Re: What would it take: Queue for 6v6
Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 10:12 pm
Unlocking the /dab emote.
Return of Reckoning
Warhammer Online
https://returnofreckoning.com/forum/
What would it take: Queue for 6v6
Page 12 of 16
Re: What would it take: Queue for 6v6
Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 10:44 pm
But then there's no incentive to win or make a group with voice comms or spec to complement each other, just show up- receive handouts.
Re: What would it take: Queue for 6v6
Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:08 pm
Then I honestly can't think of another means of incentivising groups to keep trying - even if they lose. I feel if groups had more incentives to keep trying, they would be more inclined.wargrimnir wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 9:47 pmThis carries intrinsic issues.peterthepan3 wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 9:37 pmI think losers should get more rewards than they would for pug stomp winning a normal sc - so as to incentivise them to keep queuing and trying - but still not as much as a winning team.OldPlayer wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 3:58 pm
Exactly same rewards for all participants, both winners and losers.
Pug scen there's a lot of kills and deaths going around. There's a lot more RP being generated and loot dropping simply by virtue of volume.
6v6 has a few solid engagements, then usually the team with the upper hand is determined and the fighting ends. Or it's a 15 minute stalemate between turtle teams. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're not going to see the 30+ kills in a 6v6 for each side that you might get out of a particularly deadly pug-brawl. Both 6v6 scens grant 50% more emblems and loot.
We can't give the losing team better rewards than a pug brawl if they get stomped and end up with 1-2 kills (or 0!). If there's rewards simply for queueing then we run the issue of having to drop hammers on people that afk or don't take a match seriously and queue with useless garbage just to get their loser rewards. Giving people stuff for failure is a fast way to dilute the pool of competition, so we're going to need a different direction on that thought.
Of course, the issues that you mentioned, e.g. potential AFKers that would necessitate more GM involvement, are very valid.
Re: What would it take: Queue for 6v6
Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:52 pm
Finding 5 more friends who are willing to paticipate
Re: What would it take: Queue for 6v6
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 12:12 am
Make a requirement of a single kill to get the rewards. Trust me, this requires work against any decent party.peterthepan3 wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:08 pmThen I honestly can't think of another means of incentivising groups to keep trying - even if they lose. I feel if groups had more incentives to keep trying, they would be more inclined.wargrimnir wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 9:47 pmThis carries intrinsic issues.peterthepan3 wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 9:37 pm
I think losers should get more rewards than they would for pug stomp winning a normal sc - so as to incentivise them to keep queuing and trying - but still not as much as a winning team.
Pug scen there's a lot of kills and deaths going around. There's a lot more RP being generated and loot dropping simply by virtue of volume.
6v6 has a few solid engagements, then usually the team with the upper hand is determined and the fighting ends. Or it's a 15 minute stalemate between turtle teams. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're not going to see the 30+ kills in a 6v6 for each side that you might get out of a particularly deadly pug-brawl. Both 6v6 scens grant 50% more emblems and loot.
We can't give the losing team better rewards than a pug brawl if they get stomped and end up with 1-2 kills (or 0!). If there's rewards simply for queueing then we run the issue of having to drop hammers on people that afk or don't take a match seriously and queue with useless garbage just to get their loser rewards. Giving people stuff for failure is a fast way to dilute the pool of competition, so we're going to need a different direction on that thought.
Of course, the issues that you mentioned, e.g. potential AFKers that would necessitate more GM involvement, are very valid.
Re: What would it take: Queue for 6v6
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 5:30 am
No amount of rewards would incentivise the right kind of people (those interested to fight an learn) to be roflstomped for 15 mins by a better team.peterthepan3 wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:08 pmThen I honestly can't think of another means of incentivising groups to keep trying - even if they lose. I feel if groups had more incentives to keep trying, they would be more inclined.wargrimnir wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 9:47 pmThis carries intrinsic issues.peterthepan3 wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 9:37 pm
I think losers should get more rewards than they would for pug stomp winning a normal sc - so as to incentivise them to keep queuing and trying - but still not as much as a winning team.
Pug scen there's a lot of kills and deaths going around. There's a lot more RP being generated and loot dropping simply by virtue of volume.
6v6 has a few solid engagements, then usually the team with the upper hand is determined and the fighting ends. Or it's a 15 minute stalemate between turtle teams. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're not going to see the 30+ kills in a 6v6 for each side that you might get out of a particularly deadly pug-brawl. Both 6v6 scens grant 50% more emblems and loot.
We can't give the losing team better rewards than a pug brawl if they get stomped and end up with 1-2 kills (or 0!). If there's rewards simply for queueing then we run the issue of having to drop hammers on people that afk or don't take a match seriously and queue with useless garbage just to get their loser rewards. Giving people stuff for failure is a fast way to dilute the pool of competition, so we're going to need a different direction on that thought.
Of course, the issues that you mentioned, e.g. potential AFKers that would necessitate more GM involvement, are very valid.
Introducing a ladder where your group is matched against teams of same rating, or including some kind of handicap between uneven rated teams (if ratings drop 6v6 que pops, which they would) would be a better approach imo
Re: What would it take: Queue for 6v6
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 10:01 am
Juicy rewards (the lion's share) being tied to a set of weekly changing quests; mini-questlines that prompt players to run non-fotm comps, or 'troll' comps...might do the trick.peterthepan3 wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:08 pmThen I honestly can't think of another means of incentivising groups to keep trying - even if they lose. I feel if groups had more incentives to keep trying, they would be more inclined.Spoiler:
Of course, the issues that you mentioned, e.g. potential AFKers that would necessitate more GM involvement, are very valid.
Puggy McPugdingsen is probably more inclined to queue if he knows that even the top premades gotta work with suboptimal comps. That'd give opportunity to test class changes and metas in a competitive environments, too.
Re: What would it take: Queue for 6v6
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 2:13 pm
Why should a player who did not care about 6 on 6 before now suddenly spend time and effort in order to create a good group with proper spec/gear/complementation/voice comms if the rewards are not motivating enough?NoRKaLKiLLa wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 10:44 pm But then there's no incentive to win or make a group with voice comms or spec to complement each other, just show up- receive handouts.
Even if a player never caring about 6 on 6 before will create a new group, this player's particular group will be farmed, jumped upon and /danced by few established premades. Why should a player do it if he did not do it already?
Maybe the player will feel challenged/masochistic enough to try for high/unique rewards. Good premades get fresh meat to farm, bad premades get rewards for roleplaying fresh meat.
Sidenote: we had similar thread some months ago. WAR's focus was never 6 on 6, why focus on it now?
Re: What would it take: Queue for 6v6
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 2:20 pm
less toxicity, less blame, less drama. ( less spam 
)
you play game for fun.
everybody have different vision of it.
even trolls think it's fun trolling and shittalking. they can play together, not me.
everytime when i see 6v6 dramas, it's funny how they made shitshow environment and asking others to join that show.
with their seriousness it's almost sad.
that environment is made by players.
until the player base fix themselves, it'll be always same.
anyway i'll play small scale more if i find ppl sharing same idea of fun.
)you play game for fun.
everybody have different vision of it.
even trolls think it's fun trolling and shittalking. they can play together, not me.
everytime when i see 6v6 dramas, it's funny how they made shitshow environment and asking others to join that show.
with their seriousness it's almost sad.
that environment is made by players.
until the player base fix themselves, it'll be always same.
anyway i'll play small scale more if i find ppl sharing same idea of fun.
Re: What would it take: Queue for 6v6
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 2:36 pm
A loss in 6v6 should carry more benefit than a loss in pug roflstomp. But not more than winning. Also with varied/added cool stuff benefits being introduced that aren't power related, a small benefit towards obtaining those even if you got stomped would be something.peterthepan3 wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:08 pmThen I honestly can't think of another means of incentivising groups to keep trying - even if they lose. I feel if groups had more incentives to keep trying, they would be more inclined.wargrimnir wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 9:47 pmThis carries intrinsic issues.Spoiler:
Pug scen there's a lot of kills and deaths going around. There's a lot more RP being generated and loot dropping simply by virtue of volume.
6v6 has a few solid engagements, then usually the team with the upper hand is determined and the fighting ends. Or it's a 15 minute stalemate between turtle teams. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're not going to see the 30+ kills in a 6v6 for each side that you might get out of a particularly deadly pug-brawl. Both 6v6 scens grant 50% more emblems and loot.
We can't give the losing team better rewards than a pug brawl if they get stomped and end up with 1-2 kills (or 0!). If there's rewards simply for queueing then we run the issue of having to drop hammers on people that afk or don't take a match seriously and queue with useless garbage just to get their loser rewards. Giving people stuff for failure is a fast way to dilute the pool of competition, so we're going to need a different direction on that thought.
Of course, the issues that you mentioned, e.g. potential AFKers that would necessitate more GM involvement, are very valid.
People do not like to get zero reward for putting in effort and getting beaten. Of course those that put the time to have better skill should be more rewarded for actually winning.