So you want both teams to lose then? I would suggest that would be the only reasonable outcome, if you made it the first team attacking wins then what would happen is this: Random win would be the result still as its random who's attacking first.

How did you fail to see a word "draw" in the title?

Or you don't know the meaning of it?

So you want both teams to lose then?

Yes, both lose, both teams have failed to win, so both should lose.

How did you fail to see a word "draw" in the title?

 

Or you don't know the meaning of it?

Nah I just failed to see a reasonable solution to the QQ. You know, someone says " I want this changed" but doesnt submit an idea, so even if it gets changed they are still crying.

They added that wall in frist room to prevent this from happening more often.

Get 2 good coordinated 8 man teams in there and 9/10 times nobody gets a door.

Imo they should make the 0-0 a draw, so no rating loss, just comms + creds for the wz

If they don't do that they should remove voidstar out of the ranked wz. In a ranked game there is no place for randomness

Nah I just failed to see a reasonable solution to the QQ. You know, someone says " I want this changed" but doesnt submit an idea, so even if it gets changed they are still crying.

Every normal competition on Earth has a rule for situation where noone wins. It called DRAW. Teams are getting equeal reward, or both don't get and don't loose anything.

DRAW

Thats your solution.

Every normal competition on Earth has a rule for situation where noone wins. It called DRAW. Teams are getting equeal reward, or both don't get and don't loose anything.

 

DRAW

 

Thats your solution.

WRONG

The goal of voidstar is to plant at least one bomb, if you didn't do that you FAILED, both teams FAILED and both should count as a loss. There is no draw because there is no score, just two ranked teams where neither can accomplish any of the goals of the WZ.

WRONG

 

The goal of voidstar is to plant at least one bomb, if you didn't do that you FAILED, both teams FAILED and both should count as a loss. There is no draw because there is no score, just two ranked teams where neither can accomplish any of the goals of the WZ.

WRONG

The goals of voidstar is to get as close to the datacore as you can and to block the other team from getting as close to the datacore as you can. There are TWO GOALS in Voidstar. Attacking and Defending. I don't know why this isn't clear to you.

Your reasoning is nearly as absurd as saying that in Football both teams should lose if neither scores a touchdown during their offensive phases. Or in baseball if neither team scores when they're at bat.

WRONG

 

The goals of voidstar is to get as close to the datacore as you can and to block the other team from getting as close to the datacore as you can. There are TWO GOALS in Voidstar. Attacking and Defending. I don't know why this isn't clear to you.

 

Your reasoning is nearly as absurd as saying that in Football both teams should lose if neither scores a touchdown during their offensive phases. Or in baseball if neither team scores when they're at bat.

Well please explain to me the rationale behind giving a team a win, when they went in to a PvP match without a team composition able to even achieve one single objective in a row of 5 that you were supposed to have achieved?

Football is a different sport, there are scores so there can be a tie. In voidstar if no one plants a bomb the score isn't 0-0 and if one does the score is not 0-1. If no one plants any bombs in voidstar both teams FAILED the objective completely. The objective is not to defend, it is to get to the datacore FASTER than the other team which if you eneded with no plants you FAILED to do. Defending is NOT A GOAL in voidstar, it is something you do to try to make it so the other team doesn't get to the datacore AS FAST as you did. There is no point for keeping them from doing it, there is no sccore and there is no tie. Just two teams that refused to take winning in voidstar as a consideration when making their ranked teams.

Well please explain to me the rationale behind giving a team a win, when they went in to a PvP match without a team composition able to even achieve one single objective in a row of 5 that you were supposed to have achieved?

Because as I said before, the goals of Voidstar are to get as far in as you can (and you're right, it needs to be done as fast as you can in case both teams plant at least one bomb and get equally as far.) AND to also block the other team from getting as far as you can or at least slower than you did. Defending is the other half of Voidstar, and if a team wants to focus on winning through superior defense, I see that as perfectly legitimate. What you fail to understand is that each door/bridge is an objective for BOTH the attackers and the defenders. The attacker's objective is plant a bomb at a door. The defender's objective is to prevent the bomb being planted at the door.

Also note that you gain objective points for defending doors so your entire argument about teams having poor offence but excellent defence not accomplishing any objectives is wrong.

Football is a different sport, there are scores so there can be a tie. In voidstar if no one plants a bomb the score isn't 0-0 and if one does the score is not 0-1. If no one plants any bombs in voidstar both teams FAILED the objective completely.

You're wrong. Next time look at the score on the leaderboard when the game ends, when both teams plant bombs. You'll see a definite score on the leaderboard (same as where the huttball score, civil war score, novare cost scores are located). That score represents how many objectives each team succeeded in accomplishing as an attacking team. If you reach all the way to the datacore you get 6 points (1. first door, 2. bridge control, 3. second door, 4. shields, 5. third door, 6. datacore). If you only get past the shields in the final room you only get 4 points.

The objective is not to defend, it is to get to the datacore FASTER than the other team which if you eneded with no plants you FAILED to do. Defending is NOT A GOAL in voidstar, it is something you do to try to make it so the other team doesn't get to the datacore AS FAST as you did. There is no point for keeping them from doing it, there is no sccore and there is no tie. Just two teams that refused to take winning in voidstar as a consideration when making their ranked teams.

Wow. I can't believe how incredibly dense you are. I don't know how I can spell it out for you more clear than I already have. But I'll try.

The objective is not to defend, it is to get to the datacore FASTER than the other team

Defending is NOT A GOAL in voidstar, it is something you do to try to make it so the other team doesn't get to the datacore AS FAST as you did.

I'm using your own words here. As you just said, defending is directly responsible for ensuring that YOU get to the datacore (or whatever point you reach if you cant make it all the way to the datacore) faster than the other team. Defending plays an equally important role in ensuring that you win. Who cares if your offense is so good that you can reach the datacore in 3 minutes if your defense is so bad that you let the enemy reach it in 2 minutes? In the situation I just described your defense was so bad you lost. Which is my point. Defense is an equal objective AND goal as Offense in Voidstar. Teams should not both be penalized if they both played very good defense. Get it?

One way to make less draws is to see which team was closest to capping a door. So if one team was 7 seconds into capping before they were interrupted, and the other team only made it 6 seconds. The 7 second team wins. It could even be taken down to milliseconds. Draws would be very rare in that case.

Sometimes, the easiest solution is the best.

This problem happens in Civil War too. I've had two or three matches where nobody gets two points the entire match and the team that got to the cap 0.01s before you wins.

Also, getting through the 1st door is the easy part in Voidstar. The second door is the hardest to defend.

One way to make less draws is to see which team was closest to capping a door. So if one team was 7 seconds into capping before they were interrupted, and the other team only made it 6 seconds. The 7 second team wins. It could even be taken down to milliseconds. Draws would be very rare in that case.

 

Sometimes, the easiest solution is the best.

This would be the most elegant solution, imo.

Barring that, just make it an actual Draw and both teams leave w/out gaining / losing Rating, as neither team technically won or lost the stalemate.

This problem happens in Civil War too. I've had two or three matches where nobody gets two points the entire match and the team that got to the cap 0.01s before you wins.

I fail to see that as a "problem", rather than the enemy team had a better composition for the match. After all, they blew your ship up first, and that's the only thing that matters on that map.

I think that the way they determine a winner is by final elimination. This rule should be applied to every warzone. Set the Civil War to where instead of timing, each turret is on a set timer when they shoot instead of shooting each at their own pace.

Bottom line, in Huttball/Voidstar when the timer expires and the score is 0-0, a "SUDDEN DEATH" message should be announced. Then from that point onwards there will be no more re-spawning.

One way to make less draws is to see which team was closest to capping a door. So if one team was 7 seconds into capping before they were interrupted, and the other team only made it 6 seconds. The 7 second team wins. It could even be taken down to milliseconds. Draws would be very rare in that case.

 

Sometimes, the easiest solution is the best.

You guys don't understand that such crap as "how close you were to compleating the goal" wil not work. You either achive a goal or you don't. Almost does not count.

Its a score based competition. Scores are rewarded for sertain things. There are rules how do you get those scores. If you score is *********** zero, system decided that you didn't do anything, thats why you have zero.

So 0-0 just can't be a win/lose to someone.

Its not the "new briliant developers move" its another developers fail. This game is a most furious failfest ever introduced to people. And this is just on of many. It is not ok.

I think that the way they determine a winner is by final elimination. This rule should be applied to every warzone. Set the Civil War to where instead of timing, each turret is on a set timer when they shoot instead of shooting each at their own pace.

 

Bottom line, in Huttball/Voidstar when the timer expires and the score is 0-0, a "SUDDEN DEATH" message should be announced. Then from that point onwards there will be no more re-spawning.

I think in the event of a draw you could have sudden death rounds. The defense loses the ability to respawn and you keep going for the 1st door. THe team that does it under the no-respawn rule fastest wins.

I think that the way they determine a winner is by final elimination. This rule should be applied to every warzone. Set the Civil War to where instead of timing, each turret is on a set timer when they shoot instead of shooting each at their own pace.

 

Bottom line, in Huttball/Voidstar when the timer expires and the score is 0-0, a "SUDDEN DEATH" message should be announced. Then from that point onwards there will be no more re-spawning.

As I was reading through this thread, this exact thing came to mind. Have some sort of tie breaker or "overtime". I'm not sure how it would work in voidstar. I would imagine something like an NFL style overtime where each team gets a shot at one more door each. The issue with this though would be that the teams could remain tied through multiple overtimes. I would have no problems with this as it would make the match much more intense, but it could be a problem for others (for whatever reasons).

just add the teams damage done, healing done, and warzone objectives and boom you now have a winner...

the 0-0 draw where no one loses or wins is a easy way to exploit with win trading ....

One way to make less draws is to see which team was closest to capping a door. So if one team was 7 seconds into capping before they were interrupted, and the other team only made it 6 seconds. The 7 second team wins. It could even be taken down to milliseconds. Draws would be very rare in that case.

 

Sometimes, the easiest solution is the best.

I disagree. Once teams realize they aren't getting a door it will turn into a spam cap and aoe mess.

For my money, I think the lower rank team should get the win and the higher rank team should get the loss.

Why not just give a draw? Give commendations, valour, etc... that is in the middle between winning and losing for amounts.

As for the actual rating gain/loss- I'd be in favour of both teams gain +0 rating, since it was a draw. But, I could also see it being reasonable that the higher ranked team loses half as many points as they would from a loss, while the lower ranked team gains half as many points as they would from a win- to take into account that a tie with a better team is more impressive than a tie with a poorer team.