reg pvp rewards are bad, really bad, vis-a-vis the only comparable pug mode: vet FPs.

 

so saying that reg pvp rewards are worlds better than the garbage 10-74 rewards is like saying poop is better than diarrhea.

 

as for your disagreement with trixxie over...w/e it is you're arguing, I have no comment. but you get more rewards for far less work in vet FPs than reg WZs (unless by some miracle you get all arenas and win them in 2 rounds for like 10 straight pops).

It's actually really important to keep pvp "non-profit", especially for low effort players, because, like a few times in the past, when it's seen as profitable the gates get flooded with people who don't care about pvp at all.

Any decent player can take their op to solo MM red reaper, and get way more gear/tech frags in 15 minutes than they can in pvp. But they have to pay attention. They have to roll at the right time to avoid getting one shot by SV-3. They have to track adds and be in the right position, and micromanage their companion against Darth Ikoral.

Instead of all that effort, some people just decide to watch netflix while pvping. They don't know what objectives their team has, they don't know where they're needed, they can probably do decent damage with their rotations thanks to muscle memory, if they are decent players to begin with.

See the difference yet? Efficiency for some means getting the most stuff for the least time, but for others, it means getting something for the least amount of effort. It's that second type that doesn't belong in pvp, because that attitude spoils the match for the other 15 people in the warzone.

A

The reason Bioware hasn't listened to your 300 posts on the subject is because they have the analytics.

 

.

no, the reason they haven't listened, is trixxie isn't part of that discord group, the elite part, that the dev talks to, communicates , and has a discourse with, while ignoring the PVP Forum on the OFFICIAL forums. A lot of stuff has popped up there, that hasn't been discussed here, 'they' have mentioned things there, they didn't here, and worse, things have been said here, that they had no idea were said.

 

See the difference yet? Efficiency for some means getting the most stuff for the least time, but for others, it means getting something for the least amount of effort. It's that second type that doesn't belong in pvp, because that attitude spoils the match for the other 15 people in the warzone.

Then what we really need is for SOLO content to be as rewarding with GS/CQ points as WZ's, or GSF.....

It's actually really important to keep pvp "non-profit", especially for low effort players, because, like a few times in the past, when it's seen as profitable the gates get flooded with people who don't care about pvp at all.

 

Any decent player can take their op to solo MM red reaper, and get way more gear/tech frags in 15 minutes than they can in pvp. But they have to pay attention. They have to roll at the right time to avoid getting one shot by SV-3. They have to track adds and be in the right position, and micromanage their companion against Darth Ikoral.

 

Instead of all that effort, some people just decide to watch netflix while pvping. They don't know what objectives their team has, they don't know where they're needed, they can probably do decent damage with their rotations thanks to muscle memory, if they are decent players to begin with.

 

See the difference yet? Efficiency for some means getting the most stuff for the least time, but for others, it means getting something for the least amount of effort. It's that second type that doesn't belong in pvp, because that attitude spoils the match for the other 15 people in the warzone.

lol no. I don't see the difference. I watch youtube vids on my 2nd screen all the time in reg pvp (when I'm not posting here) and generally get my daily done in 1 or 2 WZs. but it takes twice as long to get a pop for a WZ as a Vet FP, and you can easily get 5x more tech frags spamming Vet FPs than WZs. granted, that's nothing so bad as the rewards from lowbie, which actually slow your leveling xp and do nothing for picking gear when you ding 75 anymore. but for a few level you might get op set bonus gear. -_-

Almost every match before the win requirement was extremely lopsided, even at max level. Most huttballs ended up 6-0 because after 1 score the opposing teams would give up. Hypergates would end with scores like 0 vs 700. The win requirement, while slowing down ques, made for better matches, especially with the lockout timer.

 

The reason Bioware hasn't listened to your 300 posts on the subject is because they have the analytics.

 

Is it a perfect system? No. Is it better than every match being lopsided? Yes. Do I trust Bioware to come up with a better system to reward effort in pvp? No.

 

Now Galactic Seasons has complicated the situation, by once again encouraging losing. I'm all for getting new people to try and pvp, but Galactic Seasons is less of an invitation for fun and more like a punch card at a factory.

But nothing has changed. The matches were and are still ridiculously lopsided before and after GS was added. So I don’t know why you think their analytics would show anything different.

lol no. I don't see the difference. I watch youtube vids on my 2nd screen all the time in reg pvp (when I'm not posting here) and generally get my daily done in 1 or 2 WZs. but it takes twice as long to get a pop for a WZ as a Vet FP, and you can easily get 5x more tech frags spamming Vet FPs than WZs. granted, that's nothing so bad as the rewards from lowbie, which actually slow your leveling xp and do nothing for picking gear when you ding 75 anymore. but for a few level you might get op set bonus gear. -_-

You honestly think we're talking about the less than 1% of swtor players, the ones who post in the forums? Even if I disagree with someone, the fact that they post in the forums, even with a bad idea like "group by valor" puts them miles ahead of the lazy, disinterested players that are being herded into pvp.

If you can't understand that, it follows that you also can't see the difference between time efficiency and effort efficiency.

But nothing has changed. The matches were and are still ridiculously lopsided before and after GS was added. So I don’t know why you think their analytics would show anything different.

From my perspective, games got considerably better with the win requirement, because I remember exactly how bad it was before then. That's not your perspective, clearly, but the people with the analytics clearly favor my argument. The fact that it was changed to a win only should tell you that something was very, very wrong with the way it was before, and analytics, not the whims of the devs, was the deciding factor for that.

I'd rather build fast que times from the ground up, with competitive, fun gameplay that draws people in. The top down approach, which favors participation rewards, is a slow growing cancer that destroys the community.

You honestly think we're talking about the less than 1% of swtor players, the ones who post in the forums? Even if I disagree with someone, the fact that they post in the forums, even with a bad idea like "group by valor" puts them miles ahead of the lazy, disinterested players that are being herded into pvp.

 

If you can't understand that, it follows that you also can't see the difference between time efficiency and effort efficiency.

what I see is someone (you) who thinks regs are some sacrosanct activity. and I have news for you: they are not. and they never have been. and since pvp requires the same baseline gear (set pieces and tactical) as pve, its rewards structures should be close. at present, those rewards are MILES apart in terms of XP, gear, and resources for purchasing gear (tech frags).

for some asinine reason, rated pvp was incentivized by placing extremely high end mats as quest rewards. THAT was dumb b/c it encouraged unprepared players to jump into high end pvp. but rewarding basic tech frags for reg pvp that is commensurate with vet fps is perfectly logical. furthermore, what non-pvp person would run reg WZs when he could get the same reward for doing something he likes like a vet fp?

• I don't particularly care about the wins requirement for pvp.
  
• I loathe the deserter debuff b/c I cannot choose my teammates nor my maps, but I'm now required to sit in a match where my team or the other team are just there to farm numbers or are utterly incompetent. that said, hey, I'll just pay more attention to that youtube channel I've already got going on. you and ransu can have fun carrying.
  
• I've already made it clear that GS is just a horribly implemented "activity." I understand why they did it. it's like GSF. they don't require wins b/c nobody would sit through something they dislike when the likelihood of completing the quest is against them and their very presences increases the likelihood of failure.
  
• I didn't comment on the OP of this thread b/c valor grouping is immaterial. the game's 10 years old. they already have a "hidden elo" system which (even if it's as "accurate" as the ranked elo) is vastly superior to valor in gauging a player's ability.
  

what I see is someone (you) who thinks regs are some sacrosanct activity. and I have news for you: they are not. and they never have been. and since pvp requires the same baseline gear (set pieces and tactical) as pve, its rewards structures should be close. at present, those rewards are MILES apart in terms of XP, gear, and resources for purchasing gear (tech frags).

 

for some asinine reason, rated pvp was incentivized by placing extremely high end mats as quest rewards. THAT was dumb b/c it encouraged unprepared players to jump into high end pvp. but rewarding basic tech frags for reg pvp that is commensurate with vet fps is perfectly logical. furthermore, what non-pvp person would run reg WZs when he could get the same reward for doing something he likes like a vet fp?

 

 

• I don't particularly care about the wins requirement for pvp.
  
• I loathe the deserter debuff b/c I cannot choose my teammates nor my maps, but I'm now required to sit in a match where my team or the other team are just there to farm numbers or are utterly incompetent. that said, hey, I'll just pay more attention to that youtube channel I've already got going on. you and ransu can have fun carrying.
  
• I've already made it clear that GS is just a horribly implemented "activity." I understand why they did it. it's like GSF. they don't require wins b/c nobody would sit through something they dislike when the likelihood of completing the quest is against them and their very presences increases the likelihood of failure.
  
• I didn't comment on the OP of this thread b/c valor grouping is immaterial. the game's 10 years old. they already have a "hidden elo" system which (even if it's as "accurate" as the ranked elo) is vastly superior to valor in gauging a player's ability.
  

I don't believe in the concept of sanctity. I do, however, hold the concept of integrity in high regard. A game, or a playerbase, that doesn't safeguard it's own integrity eventually creates a game/community culture that's not worth playing or participating in. The rewards for pvp, especially for the low effort players, should be bad. Otherwise the losers and the leechers flood the matches.

I don't believe in the concept of sanctity. I do, however, hold the concept of integrity in high regard. A game, or a playerbase, that doesn't safeguard it's own integrity eventually creates a game/community culture that's not worth playing or participating in. The rewards for pvp, especially for the low effort players, should be bad. Otherwise the losers and the leechers flood the matches.

BioWare already created such a bad environment when they released 5.0 and have only made it worse since then. If we had a time machine and could go back and stop them making changes to pvp during 5.0 till now, we’d have a much healthier pvp community and game. (And I’m not talking about class changes).

I'm all for a better matchmaking system, as the underlying algorithm is more or less the same for WZs and for GSF as far as I know, and GSF very much needs better matchmaking.

We have our own matchmaking rants. Closer games are more fun usually.

So yeah, better matchmaking is something that everyone should have their torches and pitchforks out for.

Not sure Valor based would be a good metric though, because it can accumulate over time, so that a long time player that's at best ambivalent about WZs, like me, can rack up a fair sized valor ranking without ever progressing past a fairly basic level of competence.

I don't really care one way or another for WZs, but in terms of reward structure for an ambivalent player, getting nothing is a fairly strong disincentive. WZs are in competition with other activities for player time. If there's a lousy play experience because of bad matchmaking, and no rewards, there's no incentive to participate. If you're not participating, there's no incentive to try to get better. If there's a small to moderate reward for participation, then participation becomes more likely. If there's more reward for winning than for participating, then there's also incentive to improve. Rather, there's incentive for people that don't find WZ PvP the most intrinsically entertaining portion of SWTOR, but find it reasonable enough to be ok if there's some sort of reward.

Personally my history was, when WZ weeklies were 2x rewards for wins, 1x for losses, I queued pretty much every week for the weekly, most days for the daily, and even dabbled a bit in Ranked. When it went wins only I just stopped. I have better things to do than waste time on the inevitable lopsided stomps if all I get for it is a repair bill, especially if a string of matchmaker luck/stupidity can make it take more than twice as long to get through the mission if there's a string of losses. Seasons has gotten me back into WZs in a mild way. There's a low value reward win or lose, and though WZs certainly aren't my first choice, they're a lot better than, "Kill 75 insectoids on a planet you have no reason to visit." WZs even come up often enough that there's a bit of motivation to try scrubbing some of the rust off of my PvP skills.

If you want new or ambivalent players in the queue there's a balancing act between "loot pinata even if you lose" and rewards for wins only,. Loot pinata level rewards attract AFKers, but matchmaking misery combined with no reward can easily tip the balance against WZs for someone who's at an enthusiasm level where it's 50-50% for WZ vs FP before looking at rewards.

GSF gets around the issue in large part by tying a significant chunk of the rewards to personal performance. The daily/weekly follow the old 2x for win 1x model, but the per match rewards are almost entirely personal performance based. To the point where if you're good it's difficult to gear faster in other activities. Not sure if that's workable in WZs though. In GSF the scoreboard measures that go into calculating per match reward line up with good play reasonably well, so there's not a lot of incentive to farm numbers irrelevant to winning the match.

Been saying for years the medal system needs to be reworked for each map type and be based on personal contributions to winning. At the moment I can get 10 medals for basically doing nothing that helps my team win or lose. And each map has the same generic medals.

As an example. I scored 4 out of 5 Hutt ball goals the other night and helped set up the 5th. I personally stopped the other team from scoring 3 times and helped my team control vital points. But because I didn’t get the top dps or heals or protection, I had less medals than the people who did NOTHING to help us win. Myself and two other people practically carried the other 5 team members who all had more Medals.

Until the medal system is fixed, you can’t have a performance reward system because it won’t encourage proper playing. It will only encourage more scoreboard epeening

But because I didn’t get the top dps or heals or protection, I had less medals than the people who did NOTHING to help us win. Myself and two other people practically carried the other 5 team members who all had more Medals.

you wouldn't have been able to carry the ball if those 5 other people weren't busy "epeening". soaking up all the medals, kills, damage, heals, and prot. in reality, the 3 of you were carried by those 5 players.

you wouldn't have been able to carry the ball if those 5 other people weren't busy "epeening". soaking up all the medals, kills, damage, heals, and prot. in reality, the 3 of you were carried by those 5 players.

LoL, you know nothing Jon Snow

you wouldn't have been able to carry the ball if those 5 other people weren't busy "epeening". soaking up all the medals, kills, damage, heals, and prot. in reality, the 3 of you were carried by those 5 players.

Those 5 players chasing down a single guy, none of them even near the ball. Thanks for the "carry". Aim for the enemy ball carrier next time.