Let's Talk About Today's XP Changes and What They Mean For AFKers/Quitters

Battleborn Battleborn General Discussion
#65

The thing was, the team wasn’t enjoying it either. The ONLY reason they refused to leave was because of the XP penalty for surrenders/leaving/quitting etc. But what about players who will get 0 (Zero) XP? Should they be forced to suffer alongside another 3 teammates for the sake of them getting a couple extra XP? I don’t think that’s fair.

The Surrender option is there for a reason. I don’t like that this “promotion” for people to play ignores the purpose of surrenders by penalizing surrenders. Might as well remove the damn option entirely.

“If you surrender you’ll be losing out in about 50%+ of the XP, take that L like a champ”. That’s fine and dandy if they would have taken into consideration that most people are max CR and have characters that they play at Lvl15. If they would have thought about that for a second they would realize that this new “motivational promotion” does nothing for these people other than have to deal with peope NOT wanting to surrender when a game is going catastrophically bad.

If you’re not playing in a group, you’re going to have a bad time.

2 Likes
#66

You do realise that the majority of people leaving matches do so at the very beginning and they won’t care about the 10 xp they lost. And now you are also handing out an xp bonus to teams who win 5v4?

Don’t be surprised if leaver rates don’t budge after this garbage solution goes live.

1 Like
#67

That 50% is still about as much as you USED to get for winning the match to the enemy team surrendering. It’s a great addition to the game. It hasn’t done much to stop surrenders as far as I’ve seen, but at least now when the enemy team surrenders they aren’t forcing MY team to lose out on rewards.

Now, maybe something just needs to be done about the way Incursion works, because as it is now I really hate it, but with or without the changes to surrendering there are going to be bad matches, and I’d much rather people have to just play through them than be able to quit.

#68

Nice change.
Glad I thought of it MONTHS AGO.
Glad I posted it on the forums here, MONTHS AGO.
So glad, that i’ll post my “here i’ll fix the game for you” post here

… glad it was ignored
Glad that it’s being paraded around like its some sort of innovation worthy of praise.
When its not. It’s common game sense that is implemented in MANY other games.
Has been. For years.

#69

Thank you for that, and let me in kind.
I’m a new player. (You have a really good and fun game here.) I have no emotional involvement with the success of this game(yet). I’m playing just for fun.
What’s my benefit for staying to the end of a hopeless game. What are you going to offer to offset the lack of fun that getting pubstomped provides?

You have a fun game here, I’m giving you money for the chance to entertain myself. I’d like to spend more money on it.
But I’m not going to give you more money to sit in a “Waiting to play” cue, and I’m not going to give you more money to be someone else’s entertainment.

If you want me to sit through a match that everyone know is going to go one way,(IE my team has 150pts of char level, and the other team has 500pts of char level) that’s no longer a situation of me paying you to be entertained. My team has become someone else’s entertainment.
As for getting locked out of matches for 30 minutes? Those 30 minutes I’ll spend looking up stuff for my other hobbies. You’re just creating opportunities for other businesses to make money at your expense.

So what’s the upside for me? Why should I buy a season pass instead of a new set of LED tail lights for my motorcycle?

2 Likes
#71

Talk about the game, please.

#72

…Same! :smile:

1 Like
#73

@Psychichazard Fine, I’ll reword my comment then :stuck_out_tongue:

Tbh sasuga, what you listed in that topic are pretty much things that the devs are likely working on as we speak. The fact that they can’t tell us every little thing is pretty much the standard for any game company. They just aren’t allowed to.

And who’s to say that your idea was ignored? They take feedback from everyone, but it’s whether or not what was suggested fits in with their vision for the game it’s down to them. Even then, they probably have these things written down on a big list somewhere, but that list has a bottom, and they have to do all the stuff that comes before that.

Give them time. I’m sure they’ll get around to fixing this stuff sooner or later.

2 Likes
#74

Yep! Me and John are as bad as each other… No, that may be an insult to John there. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes: I really want to see better matchmaking but command rank is not the best way to do it. It needs to go on PvP stats. I’m not even sure it’s helpful to see command rank in the queue at all.

#75

…Gearbox sooner, or Valve sooner? :blush:

1 Like
#76

Geez, everyone is sooner than Valve XD

1 Like
#77

And I’m grateful to Gearbox for being a lot better at communicating their plans!

1 Like
#78

I think its important to point out someone who has decided to quit/afk has already conceded to being blocked from matchmaking up to 30 mins, I don’t think any reasonable amount of xp/credit bonus is going to offset that. They’re probably not playing for the credits/xp in the first place.

#79

I’m not. The stupid change makes people not surrender when the match is frustratingly one sided and I am far more likely to quit now because it isn’t fun. I’ll call for surrender, and if it gets shut down, I just quit.
Second time I’ve ever just quit a match with this new change.
I ply a game to have fun. But this matchmaking and “experience increase” is ruining any semblance of fun I’ve ever had with this game.

#80

ROTFLMAO :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

#81

It’s not just about matchmaking. At this point in time it’s about population size. It’s math. Matchmaking is a function, the population size is its input, and the matches are its output. With the tiny population size that is PC it’s futile to simply blame matchmaking because queue times word be DRAMATICALLY worse than they are already.

The only way to make matchmaking significantly better is to have a significant increase in population size. As I write this there are 626 people in game, ALL the matchmaking mojo in the world is not got to be worth spit when it only has 626 people as its input! There can be minor improvements but nothing major. Cause, you know, math! :smile_cat:

1 Like
#82

If the reward is credits then who gives a hoot? Which, BTW, I think it ought to be. A CR cap increase is pointless because it’s a cap and eventually it will be reached and then the complaints/cycle will begin anew. The only reasonable solution that doesn’t require new assets is like @Rivaire suggests, to bathe us in credits! And so long as the drop rates for loot pack legendaries, taunts, and skins remain abysmal the utility of credits remains indefinite.

The other option that doesn’t require new assets is to dish out small amounts of the new platinum currency. Unfortunately, I don’t see that happening. So more credits for everyone. Yeah! :smile_cat:

1 Like
#83

I see the problem completely (and you’ll forgive my lack of technical expertise in how the maths is worked out, it’s a long way from my field!). But couldn’t some matchmaking rules be established despite the low player base? Aren’t there ways that the admittedly small pot of people could be connected more appropriately than they are at present? (Which just seems to be whoever turns up next in the queue, which is very fast, but results in really unbalanced matches).

Would it be possible to divide players with high and low stats into some different streams, to make sure that new players aren’t continually put with veterans? Or finding a way to rebalance teams once 10 players are found?

I genuinely don’t know if this is possible, but I think small changes - any change that takes skill into account to make games more even than they often are at present - will be a real turnaround for PvP.

#84

So what you are saying is that because adding new functionality to a complex piece of software w/ millions, possibly billions of lines of existing code took months to get implemented and was thus not released the day after you made a recommendation means you are being ignored? Even though the fact that they are releasing your suggestion is a direct contradiction to the implication that the devs don’t listen to the community.

#85

As I’ve stated there can be minor improvements. The problem is it won’t feel like an improvement. Let me give you an example. Let’s say normally you get 7 lopsided matches in your normal play session. Tweaks are made to the matchmaking algorithm such that sometimes (i.e., when the conditions are perfect) you only have 6. Though that’s an improvement it’s not going to feel like one. If they cut in 1/2 or 1/3 you would feel it but for that to happen the population size needs to increase dramatically.

Just remember high school math where you learned about graphing functions. What the graph ends up looking like is dependent on the function and its inputs. You can’t separate the two. And the problem on PC is not the function, it is its input (i.e., population size).

Please note, I’m not saying the match making algorithm/functions is perfect. I’m saying that even if it was it can’t make a significant difference due to population size.