+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 32 of 32

Thread: PST - Episode 66

  1. #21
    The way to get people to stop fighting in the middle is to stop giving honor for normal kills.

    1.) Define the objectives that need to be completed for winning the BG.
    ______a.) Killing opposing players while within X meters of the flag or capture point is an objective.
    ______b.) Capturing a flag or capture point is an objective.
    ______c.) Fighting in the middle of the road is not an objective.
    2.) Give an assload of honor for completing objectives.
    3.) Give zero honor for doing anything that is not an objective.
    4.) Give big honor reward to the wining side.
    5.) Give smaller honor reward to the losing side.

    Problem solved.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    696
    21:43 - Why do PvE and PvP gear need to be separate?
    Simple answer? It's a way for Blizzard to "balance" pvp without having to completely retool the classes to balance against each other. In the most basic sense, the easiest way to nerf the nuclear pve numbers of dps classes for use in pvp is to apply a damage reduction. Consider, where do mages stand versus a warrior in burst dps in raid?

    Lore is also probably correct in what would happen in response from the player base if you eliminated the resilience stat. He's probably very close to the truth in that this whole thing is somewhat driven in response to the players.

    The reality of it though is that Blizzard could eliminate resilience on gear. They could make PvE and PvP gear functionally identical again. This would have a ripple effect though on the gameplay. Blizzard would pretty much have to scrap a lot of things though in order to re-establish "balance".


    28:56 - What if you got 0 honor for losing a BG?
    I love this one.

    Again, simple answer..... dominant faction becomes more dominant. PvP becomes much more unpopular and random bg's implode.
    How many times have you seen a side at least stick around until the end of a bg that they're clearly losing, just to grab the honor for completion? Without it.... what's the incentive for a group that is clearly getting thumped to stick around? Would you hang around in WSG or Twin Peaks for another 15 minutes if you're clearly outmatched?

    Put yourself in the shoes of a person on the losing side of the equation. You've just run 4 losing bg's in a row, you're busted your ass trying to get a win but have still come up short and now have absolutely NOTHING to show for it. What is your incentive to PvP? Your gear isn't going to get better magically without a win, and with PvP gear being what it is, you're simply NOT going have very good odds of winning without it.

    Final thoughts.......... (Warning..... Wall O' Text)............................

    Really, these questions are tangled together and are just facets of the same issue. Player vs Opponent balance. Whether the opponent is a PvE or PvP foe, you want the PC (Player Character) to be effective against both and you want the PC to be threatened by both.

    Blizzard has dug themselves into a nasty little hole with this. Really, it's a bit of a vicious circle in a sense. They WANT to make gear improvements "meaningful" with each tier, but with each tier, that improvement becomes harder to balance out. With PvE it isn't very difficult. You can progressively make bosses with more health and make them hit harder in order to ensure that the PvE player feels threatened and at the same time, feels like they are contributing to the larger effort required to kill that opponent. Most boss fights are targeted toward a certain timeframe. 5 to 10 minutes for a total fight.

    The problem however starts to appear when you take those same characters in that same gear, and now pose them against each other. Suddenly, that "meaningful" stat increase has to be dealt with somehow. The PC's, against each other, are sudenly NOT balanced.

    Don't believe this? I have a ready example in-game for proof. It's simple. Level 80 - 84 PvP bracket. Perfect example of how gear scaling for PvE creates the problem. A toon at level 80 versus a level 84 can almost be compared to a level 85 in 346 gear versus a level 85 in 397 gear. The stat value increase is very similar in relation to each other. There is that much disparity between the two sets of gear. The situation rapidly becomes unbalanced as the 84 can do so much damage in one or two hits that the lvl 80 is simply not able to survive. The damage output from the 84 becomes such a large percentage of the 80's health, there is simply no contest. Even between level 84 toons, the damage output is simply staggering.

    PvP attempts to resolve the ever increasing damage output with resilience. It's just plainly needed if you want PvP to be anything beyond a one-shot, one-skill scenario. The health increases from the gear simply aren't enough on their own to mitigate the issue.

    Even if you were to increase health correspondingly, you've now altered the PvE dynamic. What was threatening to a PC in PvE is no longer a threat. The obvious counter would be to increase boss damage accordingly. This generates another problem though with heals. Now the effectiveness of heals must be increased to afford the ability to survive the damage of the PvE boss.

    BUT.... as soon as I do that, now I have altered the PvP balance yet again! Now, the ability to outheal significant amounts of damage comes into play. In PvE, you have to be able to maintain a PC against life-threatening amounts of damage..... but when this translates to PvP, you now face someone who is effectively "unkillable".

    Worse yet, Blizzard has yet to address the issue of healing. It became quickly apparent that the 10% mortal strike debuff was not sufficient in 4.2. It might have been enough in 4.1. but with improvements in 4.2 gear, that debuff was overcome through the brute force of greater stats.

    The issue Blizzard now faces is that with ever-increasing stat scores, they're facing a gretaer problem each time with scaling these things against each other. In some ways, Blizzard cannot be faulted. Did the company truly expect the kind of longevity that WoW has shown? How many other 8 year old games are there on the market that are still growing and evolving? How many other developers have had to contend with this issue? If Blizzard had well and truly known that WoW would survive 10 years and have 4 major expansions, they might have approached stat growth in a different manner. They may have taken a larger scale approach with the idea in mind of a progression across the grand scheme of the game.

    What we're seeing is the effects of poor long-term planning. Blizzard is now looking at WoW with an eye on longevity. The problem is, it might be just a little bit late.

    TL;DR - Blizzard didn't do very good long-term planning in WoW and have boxed themselves into a corner on gearing, and now are stuck trying to figure out what the hell they can do to fix it without making players (more) unhappy (than they are).
    No one tanks in a void.........

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    696
    Quote Originally Posted by wormspeaker View Post
    The way to get people to stop fighting in the middle is to stop giving honor for normal kills.

    1.) Define the objectives that need to be completed for winning the BG.
    ______a.) Killing opposing players while within X meters of the flag or capture point is an objective.
    ______b.) Capturing a flag or capture point is an objective.
    ______c.) Fighting in the middle of the road is not an objective.
    2.) Give an assload of honor for completing objectives.
    3.) Give zero honor for doing anything that is not an objective.
    4.) Give big honor reward to the wining side.
    5.) Give smaller honor reward to the losing side.

    Problem solved.
    1.a. - There's a buff around cap points for 50% honor increase on HK's in range. Problem is.... it's not on kills IN that range only. So a lot of people just sit and park there and collect 50% increased honor off other's hard work.

    1.b. You get honor for this.

    1.c. We'll get back to this one.

    2. They already do this. You get honor for caps, etc.

    3. .... We'll get back to this one too.

    4. They already do this. It's about 6x the amount.

    5. And they already do this.


    Now.... back to 1.c. and 3. I get your point of making it so that you ONLY get honor if you're "on task". Here's the problem with this:

    A) There are people who honestly genuinely do not give a f*** and are just there to be a$$holes. You will never convince these people to be functional members of anything. There are no truly negative consequences to their actions in game, unlike in real life. Unless you come up with a "Total Worthless Jerk" debuff that prevents them from playing..... you're out of luck. Frankly.... that won't happen because money talks and whining walks. Those people fork over money to Blizzard just like everyone else.

    B) You would deincentivize some strategy completely. One example, going for a reinforcement win in AV. Some of the key choke points which really are best suited to this are not near objectives. You have to have this though otherwise you really run the chance of the perpetual AV where neither group can gain an edge. You have potential for reverse-incentive. Fine example.... Twin Peaks. My team is stomping yours. I want to deny you points, thus I will kill you in the middle of nowhere. Since me winning will give me tons more.... me killing you away from objectives denies you honor points. I can just pick you off and kill you trying to get to an objective. I still win in the end because my team wins and I'll get a lot more honor. Yes.... this is an extreme. It's a true dick-move. Thing is..... there are premades that I know of who would engage in this though. Or.... a group simply turtles knowing that they will get honor because you HAVE to try and capture something.

    C) Sometimes, I really honestly CAN'T get out of mids. I've had this happen where trying to run and get to an objective will simply mean my death, for free, to my opponent. Unless i actually engage them in combat and try to win..... I'm going to die. I can't outrun them. I can't escape them. I'm nowhere near help. This is usually due in part to answer A up above. It's a person with better gear just looking to bash my face in. If I just die... I'm dead and of no use while waiting to rez and trying to get back to an objective. At least in fighting, I am preventing them from hitting an objective in turn. Me tying up those one or two idiots might be what is allowing my fc to run like hell away. But in that case, ME.... I'm fine with not getting honor because I'm helping go for the WIN. My personal honor kill or kills racked up don't matter to me much though. I just LOVE the people who have their stupid macro announcing that they just got a kill someplace. THAT to me tells me where their real priority lies. ~_o

    Sometimes it's just awareness. I've seen groups get baited and dragged away from a target with a convincing attack from one direction. They simply get so tied up in a skirmish that they lose track of the objective. Not an excuse.... they are losing sight of the goal after all.

    Anyway......
    I like your idea. I would probably just modify it in some way and get away from simply "kills" as being the only qualifying factor. Heals and crowd control should come into play somehow.





    No one tanks in a void.........

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Marina del Rey, CA
    Posts
    3,122
    Quote Originally Posted by Leucifer View Post
    TL;DR - Blizzard didn't do very good long-term planning in WoW and have boxed themselves into a corner on gearing, and now are stuck trying to figure out what the hell they can do to fix it without making players (more) unhappy (than they are).
    Ergo Dev Watercooler - The Great Item Squish (or Not) of Pandaria.

    It's not like they're not thinking about this...just perhaps a bit late.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Leucifer View Post

    Anyway......
    I like your idea. I would probably just modify it in some way and get away from simply "kills" as being the only qualifying factor. Heals and crowd control should come into play somehow.
    I was oversimplifying the situation in an effort to be somewhat humorous. I am aware that Honor is given for many of the items I listed, however, I was indicating that MORE honor should be given for them than is now.

    You get honor for capping a point, but honestly I don't notice it. It's just a drop in the bucket. It should be THE source of honor.

    For example in AB, your team can hold 4 of the points for the whole game and honor only trickles in from that while you're guarding the points. While the ignoramuses who are fighting in the middle of the road are scooping up the honor from kills. This incentivizes doing something not directly related to winning the match. You should get massive honor from guarding a point or taking it from the enemy. Killing dudes around the point should only be a secondary bonus to the honor of taking the point or defending it/holding it.

    I agree though. If there is a better way of figuring out who is contributing to the victory besides a kill total, then that should be used instead. If a healer is healing someone defending the point they should get honor for that. And they should get more honor than the dummies fighting in the road.

    Finally, when I say that they should get an assload of honor from winning the match, I mean that the honor from winning the match should outstrip the honor from participating in it unless you were one of the top contributors. And even if you are one of the top contributors (using this new criteria for contribution) then it should be close to 50% of your honor total from the match when you win. (If you lose, then maybe as the top contributor on your team you will get twice the honor from contributing than you get from the match loss honor.)

    This does have its downsides. The major downside is that if the honor from winning a match is that high it may incentivize people to AFK the matches on the off chance that their team will win because the other side has more AFKs. But this happens already, so I can't see it becoming much worse under this plan. Secondarily if a BG does not have easily definable objectives it can be hard to reward them.

    In the case of the examples you give camping the other side's grave yard in AB would be deincentivized even though it is a legitimate tactic if you get a 5 cap. However, in the case of AB, getting a 5 cap and sitting on the point should generate more honor than going to the GY and camping, however it may give the other side the chance to recover if you don't camp their GY. This can be overcome by making the winning honor much higher than the participation honor, but if you make it too high, it might start giving the losing team an incentive to just throw the match to get it over sooner since when increasing the winning honor you also need to increase the losing honor or you run the risk of impoverishing one faction on a battle group.

    Ultimately a dynamic system of rewards that rewards playing on task instead of farming kills, while balancing the honor gained on a win and loss in response to the win and loss ratios of the factions on the battle group would be the best choice.

    And fix the damn AFK problem please.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    105
    @poot

    Wait, what? That is just a convoluted mess of naked numbers in a world with no grey.
    Last edited by Kagitaar; 02-13-2012 at 10:12 PM. Reason: Reply was being a pain

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    33
    I only swap out trinkets and use a bastardized tanking spec. My gear is 100% optimal for Cat, and I tank heroic content perfectly fine.

    Cmon Lore. -_-)

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    3
    if ur pvping as a hunter ur doing it wrong

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Pavidus View Post
    I only swap out trinkets and use a bastardized tanking spec. My gear is 100% optimal for Cat, and I tank heroic content perfectly fine.

    Cmon Lore. -_-)
    Please give your healers my congratulations and condolences.
    Follow me on Twitter | Facebook | Google+

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    696
    Quote Originally Posted by Ion View Post
    Ergo Dev Watercooler - The Great Item Squish (or Not) of Pandaria.

    It's not like they're not thinking about this...just perhaps a bit late.
    Yeah. I'm aware of that post Ion.
    And I agree wholeheartedly..... they're just a bit late.

    About 2 years behind me.
    http://www.tankspot.com/showthread.p...ht=#post385655

    Edit: My point being Ion, that if Joe Schmuckatelli me can see this from a mile off, how in hell did they miss this?
    No one tanks in a void.........

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by wormspeaker View Post
    You get honor for capping a point, but honestly I don't notice it. It's just a drop in the bucket. It should be THE source of honor.

    For example in AB, your team can hold 4 of the points for the whole game and honor only trickles in from that while you're guarding the points. While the ignoramuses who are fighting in the middle of the road are scooping up the honor from kills. This incentivizes doing something not directly related to winning the match. You should get massive honor from guarding a point or taking it from the enemy. Killing dudes around the point should only be a secondary bonus to the honor of taking the point or defending it/holding it.
    Another problem i see with it currently is you get a good bit of honor for being the one to actually click the flag but nothing for being there when someone else clicks it despite that being just as important for the goals of the bg. So you get 5 people rushing to try to click the flag at the same time because thats where the extra honor comes from and meanwhile the opposing faction is setting up camp ready to kill everyone. All of the 'get bonus honor' triggers need to be based on proximity to events that increase the chances of winning the bg but there may be technical limitations to that.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by tawnos View Post
    Another problem i see with it currently is you get a good bit of honor for being the one to actually click the flag but nothing for being there when someone else clicks it despite that being just as important for the goals of the bg. So you get 5 people rushing to try to click the flag at the same time because thats where the extra honor comes from and meanwhile the opposing faction is setting up camp ready to kill everyone. All of the 'get bonus honor' triggers need to be based on proximity to events that increase the chances of winning the bg but there may be technical limitations to that.
    I think that the points that should be changed aren't the objective based, but the normal points, those that you win because of damage, healing, CC, those should be multiplied for a Value toward the Objective Factor that is relaitve to the objective.

    As I understand there is a baseline for Honor given, for example if 2 players kill 1 they gain less honor each one than if the kill was done via 1v1. I consider the 1v1 the baseline.

    First baseline Honor must be reduced, if now it is 10 now it must be 1. Then if the kill, heal and so is around flag it must have the old baseline value 10. If the kill is done to someone that its hitting FC it must be 10 or more, if the heal is on the FC it must be 10 or more if you kill the EFC it must be like 110000 or more (jk), if you cc or kill the healer that is healing the EFC you gain 10 or more. Based on that killing the DPS that is attacking EFC or FC must have lesser base than the previous but a relative good one like 7. And then it continue degrading until the kill or whatever you do is irrelevant to the objective that gains only the baseline. The only new issue here is adding the factor to the final honor based on who is the target of your action, the new code really is checking who is your target (FC, EFC, DPS to the EFC/FC, Healer of EFC/FC) and I hardly can see a big problem there, maybe in AV and IoC, but fixing the rest is better than don't fixing anything.

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts