About losing team...

[kayitsiz 621]

First, this is similar one...

 

http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=232043

 

Okay.. Except deuce, all matches have 1 winner and loser team right... Much times with team scores, winner team players get much crystals. İt it normal, but there is a problem. Nearly all matches, loser team have a player. This player fightning with its all skills and equipments and this player trying this to at last of the match. And, it gets a little crystal.

 

My english is weak so please let me...

 

So i have a idea, and this idea only for loser team's first player.  Assume, this player won, and give crystals to this players with this assumption. Suppose, this player was in winning team in its score.

 

 

[Nightingale 70]

Firstly, thank you for making the effort to communicate in English. Your comment is well phrased and perfectly understandable.

 

Interesting idea but I still think it's better the losing team all get a chance to win some crystals. Perhaps based on time spent in enemy territory, hits on enemy targets (not necessarily kills) or simply based on scores.

[r_DidYouKnowThat0 1,662]

I posted this in two topics already, but I'll post it here. I'll only post the solutions I thought of to accompany this update if they choose to stand by it.

 

I personally do not think that the crystal boxes should have been touched at all in the first place.

In my opinion, it was a very big mistake - sorry. It was something that caused big problems - problems that had consisted and played a major disruption in battle. It made gameplay skydive and did the total opposite. The different crystal values actually made the boxes a lot more distracting.

 

Furthermore, the varied values made the boxes drop less, and thus, decreased the distribution to different players i' each game. I would have preferred 10 crystal boxes to drop (equaling 100 crystals in total) in contrast to 1 crystal box to drop (equaling 100 crystals in total.) Different people could get a part of those 100 crystals, instead of just one person hogging it up. But that's just my opinion.

 

Now you're testing the possibility of directly sending the crystal boxes to the funds. I agree, it does make the game more alive, exciting, and features much more intense gameplay with more player interaction. However, if you were to do this, would you consider re-organizing how crystals are distributed to the winning, and losing team?

 

Just like how it has always been, the loser hardly gets a morsel of the fund, despite their hard work and willingness to stick it out to the end. After all, without these "losers," the winners wouldn't have much to take home in the first place. However, the crystal boxes that drop from the skies actually gives the players on the losing team some extra crystals. Although they end with a loss, and hardly a "reward," they sustain enough crystals from boxes to make it worth while.

 

After all, omitting the crystal boxes ultimately leads to earning crystals only by the reward. What if you fought really hard for an hour, and have to leave? You have to forfeit the whole fund! At least crystal boxes would've given you a brighter side to it. And if you lose, well that's exactly what I'm talking about. You hardly get any reward.

 

So if you're going to do this, at least implement a system where either:

 

A. The losing team gets a bigger share of the crystal fund.

B. When you must "leave" the battle, you get to take some of the fund with you, depending on your score and whether or not your team is winning.

 

If not option A. or B., then I'll suggest to go back to how it was before: a uniform 10 crystal box value, with an increase in drop quantity.

 

You say your English is weak, but I hope you can read it. . .

The most important part would be the solutions.

[kayitsiz 621]

I posted this in two topics already, but I'll post it here. I'll only post the solutions I thought of to accompany this update if they choose to stand by it.

 

I personally do not think that the crystal boxes should have been touched at all in the first place.

In my opinion, it was a very big mistake - sorry. It was something that caused big problems - problems that had consisted and played a major disruption in battle. It made gameplay skydive and did the total opposite. The different crystal values actually made the boxes a lot more distracting.

 

Furthermore, the varied values made the boxes drop less, and thus, decreased the distribution to different players i' each game. I would have preferred 10 crystal boxes to drop (equaling 100 crystals in total) in contrast to 1 crystal box to drop (equaling 100 crystals in total.) Different people could get a part of those 100 crystals, instead of just one person hogging it up. But that's just my opinion.

 

Now you're testing the possibility of directly sending the crystal boxes to the funds. I agree, it does make the game more alive, exciting, and features much more intense gameplay with more player interaction. However, if you were to do this, would you consider re-organizing how crystals are distributed to the winning, and losing team?

 

Just like how it has always been, the loser hardly gets a morsel of the fund, despite their hard work and willingness to stick it out to the end. After all, without these "losers," the winners wouldn't have much to take home in the first place. However, the crystal boxes that drop from the skies actually gives the players on the losing team some extra crystals. Although they end with a loss, and hardly a "reward," they sustain enough crystals from boxes to make it worth while.

 

After all, omitting the crystal boxes ultimately leads to earning crystals only by the reward. What if you fought really hard for an hour, and have to leave? You have to forfeit the whole fund! At least crystal boxes would've given you a brighter side to it. And if you lose, well that's exactly what I'm talking about. You hardly get any reward.

 

So if you're going to do this, at least implement a system where either:

 

A. The losing team gets a bigger share of the crystal fund.

B. When you must "leave" the battle, you get to take some of the fund with you, depending on your score and whether or not your team is winning.

 

If not option A. or B., then I'll suggest to go back to how it was before: a uniform 10 crystal box value, with an increase in drop quantity.

 

You say your English is weak, but I hope you can read it. . .

The most important part would be the solutions.

İt was hard, but i understood :(

 

With my idea, some bad teammates can get big chances :(

 

Firstly, thank you for making the effort to communicate in English. Your comment is well phrased and perfectly understandable.

 

Interesting idea but I still think it's better the losing team all get a chance to win some crystals. Perhaps based on time spent in enemy territory, hits on enemy targets (not necessarily kills) or simply based on scores.

Thanks  all times :lol:

 

Actually "Unnecersary kills" is not too much. By the way... :(

[RustyNail 1,538]

So, what we all (hmmm.. ) say, is "give more to loosing team".

Right.

I do think it's a good idea.

It can take many forms, one of which is counting funds as if being winning team, in case loosing team has only one player left.

Another form is giving a PART of funds to loosing team, in case no flag is captured (but kills were accomplished).

 

Especially for the case of one team raiding the opposite base due to many players leaving, maybe an extra armor for right after respawning (for 5 or 10 seconds) would be nice...

 

There are many possible ways to promote the loosing side, so I think TO Devs should make a contest for best ideas or a poll for said ideas...

[Eragon 13,876]

A skilled player won't stay in a battle where is team are "un-skilled"

[blackjack91 49]

A skilled player won't stay in a battle where is team are "un-skilled"

agree

[kayitsiz 621]

So, what we all (hmmm.. ) say, is "give more to loosing team".

Right.

I do think it's a good idea.

It can take many forms, one of which is counting funds as if being winning team, in case loosing team has only one player left.

Another form is giving a PART of funds to loosing team, in case no flag is captured (but kills were accomplished).

 

Especially for the case of one team raiding the opposite base due to many players leaving, maybe an extra armor for right after respawning (for 5 or 10 seconds) would be nice...

 

There are many possible ways to promote the loosing side, so I think TO Devs should make a contest for best ideas or a poll for said ideas...

Actually this is "give more chance to losing team."

Yes, we have a lot of scenario about losing team. One player, two player or all team. My idea is lust one feet... We can upgrade this.

For example, another topic..

 

All of the waysi we should think a system, and this system shouldn't be suitable for multers, sabotaurs and another bad things.

 

Today, current system has absurd problems, so i most play DM.

[RustyNail 1,538]

A skilled player won't stay in a battle where is team are "un-skilled"

 

Depents... who is a skilled player? Am I a skilled player? (I do choose loosing teams to participate and sometimes I do make the difference).

But my point really is: the longest a weak team stands, the more the funds. And the bigger the performance distance between teams, the shortest the game, the less the funds. Thus, it's to everyone's best interest that a battle be as ballanced as possible.

[kayitsiz 621]

Depents... who is a skilled player? Am I a skilled player? (I do choose loosing teams to participate and sometimes I do make the difference).

But my point really is: the longest a weak team stands, the more the funds. And the bigger the performance distance between teams, the shortest the game, the less the funds. Thus, it's to everyone's best interest that a battle be as ballanced as possible.

Actually my poinion, it is not about skill. Only good trying or bad trying...