Jump to content


Would this fix "Pub 15:1 blow-outs"?


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

Poll: Remove XP penalty for the losing team? (69 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 100 battle in order to participate this poll.

Should Wargaming remove the XP penalty for the losing team?

  1. Yes, the XP penalty hurts game play (19 votes [27.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 27.54%

  2. No, the XP penalty has a positive effect on game play (50 votes [72.46%])

    Percentage of vote: 72.46%

Vote Hide poll

golruul #41 Posted Aug 21 2019 - 07:27

    Captain

  • Players
  • 22183 battles
  • 1,787
  • Member since:
    11-05-2011

View PostFlarvin, on Aug 20 2019 - 17:09, said:

 

You do understand just removing the win bonus, hurts good players the most? 

 

Because good players are the ones that get the bonus the most. Simple logic. 

 

Yes, I realize that, but in the end good players can still grind tanks in a reasonable amount of time. 

 

Let's throw some numbers around.  150k to research next tank.  Good player gets 600 base xp.  With bonus, 900 xp per game = 167 games to research tank.  600 xp needs 250 games.  83 more games is pretty bad, but kinda doable. 

 

Now let's take bad player.  Bad player gets 200 base xp.  With bonus, 300 xp per game = 500 games to research tank.  With 200 xp, he'll need 750 games.  An extra 250 games is absolutely awful.

 

There's no way a bad player will be in favor of this system.



thorus08 #42 Posted Aug 21 2019 - 12:26

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 29444 battles
  • 372
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    12-28-2010

Blowouts happen even when players don't give up.  They even happen when XVM says the match is around a 50% chance of winning.  Sometimes the tank composition given to one team is just outright better for the map the match was given.  Grinding now is easier than ever with boosters being handed out fairly often as well as the fact that premium account holders can boost their progress 5 times a day on wins, it kind of makes up for any bad streaks you might have. 

 

Sure, I think WG could do some things to make matches last longer, but they have zero control of the decisions people make once the game starts.  That will always be a thing, especially for random matches. 



Flarvin #43 Posted Aug 21 2019 - 19:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 55080 battles
  • 17,170
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View Postgolruul, on Aug 21 2019 - 01:27, said:

 

Yes, I realize that, but in the end good players can still grind tanks in a reasonable amount of time. 

 

There's no way a bad player will be in favor of this system.

 

Still grind tanks in a reasonable amount of time? 

 

You understand “reasonable amount of time” is subjective? 

 

So your example is point less. Just because 83 more games of grinding is “kinda doable” for you, does not mean it is for everyone else, 

 

And there should be no reason good players would be in the favor of this system. 

 

Given the better you are, the more it hurts your xp making ability.

 

“Cutting off the nose to spite the face.” 



toesave #44 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 00:19

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 24325 battles
  • 601
  • [DIXIE] DIXIE
  • Member since:
    01-25-2012
do away with win/loss all together.....   only thing that matters is damage done, tanks killed,  distance traveled..   this helps blowouts by making you have to play....   afk gets nothing at all

the_Deadly_Bulb #45 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 00:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 28706 battles
  • 6,832
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

View PostNavyGuns45, on Aug 18 2019 - 09:07, said:

XVM is a thing, and a lot of players use it.  We all see the "GG" chat at the start of matches where XVM shows a large imbalance in team WN8.  Wargaming has continued to avoid attempts to balance player skill in Matchmaking.  Players give up or go AFK, especially when a blow-out loss is materializing.  I think it would definitely encourage players to keep trying if they removed the XP penalty for the losing team.  I think Wargaming put that into place with the thought that it would encourage people to try harder to achieve the win, but I can definitely see where it has the opposite effect.  Why continue to expend shells and repair kits when you're going to lose anyway?  If you remove this one disincentive to continue putting up a good fight, might it at least make some battles less uneven?  Yeah, you may still lose, but it may make it more of a challenge for the other team.

No!

 

If players insist on taking their XVM CTW cartoon as fact then they sure as hell don't deserve to receive the same XP as the team that won.

Its fine as it is. If anything there should be a greater spread.

 

CTW NEVER says zero chance to win.

The only players who give up when their CTW looks dire are the ones who know they are nothing but a detriment to their team.

If this is you then uninstall CTW because you've got it wrong.

Players who come to battle and bring their best game aren't discouraged by a cartoon.

 

If you want to be carried grow a damn handle.

If you want even a slim chance of winning then stay in the fight until you're destroyed and FCS stay away from the water.

When the going gets tough only the fluff get wet.



golruul #46 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 03:59

    Captain

  • Players
  • 22183 battles
  • 1,787
  • Member since:
    11-05-2011

View PostFlarvin, on Aug 21 2019 - 12:10, said:

 

Still grind tanks in a reasonable amount of time? 

 

You understand “reasonable amount of time” is subjective? 

 

So your example is point less. Just because 83 more games of grinding is “kinda doable” for you, does not mean it is for everyone else, 

 

And there should be no reason good players would be in the favor of this system. 

 

Given the better you are, the more it hurts your xp making ability.

 

“Cutting off the nose to spite the face.” 

 

You really need to read what I actually post.

 

Nowhere did I claim it's not bad for good players.  In fact, I outright stated that, yes, it hurts good players more. 

 

I am explicitly saying it'll be a disaster for the bad players if they want to eliminate bonus xp on win to "make it even".  Reread that last sentence.  I bolded it for you, too.  That was the point of my posts, but you want to argue with random things I didn't claim.

 

I'm also not saying or making any comparisons on people's willingness to grind.  I'm outright claiming it will be a disaster if bad players have to play an extra 250 games to make up on the "bonus xp" they no longer get.  To get this number, I created a simplified example to actually show how bad it would be.



NeatoMan #47 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 04:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 28248 battles
  • 20,874
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostLOL_i_CLICKED_u, on Aug 19 2019 - 13:51, said:

Make top X players(3, whatever) in damage on losing side not have to pay for repairs to their own vehicle, not have to pay for standard consumables used, and not have to pay for any standard ammo used.

 

Allow the leeches to afk if they want to continue to, I don't care. They can always buy more credits in the store to fund their afk games.

 

People who significantly contribute to the losing team(either team actually) should be significantly rewarded so they can continue to contribute to games. Many times I've been top damage on losing team but still bleed because we lost.

 

Tweak it how you like, but needs to significantly reward top performers. Getting crapfor nothing = lazy [edited]players.

 

While we're at it, missions = win only.

This

they really need to expand the parameters for bonus xp on the losing team.  The courageous resistance rewards were a good start, but IMO still failed to reward enough of the top performers in losing efforts 



spud_tuber #48 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 04:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 59746 battles
  • 9,047
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostNeatoMan, on Aug 21 2019 - 21:28, said:

This

they really need to expand the parameters for bonus xp on the losing team.  The courageous resistance rewards were a good start, but IMO still failed to reward enough of the top performers in losing efforts 

It is a delicate balancing act.  Too much for a "good" performance on a loss and we're right back in that beta season of ranked. 

 

I mean, I've been know to farm defender in a sure loss just to get CR.  Or go for TG over going back to reset on sure losses, or etc.  I'm sure others have done similar things 



3bagsfull #49 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 07:17

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 2713 battles
  • 944
  • Member since:
    02-16-2014

The OP's question?   No, it wouldn't change a thing.   Regardless of what some people say, a 15-1 blowout is a total MM failure.    Sure, the domino effect can lead to 15-5 type matches, but 15-1 means one team had no chance in hell before the counter reached 0.   Game was over before it even started, like Alabama playing Incarnate Word - complete and utter total mismatch of epic proportions - by design. 



NavyGuns45 #50 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 11:31

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 47264 battles
  • 79
  • [V--S] V--S
  • Member since:
    01-31-2015
OP here, thanks for all the replies - mostly.  XP bonus for win is not technically a penalty for loss, valid but semantics.  Changes to incentivize competent players to keep trying even after a game starts to become a blow-out, yeah it won't eliminate blow-outs.  The best comments I've seen so far here tend towards giving the XP bonus (removing the penalty) to the top players on the losing team.  The existing rewards that do this are a rather high threshold and some of you are just fine with that.  Bottom line was that it totally sucks to have a 4k damage game with 5 kills on a loss and end up with less XP than the tomato on the winning team that fires 4 shells, only hits 2 and doesn't break 1k damage. 

Flarvin #51 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 13:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 55080 battles
  • 17,170
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View Postgolruul, on Aug 21 2019 - 21:59, said:

 

You really need to read what I actually post.

 

Nowhere did I claim it's not bad for good players.  In fact, I outright stated that, yes, it hurts good players more. 

 

I am explicitly saying it'll be a disaster for the bad players if they want to eliminate bonus xp on win to "make it even".  Reread that last sentence.  I bolded it for you, too.  That was the point of my posts, but you want to argue with random things I didn't claim.

 

I'm also not saying or making any comparisons on people's willingness to grind.  I'm outright claiming it will be a disaster if bad players have to play an extra 250 games to make up on the "bonus xp" they no longer get.  To get this number, I created a simplified example to actually show how bad it would be.

 

And I’m outright claiming it will be a disaster if good players have to play an extra 83 games to make up on the “bonus xp” they no longer get. 

 

Again “cutting of the nose to spite the face.” 



ArmorStorm #52 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 20:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 37711 battles
  • 8,659
  • [F__R] F__R
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View Postez_money, on Aug 18 2019 - 17:49, said:

I both agree and disagree. Some players see the lineup and just give up or go AFK, which sucks. When I see the lineup, it helps me to decide how I will play. If we are going to get stomped, I will likely play more conservative and wait for my opportunities. If we have more skilled players I will be a little more aggressive. It also tells me who on my team I will support/follow/backup during the battle if I'm not top tier. It's not a panacea by any means, but it does provide information on which I can (hopefully) make better decisions.


That’s the main thing for me, identifying a good player to support.  I’ll pick a top player in a like tank and tell him I’m backing his play.  It can really help and occasionally something I see gets through my thick skull. 



Tao_Te_Tomato #53 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 20:43

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 28059 battles
  • 3,050
  • [TER] TER
  • Member since:
    02-28-2016

View PostArmorStorm, on Aug 22 2019 - 20:35, said:


That’s the main thing for me, identifying a good player to support.  I’ll pick a top player in a like tank and tell him I’m backing his play.  It can really help and occasionally something I see gets through my thick skull. 

 

Yup!  Though i got dead quick trying to help Flarvin out some time back... :(



Razorkitten #54 Posted Aug 22 2019 - 22:43

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 58073 battles
  • 41
  • [MOV] MOV
  • Member since:
    07-15-2012

Smaller teams, bigger maps, would greatly reduce fast blow-outs. Changing maps more often would also help. It seems that WG is headed the opposite way.

 



BornToGo_TC #55 Posted Aug 23 2019 - 00:35

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 21621 battles
  • 11
  • [PYRMD] PYRMD
  • Member since:
    10-08-2015
I got to say that I think the game will change for the worse.  It will make it much easier for people that want to stat-pad by just sit in the back and wait for the end of game to grab some easy points and the fact that up to that point they did nothing to help the rest of the team will matter less because they will get the same xp/reward at the end maybe even do better then if they took some risk to try and win.  I think winning the battle should be incentivised and would hate to see it not.  

Flarvin #56 Posted Aug 23 2019 - 02:07

    Major

  • Players
  • 55080 battles
  • 17,170
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostTao_Te_Tomato, on Aug 22 2019 - 14:43, said:

 

Yup!  Though i got dead quick trying to help Flarvin out some time back... :(

 

Wait, you identified me as a good player? 

 

Now that was a mistake. lol 






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users