|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Krias Thracian
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
38
   |
Posted - 2015.06.22 11:05:00 -
[1] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:Hide the other team's character names.
If you do that then people will still leave when the scoreboard swings massively against them, so what then, do we just hide the scoreboard? No, the idea is unworkable, if you hide the names then do you hide the k/d/WP of the enemy? You don't need the names.
The problem with a game where you actually have stuff to lose is that people want to protect the stuff they have to lose. Why would someone want to sit their in equipment that could have cost them a lot of isk to get killed over and over again for the losers isk payout at the end.
You can't stop people leaving in a game that has something to lose, barring actually stopping them leaving and you can't do that. |
Krias Thracian
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
44
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
Vell0cet wrote:Mina Longstrike wrote:Getting people to stay in matches requires the carrot, not the stick. How much ISK would you have to make to want to stay in a match where you're being severely stomped? It's probably so high that it would ruin game balance. CCP should try to implement a way for squamates who disconnect, or don't make it into a match for whatever reason to redeploy with their squad mid-battle. This would eliminate "legit" reasons for quitting battle. After this I think they should use a pretty heavy stick to punish cowards because they screw up matchmaking for everyone else. e.g. The first time you quit you get a 10% reduction to passive SP for 24 hours, 2nd time 30% reduction, 3rd time 70% reduction, etc.
I agree with the first part of your post. The second part is one of the more ridiculous ideas that I've read on this particular forum. Do you actually understand what you're suggesting?
What you think of as legitimate reasons for quitting is irrelevant. Any reason for quitting a match is legitimate. You don't get to define legitimacy.
I don't think you understand what freedom of choice means. Maybe you should go look that up before posting asinine nonsense about how you think everyone should do things your way? There is nothing in the terms we agree to that states you must finish a game you join. Do you know why there is nothing in those terms? Because it's absolutely UNENFORCEABLE. As a result your "opinion" on people's freedom to choose who, how, when and if they play and finish a game is irrelevant. If you don't like it, then don't play. Simple as that.
Because there is nothing in the terms and conditions of the game that states I have to finish a game, then a PUNISHMENT for me not finishing a particular match of any kind is unreasonable and will just lead to people quitting the game. So instead of unbalanced matches, you'll trade that for much longer queue's to potentially no matches as the numbers in this game are already close to rock-bottom according to other posts with verifiable figures on eve-offline.
Let me put this in a way you can (hopefully) understand: This is not a job. I have one job and I don't want another one. This is a game. I play this to have fun. If I'm not having fun, then I'm going to leave. It's got nothing to do with me wanting to ruin your game specifically, it's because I want to have fun which leads me to the following equation:
My Fun's Importance > Your Fun's Importance
If it comes right down to it, then to hell with your fun. Now note, that there's nothing personal there, but if I'm not having fun then I'm not going to waste my already precious free time. That doesn't mean I'll auto-quit if I'm losing, some of the best matches I've played have been losses, but they've been tense, they've been exciting, they've been enjoyable. If I'm just getting stomped the moment I spawn with no opportunity to defend myself? There's nothing fun in that, I'll just leave as per my above.
Punishing people for staying in a game where they are already not having fun, is even less fun. In a game where you have nothing to lose, a la halo some people might stay, because they have nothing to lose. This isn't that game. People have potentially a lot of isk that they will lose by staying and I'll post up another variant of the equation for you below:
My ISK's Importance > Your ISK's importance.
Thirdly, I'm not a child. You can't punish me because I don't want to play the game the way you think I should play the game (I'll refer you back to my freedom of choice spiel further up). If we want people to stay in a game where (and here's the crucial point again) they have something to lose, then they have to be incentivised as others have said.
If you go the punitive route, people will just stop playing so it must be incentivised. You say ISK would be unbalanced, so go a combination of ISK and Skill Point Multipliers, Warbarge Components, Salvaged weapons and items. Something that would offset the massive losses and lack of fun that would be involved in staying in these matches, but using a stick will just stop people playing. It's the wrong way to go all around. |
Krias Thracian
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
47
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 22:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
Vell0cet wrote:
The importance of your fun < the importance of the 31 other players' fun
When players leave it creates a snowball effect of sh*tty gameplay for everyone else, more people end up leaving and you've got a f*cked match that's no fun for anyone. Lobby shoppers are like the d*ckheads that cut in line. Currently there are reasonable excuses for leaving battle because you can get separated from your squamates, but once that's fixed there is no legit reason to leave a battle.
When you join a battle you're signing up for a contract with an NPC corp. It make sense that there would be repercussions for bailing out on your contract. With stiff penalties for bailing on your team, I guarantee there will be better matches for everyone and people will be less likely to want to bail as a result. It's a virtuous cycle. You may not be a child but your argument reads like it's been written by one. Freedom of choice... give me a f*cking break.
You still don't get it clearly. My fun is more important than anyone elses fun that I happen to be online with. That's the way people play games in an online setting. I don't know you and I couldn't care less about you or your fun. If I'M not having fun, then to hell with your fun. If people aren't having fun then what you are suggesting is happening will continue to happen.
If you implement your moronic suggestion then *I* guarantee you that the players who are more casual will just stop playing the game entirely and you'll be left with nothing but the hardcore dedicated people like yourself who seem to feel that complete strangers somehow *owe* them something.
I don't owe you anything you arrogant individual and the fact that you seem to think otherwise is the biggest problem with your suggestion. Any reason someone leaves is legitimate. They don't owe you anything, least of all an explanation for why they left a game. The fact is that you're stomping your feet like a petulant child because they have the "audacity" to want to have fun, or whatever other reason they leave, and are doing the equivalent of complaining to your parents. What you are asking is unenforceable and will lead to this game simply dying. No other game ever has attempted to punish its players for leaving games, no MMO, no online FPS, RTS or Grand Strategy because to do so would be complete suicide for that game.
What makes sense in terms in-game is irrelevant, like I tried to explain to you, if people aren't having fun, they will stop playing. You seem to think that they owe you their time. I don't think so. |
Krias Thracian
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
48
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 08:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
Vell0cet wrote:
If the lobby shoppers leave the game, most matches will be a lot closer and everyone will have more fun in general. I'd welcome that. With lots of close and fun matches more people will come back to the game and newer players will stick around. It's a small precent of the player base that's causing the problem for everyone. I have no problem with them quitting the game. DUST won't die with them gone, it will probably retain more players.
There are plenty of games that penalize you for leaving a PvP match early by the way.
It can't be a small percentage of players causing the problem, because you claim the problem is huge. One or two people leaving a game doesn't make any real difference to the outcome. 15v15 or 14v15 or 14v16 doesn't make any real difference and everyone involved can still have fun.
The problem comes when you have a match where it gets down to 9 v 16, well 7 people from 32 is over 20%, that's not a small percentage. The "problem" is endemic enough that it's spawning large conversations. The example above is a 5th of the players. I've seen matches where there are 3 v 16 players, that's a much larger percentage. Dust is currently at rock-bottom player numbers and over the last three months has averaged under 2000 players per day.
You think a conservative 400 of those leaving would render an international game in a good state? You must be dreaming. (Source: http://eve-offline.net/?server=dust)
You see you say there are plenty of games that penalise you for leaving a PVP match early but you haven't named one. I know WoW penalises you by making you wait 20 minutes to join whatever game type you left. That's a token punishment because in an MMO having a cooldown on that activity doesn't mean anything. There's plenty of other **** to be getting on with. You're talking about far more than a cooldown in a game like this your "punishment" will just alienate players that are casual.
No game can survive on its hardcore players alone. It won't work. You need casual players no matter if you think otherwise. Hardcore players just do not provide the numbers or the revenue stream for a game to survive. |
|
|
| |
|