6 replies to this topic

[TheChaffeemancer]

Some games, one team just stomps another. Sometimes this balances out; others, the stomp never stops. Would it be inconceivable if there was a small XP/Hawken Point bonus for games that could be counted as "close"_ Close games are great! We should try to encourage them. Do you think such a bonus might encourage more hard-fought battles_

[Lazoraz]

An interesting idea, and I can definately get behind having more close games. But I think that if something like that was actually implemented, it would end up making the game feel "unnatural". Take Seige for example, say one team could easily obliterate another team because the skill difference is so great. If more xp/points were given for "close" games, it would probably end up with the good team just "farming" the other team for kills and just barely LETTING them get a couple battleships rolling.

Basically what I'm getting at is that close games are fantastic. But if we did that I think it woud take away the excitement because both teams are "holding back" to get more points. Seems unnatural. That's just my opinion anyways.

[TheChaffeemancer]

Lazoraz, on October 30 2012 - 07:28 AM, said:

An interesting idea, and I can definately get behind having more close games. But I think that if something like that was actually implemented, it would end up making the game feel "unnatural". Take Seige for example, say one team could easily obliterate another team because the skill difference is so great. If more xp/points were given for "close" games, it would probably end up with the good team just "farming" the other team for kills and just barely LETTING them get a couple battleships rolling.

Basically what I'm getting at is that close games are fantastic. But if we did that I think it woud take away the excitement because both teams are "holding back" to get more points. Seems unnatural. That's just my opinion anyways.

This is already the case (somewhat) with "Game time" points.

If they can tweak it well enough (perhaps win bonus being 25 with close match being 10-15 as an example) it might work. Being half of the win bonus or should be a general ball park figure of what would fit. It can be worked on overtime to detect poor sportsmanship, like that. Detection for something like siege would be hell, though. Reward winning, reward close games, make it worth while to win a close game.

Edited by TheChaffeemancer, October 30 2012 - 07:47 AM.

[Subdivision]

Yeah I like the idea so long as we don't get an artificial game state occurring where people are throwing or such-like to obtain more points. Not sure if others would agree. Some may argue if a team dominates another they deserve a greater hoarding of points. As everyone enjoys a closely fought game, it's probably fair in the current state where both sides receive a similar level of points. The points can't become a measure of anything more than peoples ability to play the game. Overall, I don't feel it is terribly practical or necessary the more I think about it.

[TheChaffeemancer]

Subdivision, on October 30 2012 - 08:01 AM, said:

Yeah I like the idea so long as we don't get an artificial game state occurring where people are throwing or such-like to obtain more points.

Make a win worth more then a loss. A close loss can be worth less then an easy win if that's the issue.

Subdivision, on October 30 2012 - 08:01 AM, said:

Not sure if others would agree. Some may argue if a team dominates another they deserve a greater hoarding of points.

Ideally, both teams should get the close match bonus. The winners will still get more points.

Subdivision, on October 30 2012 - 08:01 AM, said:

As everyone enjoys a closely fought game, it's probably fair in the current state where both sides receive a similar level of points. The points can't become a measure of anything more than peoples ability to play the game.

If everyone enjoys a closely fought game, then why not try encouraging it_ Match win in Hawken Points is 25, a loss is 5. The other things are place on score and match time. Hawken points earned are not really a thing that's heavily dependant on skill, it's more a measure of your team's overall ability, and your skill relative to it. If the close match bonus is anything, it should be in Hawken points, keeping with the whole team things being Hawken points and personal actions being XP.

Has any game even tried a thing such as rewarding close games_ It'd be an interesting experiment. Missile and TDM would be the easiest to track. If the winning team's base HP is <300 in missile assault, that might be considered close. While the difference in kills at the end of TDM being <5 would be considered close.

Subdivision, on October 30 2012 - 08:01 AM, said:

Overall, I don't feel it is terribly practical or necessary the more I think about it.

It's not necessary. Neither is a win bonus, but its there. It would, however, be a neat effort.

[Subdivision]

Thanks for putting my thoughts into more words Chaffeemancer

[AmericanWolf]

Not being one of the strongest players I have been on a number of teams that keep getting stomped.  The idea of gamers of approximate equal abilities to promote more balanced gamming really appeals to me.  This could also have the side benefit of helping newer and less experienced players learn in a more encouraging and supportive environment.