[Scenario] Emblem reward system

[Scrilian]

Yes, because handouts is what made progress, not competition :^)
Don't bring politics into gaming please, especially the most bullshit-tier American ones.

[Specialpatrol]

This is again a somewhat troubling viewpoint from someone titled "developer". And it shows that there's still some way to go before such a title can be fully embraced.

What you seem to be doing (in tune with a lot of others in this thread) is advocating a system that's divided between Winners and Loosers, the Haves and the Have Nots. Or the Donald Trump way of life, if you will.

What you seem to forget in that equation is that RoR is a society - a gaming society, yes, but a society nevertheless. And just as in real societies, where, if you divide your population into Winners and Loosers (where the winners take all and the loosers get nothing) you will have a society that will eventually collapse on itself. Or at the very least not be able to sustain itself.

A better way would be to adopt a more holistic approach, the Ying-Yang method. Or the Bernie Sanders way of life. This would require an acknowledgement of the RoR gaming society as functioning whole, where we are all equally winners and loosers and where everybody is cared for. Having a gaming society, where one side is dominating with no chance of reward/advancement for the opposing side will end up with the winning side the only side left in the game.

Not sure if trolling but makes me wonder what you are doing in a PvP oriented mmorpg at all with this kind of attitude. Maybe Guild Wars 2 would be better option as you get endgame bis gear for free at level 10 for PvP'ing. Warhammer Online is a bit more oldschool approach where striving to win and being competitive actually has a concrete meaning other than a trivial ranking system.

And with your attitude you should probably try to pick up a book or two.

PvP is about balance. Not just beating undergeared opponents and thinking you rock.

EDIT: I can see that you edited your comment, so I will do the same. I've played WAR since open beta, so I know this game fairly well. And been part of all the changes since the game launched. So I feel quite competent in my knowledge of this game. And of course it's about winning. But isn't winning more fun/rewarding, if you actually win against a more even opponent?

[lator]

PvP is about balance. Not just beating undergeared opponents and thinking you rock.

With 2 factions instead of 3 the way how to handle this without trivializing winning and the feeling of progress is one million dollar question in itself that Mythic/EA/GW were never able to overcome on live server and it's going to be a huge challenge here as well.

However, without 100% mirroring and with potential gear / set differences between both sides there is always that nagging doubt in your mind if you lose that it could be because of gearing, scenario pugs, order/destro class being op or not etc. that keeps the people who can't handle losing in PvP oriented games coming back for more. Add xrealming without penalty to that equation and everyone is happy.

This is evidently working as well considering as long as T3 has been out the server population hasn't gone down. In a game where you can dominate scenarios with 6-man and small T3 oRvR zones with one organized WB I don't see a problem with this as it is.

[DefinitelyNotWingz]

Let us talk about equal opportunity, not equal outcome.
Having a twink army is your own decision and what does undergeared even mean, the gear difference is not the gear difference we have had on live where worn souv geared people fought warpforged geared ones.
You can buy almost equal gear on the auction house for gold.

[Scrilian]

beating undergeared opponents and thinking you rock

Like that's a bad thing
I know this triggers most of equality-balance-fairness advocates and giev-poor-puggies-a-chance representatives - so feel free to debunk my 1 and 2 posts on this "problematic" scenario issue without resorting to socialist political agenda.

[Specialpatrol]

beating undergeared opponents and thinking you rock

Like that's a bad thing
I know this triggers most of equality-balance-fairness advocates and giev-poor-puggies-a-chance representatives - so feel free to debunk my 1 and 2 posts on this "problematic" scenario issue without resorting to socialist political agenda.

Yeah, that is a bad thing.

I'm basically talking balance, not politics. But apparently you're not capable of understanding that.

[Scrilian]

beating undergeared opponents and thinking you rock

Like that's a bad thing
I know this triggers most of equality-balance-fairness advocates and giev-poor-puggies-a-chance representatives - so feel free to debunk my 1 and 2 posts on this "problematic" scenario issue without resorting to socialist political agenda.

Yeah, that is a bad thing.

I'm basically talking balance, not politics. But apparently you're not capable of understanding that.

Not true one bit, a least have some guts to stand by your words, "scientificly proven good of society" bullshit.
Enlighten me on why it is a bad thing, if you are capable of such thing

[Specialpatrol]

Yeah, that is a bad thing.

I'm basically talking balance, not politics. But apparently you're not capable of understanding that.

Not true one bit, a least have some guts to stand by your words, "scientificly proven good of society" bullshit.
Enlighten me on why it is a bad thing, if you are capable of such thing

Whatever, dude.

And no, I'm not gonna try to enlighten you. You seem too narrow-minded and beyond reach already. Which is also why I'm not gonna debate you any further.

Regarding the sicence bit, here's a video for you, though (and please reflect on the fact that it's now you who's pushing the political aspect of this):
https://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson

[Scrilian]

Whatever, dude.

And no, I'm not gonna try to enlighten you. You seem too narrow-minded and beyond reach already. Which is also why I'm not gonna debate you any further.

Regarding the sicence bit, here's a video for you, though (and please reflect on the fact that it's now you who's pushing the political aspect of this):
https://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson

And here you see, ladies and gentlemen, how quickly my opponent goes into denial, acknowledges his defeat and resorts to his favourite ad hominem tactics.
Before I rest my case, I would advise everyone to refrain from clicking that "political science" non-sense, whatever it may be.

[Azarael]

Oh, and I would like to add , as someone else also pointed out, that I haven't witnessed this more balanced sc-approach either.

In my experience you still get random pug group of players with no healers etc tossed up against a high-end premades.

It would of course be cool, if a more fair balancing could be implemented. But currently it is not working at all. And changing a "0" to a "1" seems to be a lot less programming heavy than fixing the balance issues.

You'll have to do better than that, because I, the person who wrote the code, play the game every day.