Jump to content


Proof that being AFK earns more than being terrible

WG loves bots E-100 is awesome

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
154 replies to this topic

zmeul #121 Posted 21 September 2012 - 04:00 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 19552 battles
  • 2,135
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

View Postbravotango, on 21 September 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

XP system should reward everybody for the individual performance, not the team. I still don't know why is WG pushing so hard with the team mentality, when it's clearly impossible with random skilled people.
^this
I pushed the idea of individual reward system to WG via tech support a very long time ago
and they simply refused it, why? because will make everybody happy and making us happy means that the gold selling will diminished or even stop - or at least their understanding of it is
they need unhappy players because there are more likely to get frustrated and buy one or two premium tanks to keep them floating- like I did

Snib #122 Posted 21 September 2012 - 09:50 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 18888 battles
  • 3,307
  • Member since:
    07-16-2010
Forgot to post this the other day - apparently all AFK'ers are not the same. Look at this:

Had a funny battle where half of the team decided to go drown themselves rather than play, others just rushed into the enemy getting killed without firing a shot. Most of them received 10 XP for that, like this guy, who drowned:

Posted Image

Getting killed by the enemy made no difference, 10 XP as well:

Posted Image

I'll spare you the other 10 XP guys, nothing to see there, they all drowned themselves without causing any damage (some did fire a shot though).

But now look at this, 16 XP for doing nothing more than the others.

Posted Image

Oh right, the same tank I used in my OP as an example for a profitable tank to AFK in. Looks like the M48A1 earns 60% more XP for doing nothing than other tanks. US bias?

But we're not done yet, take this guy, same tank, but actually detects one enemy before being killed and gets 2 XP more than the other M48A1. So spotting a target is worth 2 XP then?

Posted Image

I decided to shoot an enemy IS-7's tracks and then drowned myself as well, for 19 XP - assuming I'd have received 10 XP without that hit that makes a critical hit worth 9 XP, but of course all tier 10 mediums might receive the same 60% afk bonus as the M48A1, which would leave only 3 XP for the critical hit:

Posted Image

Working as intended?

zmeul #123 Posted 21 September 2012 - 11:53 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 19552 battles
  • 2,135
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010
I think we need to hire some ex-KGB guys :Smile_trollface-3:

Legion_ #124 Posted 22 September 2012 - 01:24 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 13526 battles
  • 842
  • Member since:
    09-12-2010
If WG would change the XP reward system from team to individual actions they would lose people playing this game.

At the moment its like this:

Hey I got 800xp for the last match dont know why the people calling me noob and saying i have 46% WR.


XP for individual actions:

crap another 100 xp for a win, must be the teams fault...

zmeul #125 Posted 22 September 2012 - 01:53 AM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 19552 battles
  • 2,135
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010
I am BETA testing one game that will be the direct competitor of WarGaming's products
they went the way of rewarding individual performance rather than punishing the loser team
yes, you get a bonus for wining the match but it shows that the best players in each team can get the same amount of XP !!
also they reward, with a small bonus, battle achievements (like we have here sniper, scout, reaper and so on); and they don't hide the amounts, like WG does, it's in plain view; you know exactly how much you get for each type of assist, kill, defense point, etc

TKing, even if it's accidental will get you a fine to never forget, you'll be easy with the trigger finger next time
you basically play the round till the end to get back to zero :Smile_veryhappy:

will they lose players for it!? hell no, they will gain a lot of the disgruntled WoT players, including me
and trust me, when this game will enter retail ... the flood gates will open and level WG to the ground

Legion_ #126 Posted 22 September 2012 - 02:06 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 13526 battles
  • 842
  • Member since:
    09-12-2010

View Postzmeul, on 22 September 2012 - 01:53 AM, said:

*stuff that makes me wet*

Is this game about tanks?

Snib #127 Posted 22 September 2012 - 02:09 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 18888 battles
  • 3,307
  • Member since:
    07-16-2010

View PostLegion_, on 22 September 2012 - 02:06 AM, said:

Is this game about tanks?
Planes first, later battleships and tanks as well.

tango_delta #128 Posted 22 September 2012 - 05:34 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 11465 battles
  • 2,026
  • Member since:
    03-17-2011

View Postzmeul, on 22 September 2012 - 01:53 AM, said:

I am BETA testing one game that will be the direct competitor of WarGaming's products
they went the way of rewarding individual performance rather than punishing the loser team
yes, you get a bonus for wining the match but it shows that the best players in each team can get the same amount of XP !!
also they reward, with a small bonus, battle achievements (like we have here sniper, scout, reaper and so on); and they don't hide the amounts, like WG does, it's in plain view; you know exactly how much you get for each type of assist, kill, defense point, etc

TKing, even if it's accidental will get you a fine to never forget, you'll be easy with the trigger finger next time
you basically play the round till the end to get back to zero :Smile_veryhappy:

will they lose players for it!? hell no, they will gain a lot of the disgruntled WoT players, including me
and trust me, when this game will enter retail ... the flood gates will open and level WG to the ground
So you are in war thunder beta?

Arigato #129 Posted 23 September 2012 - 05:14 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 34908 battles
  • 56
  • Member since:
    05-22-2011

View Posthandgranaat, on 14 September 2012 - 01:32 PM, said:

503 exp. for doing diddly-squat...Why should one even try to do their best to get 1000 exp...

Because you play to have fun??!
God, what's wrong with you... ;)

Edited by Arigato, 23 September 2012 - 05:15 PM.


zmeul #130 Posted 23 September 2012 - 10:03 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 19552 battles
  • 2,135
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

View Posttango_delta, on 22 September 2012 - 05:34 AM, said:

So you are in war thunder beta?
indeed I am
I didn't want to spread names around cuz WG has a itchy trigger finger with the ban button that hit me countless times

Pernumbra #131 Posted 24 September 2012 - 12:37 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4716 battles
  • 1,282
  • Member since:
    07-17-2010

View PostTigerMoth, on 14 September 2012 - 09:08 PM, said:

I would prefer them being open, but they have closed so many stats and figures since the initial release I have been a little disappointment/disillusioned.

eg. It would be nice to purchase a tank knowing what it's camo values were - as proven already, it can be calculated by 3rd parties so it is disappointing that they are not upfront with this information.

Of course the camo system is Working as Intended™, just like the AFK/reward system....

At least if they gave the comouflage figures we would know for sure that the camouflage system was another example of Working as Intended

:facepalmic:

del500780009 #132 Posted 24 September 2012 - 01:34 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 1 battle
  • 950
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View Postzmeul, on 16 September 2012 - 12:36 AM, said:

Spoiler                     
top guy in losing team - fired 18 shells; hit 15, penetrated 14; damage done 3747; did 1 HP dmg to allied but that's excusable
bottom guy in wining team - fired 2 shells; hit 0, pen 0; damage done 0

basically the guy that did nothing in the match earned more XP than the guy who did the most work in the enemy team, just because his team won the match (for him)
how come!?

It's beacuse of the survival bonus, the win bonus and team damage. The win bonus is 50%, so if it is a higher tiered battle (where the base exp is higher due to more team damage after a win), a player on the winning side will get a decent amount of exp even if he doesn't participate. If you are on the losing side, dead and with few of enemy tanks killed (little team damage), the total exp will be significantly less. It has been discussed in other threads before, but it isn't entirely clear how the formula for team damage works. Anyhow... in this battle, there are 6 high tiered tanks on the winning side left alive. The combination of being dead, having lost, and having left a lot of enemy HP left on the battlefield = little experience.

And as you say, the team did all the work for him (IS-3). He got all the benefits from team effort: they kept him alive, they won, and they did maximum team damage (all enemies dead).

If this battle had been won by cap with a lot of tanks left alive on both sides, he would by all likelihood made less exp than the top player on the losing side.

del500780009 #133 Posted 24 September 2012 - 01:49 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 1 battle
  • 950
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostLegion_, on 17 September 2012 - 12:37 AM, said:

So when during the battle, the brown mass hits the fan, it is actually better to suicide then to give your best and still being penalized for a loss?

No. Base exp is despite all mostly made up of the things you do as an individual. So suiciding without doing much else and losing = less exp and credits than give your best and lose. Doing nothing and live til the end of the battle though, that might be better than do your best, die, and lose since you will get a bonus for surviving.

jodgi #134 Posted 24 September 2012 - 01:54 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 39189 battles
  • 780
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostPernumbra, on 24 September 2012 - 12:37 PM, said:

Of course the camo system is Working as Intended™, just like the AFK/reward system....

At least if they gave the comouflage figures we would know for sure that the camouflage system was another example of Working as Intended

:facepalmic:

I've noticed that Vallter on the NA side has stated some times that they're withholding more detailed information because the security guys(!?) don't want some other entity to clone WoT.

It sounds almost plausible...

Posted Image

del500780009 #135 Posted 24 September 2012 - 02:01 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 1 battle
  • 950
  • Member since:
    06-05-2011

View PostHomer_J, on 21 September 2012 - 02:21 PM, said:

EXP yes, credits no.

But if you had been paying attention to Snib's series then it's all pretty irrelevant, being on the winning team is more important than actually doing anything.  But most of us had figured that out long ago.

Winning is only one of several factors here. It's the combination of winning + high tier + all enemies killed that gives these outcomes. There are other combinations of winning that don't give these "unfair" outcomes as outlined here. The least profitable being winning + low tier + few enemies killed. A good player on the losing side in this scenario will fare much better than an AFK player on the winning side.

St4n said:

Team bonus:
Every destroyed enemy tank adds an amount of exp (equal to the exp you would get for killing it from full hp without bonuses for modul/crew-damage or tier-difference) to the team-pool.
At the end of the match the team-pool is divided trough all players (usually 15) and each one gets the same amount of exp from it. (No matter if the player is dead or alive at the end.)

-----

As tier X tanks have an average of 2000hp there is arround 30,000hp in the pool. The damage the AMX50B has done is worth arround 1.1% of that pool while the teambonus for every player is 6.6% of that pool.
That 1.1% the AMX50B gained with his one shot could be indeed less than the bonus for surviving, because 1.1% isn't much.

St4n should be given more likes for this. He knows his sh**. :Smile_great:

Torsionierer #136 Posted 25 September 2012 - 03:48 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 108 battles
  • 115
  • Member since:
    11-01-2011
wuha - nice - thanks Snib - You're conform with using the SiteScreenshot on my playertests on various Magazine-Websites? :Smile_Default:

Snib #137 Posted 25 September 2012 - 03:59 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 18888 battles
  • 3,307
  • Member since:
    07-16-2010

View PostTorsionierer, on 25 September 2012 - 03:48 PM, said:

wuha - nice - thanks Snib - You're conform with using the SiteScreenshot on my playertests on various Magazine-Websites? :Smile_Default:
try to rephrase it please, because I'm not sure I understood that

Torsionierer #138 Posted 25 September 2012 - 04:14 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 108 battles
  • 115
  • Member since:
    11-01-2011

View PostSnib, on 25 September 2012 - 03:59 PM, said:

try to rephrase it please, because I'm not sure I understood that

I wan't to put your made and shown "proof" in my Player-tests on the Website of various gaming magazines - a very nice example showing one part of the absurd mechanics in WoT even WG themself can't deny anymore :Smile_Default:

Rozbrus #139 Posted 25 September 2012 - 04:25 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 11929 battles
  • 811
  • Member since:
    05-26-2011
I really hope something is done with those afk morons. But what surprised me, when I ask my team to report an afker, half of them asks how and the other half asks why and one even asked if I am paid by Wargaming. Has the game sunk so low that afkers are now not only tolerated, but even defended????

Snib #140 Posted 25 September 2012 - 04:29 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 18888 battles
  • 3,307
  • Member since:
    07-16-2010

View PostTorsionierer, on 25 September 2012 - 04:14 PM, said:

I wan't to put your made and shown "proof" in my Player-tests on the Website of various gaming magazines - a very nice example showing one part of the absurd mechanics in WoT even WG themself can't deny anymore :Smile_Default:
Can't stop you. Just make it clear in your reviews that you and I are different persons please.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users