invalid Remove team-related rewards

[LOLKILLERTOTHEDEATH 1,921]

I find it quite frustrating that the earning of stars is tied almost exclusively to what team you get to join. Quite often, despite whatever you do in the game, you are unable to do what you initially set out to do. For example, I had a mission to come in the top 3 places three times of the winners team. This mission should be changed simply to coming in one of the top 3 places on either team because it's impossible to control your teammates and therefore a player shouldn't have to suffer for it. I do understand that team battles involve players working together to achieve their goals, however 7 minutes along with conflicting player attitudes (someone saying "go to the point" while others simple trying to troll players) don't allow for much real strategy or planning. Furthermore, I think star distribution should also be changed. Rather than it being tied to that game, I feel it should be made as such:
 
0-50 score: 0 stars
 
50-100 score: 1 star
 
100-250 score: 2 stars
 
250+ score: 3 stars
 
As the dependency upon one's team (which may or may not be working well together) hinders a player's earning

[Maf 32,328]

Valid

[loginci 877]

An idea that I've been thinking of suggesting for a long time, nice that you did it instead of me :)

 

Two days ago, someone started a topic about that, not the same topic but it was similar, here you can find it. (Edit: Just realised that it was moved to another topic, just click the link to see the interested post)

 

I really support the idea, I haven't been playing this game for months and just today I entered the game and played 6-7 MM battles, and I lost all of them. 

 

For this reason, I couldn't even take a step at my mission ''Finish in top 3 of winner team [0/15]''. 

 

Besides that, losing stars is a big problem as well. Why do we have to be in the better team / more organised team to earn 3 stars?

 

In my opinion, these figures you mentioned are quite reasonable, 250+ points in 7 mins are already enough for 3 stars. 

 

I support the idea to the end.

[u812ic 1,629]

My alt's main combo is Isida/Viking. I've had the mission top 3 on winning team times 15 for two months (actually longer than that, but I don't play that account every day) and so far I've managed to get 12/15. But that wasn't with the Isida turret, that was with that account's secondary combo, Firebird/Viking or Hunter. With the Isida, I think I got top three on the winning team 2 times. 

 

Just another update the Devs didn't test before adding it to the game. What looks good on paper isn't always practical. Here again, quality vs quantity. They are not looking for quality. 

[ILiveOnTheChatBox123 936]

I agree that this mission shouldn't be tied to your tem winning-but sometimes a player can do a lot (giving damage, neutralizing points, move flag most of the way, etc.) without getting much battle score-but helping the team win. This also favors players who will guard a flag-instead of just playing TDM. So I think stars still should be dependent on the team's overall production.

[TWICE 798]

My alt's main combo is Isida/Viking. I've had the mission top 3 on winning team times 15 for two months (actually longer than that, but I don't play that account every day) and so far I've managed to get 12/15. But that wasn't with the Isida turret, that was with that account's secondary combo, Firebird/Viking or Hunter. With the Isida, I think I got top three on the winning team 2 times. 

 

Just another update the Devs didn't test before adding it to the game. What looks good on paper isn't always practical. Here again, quality vs quantity. They are not looking for quality. 

 

It's easier to get to top 3 with Isida in DM, especially in maps with more covers.

 

It's very difficult to finish in top 3 (even on the losing team) with Isida after they nerfed its healing ability and lowered the related experience/scores.  Before that update, I always topped the team (sometimes even the battle) by healing my teammates with very low kills and deaths (0-2 each).

[KILL_BILL_CHAUHAN 2,505]

I agree 

[CabbageRoll 3,018]

I got the weekly mission on one of accounts since release of weekly missions. Reached 2/15 so far. When actively playing i can easily reach top 3 but its 99% of times in losing team, and if it is in winning tanki crashes and kicks me out of battle.

[XxStriker 519]

I got the weekly mission on one of accounts since release of weekly missions. Reached 2/15 so far. When actively playing i can easily reach top 3 but its 99% of times in losing team, and if it is in winning tanki crashes and kicks me out of battle.

Do it in DM/jugger, it counts.

[TheCongoSpider 8,970]

Do it in DM/jugger, it counts.

DMs are filled with the heavily upgraded players since they don't have to content with only having 8 players to slaughter. They have 15 in DM. Juggernaut could be better but the waiting time doesn't make it as worth it as DM. 

 

It's always some guy with a kit coming first. 

[wolverine848 13,097]

Do it in DM/jugger, it counts.

JUG sucks and DMs are boring.    Next!

[LunaStar 348]

Your idea is obviously correct. It so ruined when you were drugging like the hell and got no team works. Well , if they don't do anything we don't care  We should world hard to get the score and to win stars. 

 

I like this idea

[CabbageRoll 3,018]

Exactly, DM is filled with all the m4 kits where i have no chance of being in top 3 while JGR always has 5 russian friends helping eachother.

 

Sure, i can drug but drugging m4 brigadier with a drone is still better.

[r_Given6 859]

I find it quite frustrating that the earning of stars is tied almost exclusively to what team you get to join. Quite often, despite whatever you do in the game, you are unable to do what you initially set out to do. For example, I had a mission to come in the top 3 places three times of the winners team. This mission should be changed simply to coming in one of the top 3 places on either team because it's impossible to control your teammates and therefore a player shouldn't have to suffer for it. I do understand that team battles involve players working together to achieve their goals, however 7 minutes along with conflicting player attitudes (someone saying "go to the point" while others simple trying to troll players) don't allow for much real strategy or planning. Furthermore, I think star distribution should also be changed. Rather than it being tied to that game, I feel it should be made as such:

 

0-50 score: 0 stars

 

50-100 score: 1 star

 

100-250 score: 2 stars

 

250+ score: 3 stars

 

As the dependency upon one's team (which may or may not be working well together) hinders a player's earning

I agree with the Missions thing, but making Star distribution to be based on experience would make it too much of work. Plus, the only reason now to play through one-sided battles is to get the Stars, since experience and crystals are really limited. So if I endure a 7 minute one-sided battle, while my teammates mostly quit, and struggle to get a score of 100, I want to get the 3 Stars I deserve, instead of just 1 Star.

[u812ic 1,629]

I agree with the Missions thing, but making Star distribution to be based on experience would make it too much of work. Plus, the only reason now to play through one-sided battles is to get the Stars, since experience and crystals are really limited. So if I endure a 7 minute one-sided battle, while my teammates mostly quit, and struggle to get a score of 100, I want to get the 3 Stars I deserve, instead of just 1 Star.

In the majority of losing battles I've been in, you have to be in the top 1 or 2 position to get any stars, especially if the opposing team takes over early in the battle. If I'm playing for stars and  am dumped into a battle that has already started, I look at the time left....2 minutes or less, I leave. Large gap in scores, I leave. But if it's a mission battle for completing X number of battles, I'll stay the 2 minutes. 

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

JUG sucks and DMs are boring.    Next!

LOL I LOVE those mode! :lol:  :wub:

[u812ic 1,629]

LOL I LOVE those mode! :lol:  :wub:

Wish I could send all my DM missions over to you. 

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

Wish I could send all my DM missions over to you. 

Yeah, 'least I can get it done. Seems like you dislike solo mode. As me dislike team battle.

 

I can get Top 3 15x mission done. But takes some time and luck. Still, that weekly mission is so annoying....

[lssimo 1,559]

I don't agree. The way battles are today, with this idea, all in the losing team will get 1 Star or less.

 

If your team is full of noobs why even stay in that battle if we're going to get 1 Star because we can't do 100 points, and we can't do 100 points because the noobs aren't helping. Unless of course we help ourselves and not worry about the team or the goals.

[loginci 877]

I don't agree. The way battles are today, with this idea, all in the losing team will get 1 Star or less.

 

If your team is full of noobs why even stay in that battle if we're going to get 1 Star because we can't do 100 points, and we can't do 100 points because the noobs aren't helping. Unless of course we help ourselves and not worry about the team or the goals.

Considering you are in the losing team, so even if you make 250+ scores, another well-playing player makes more scores than you and he earns 3 stars while you earn 2. 

 

Unfortunately, 2 well-playing players against 5-6 well-playing players aren't enough. They somehow dominate you. 

[u812ic 1,629]

Yeah, 'least I can get it done. Seems like you dislike solo mode. As me dislike team battle.

 

I can get Top 3 15x mission done. But takes some time and luck. Still, that weekly mission is so annoying....

No, it's not that. I can be in a team battle and it still feels like DM. A lot of players play for themselves and not for the team. Many times I'll be fighting 1v1 while a teammate stands by and watches. I'm wondering why he isn't helping. Isn't it obvious I'm in trouble here? As I rise towards the heavens after death, I see the teammate kill the survivor of the skirmish. Same thing in DM. 

 

Some modes I prefer over others and DM is not high on my list of priorities. It has nothing to do with teams or solo. I think it's more about playing style, combos, strategy, etc.