, as all the effort in the world is essentially meaningless when you have nothing to show for it.

(Note: As far as credits or XP go, I really don't keep track of those rewards, for winning or losing, even on my lowbies, but if it's true that a loss rewards little or none of either of those, that really should be addressed in a more balanced way, as the time investment in finishing a game is what really matters from a credit or XP standpoint, and winning might offer slightly higher rewards, but losing should not punish these two components.)

Just my 2 EC,
-BRJ

>,,> whats up with the thinly disguised political overtones here.

People don't want something for nothing. People want their personal actions to have more weight in random warzones that their team loses for them. Plus we pay $15 for a reason and thats to have access to a reasonably fun game. Take that away and we will leave. it isn't like real life where we just have to shut up and deal with it after all.

I endorse this guy.

LOL. I really do feel bad for you.

You know.... I might continue to subscribe just for the sheer entertainment provided by reading the forums. The cluelessness is astounding. What on earth does anything have to do with console games? The last console I owned was a Super Nintendo, which I got for my 16th Birthday. No joke.

I found it very dis-heartening to pvp last night with 1.2 for many of the same reasons listed in this thread. Even had one match where there was zero reward in comms, valor, xp, & credits because we got steam rolled so badly. Main reason we got steam rolled: once people saw a difficult oponent they simply dropped. Had 5 drops that match. For those of us that stayed we got crapped on by BW & their 1.2 changes.

I solo pvp and rely on the other pugs to progress in armor & skill to further the chance of a win which on my particular server are far and few between. With these changes all I see is an already wide gap widening even further. One person asked the question 'how long do you think people will continue to get beat up for no reward?' I can answer that-they friggin wont. Thanks for crapping on pvp bioware...

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who feels this way.

I definitely don't want to be generously rewarded for losing a match. And I don't want to get War Hero equipment for free. But ending up with 30 to 40 commendations after playing for 15 minutes and not doing that bad is very frustrating.

I always liked PvP on SWTOR and it is the main reason I'm still playing it. Therefore I utterly hope BioWare will rework this.

I wouldn'y say that the current system is "broken", rather that it is very flawed.

If BW is going to have a medals system in PVP, then rewards should be based on the number of medasl earned during a given match and less on a win/lose.

as it is now- for example- if I have 2 lvl 50 toons on opposing factions, the one on the dominate pvp faction can earn commendations and gear faster and would hardly need to participate in a match- say earning 1 or 2 medals.

while the otehr toon- on the less dominate faction- maybe be earning 10+ medals a match- but is getting half the rewards. and by default- taking longer to get "geared".

this situation has nothing to do with the "skill" of a player. dominate pvp factions tend to have 1 or 2 guilds doing the majority of pvp- so my one toon is being rewarded for just being on the "right" faction.

now, i am fully aware that pvp dominace often changes factions- so it is only a matter of time before that scenario changes- which is why commendation rewards should be based off of the medals earned through particpation. while giving a bonus reward for winning or losing.

Foust, beregen colony

The rewards system is not based off of skill. It is based off of an arbitrarily decided set of metrics that the Devs hope actually encourage objective based game play. In some cases it will. In some cases it won't. And the system is fairly opaque and not particularly well explained by the company that produced it.

Also, I do not understand this attitude that somehow giving people rewards for participating in PvP (even if they "loose" to quote you) cheapens your victory. You still won. They still lost. You will still get more rewards faster than them and you will always be better than them. The difference is encouraging people to play instead of punishing them for it (in game terms) will allow you to have PvP experiences in this game.

If professional sports league were run the way many people in this thread suggest, they would completely collapse. Do pro sports teams practice to get better? Yes they do. But if your team has a bad season, it actually gets better compensation in the form of high draft picks to make up for it b/c they want to encourage parity and competition.

Just imagine what would happen if the NFL started a new policy giving the Super Bowl winners the first pick in the draft. They would have access to top talent every year and would, on average, perform far better than most the other teams because of it. And the other teams would have little chance to catch up b/c they could only ever access inferior talent in the draft or pricey free agents. Eventually the "have nots" would lose fan support due to mounting loses on the field and be forced into financial insolvency. It would be a horrible business model. And so is what they are doing with PvP right now.