Reward Structure Changes Mentioned in the Postmortem

[Firebeard.1746]

22 hours ago, Infusion.7149 said:

People are probably going to be up in arms about outnumbered but I feel as though unless you actively hunt for outnumbered maps you will only have ~10% outnumbered. Is the PPK removed if you are outnumbered after these changes?

Instead of just slapping 1 base pip onto things I would have had a weekly vendor for emblems to WVW kegs of exp for low rank players similar to the ones in guildhalls. Higher ranked players should have emblem to mystic clovers to incentivize active play (IMO). In addition, if taking away wall repair and such why keep daily veteran creature slayer? It should be replaced by dolyak defender.

edit: see also https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Special:RunQuery/WvW_skirmish_pip_query?

I think the pip system is just bad, even with this improvement, even with max pips, you'd still be hard pressed to beat raiding in an organized setting as far as % of legendary progress/unit of time even if you got to max rank really fast. 

I feel like all of the game modes should be competitive with each other. i'm not saying nerf raiding, but I'm saying buff doing valuable things for your team. I would give a direct Memory of battlle and ticket conversion for each emblem, and add one for successfully completing defender events (not repairing, but actually fighting attackers). You want people attacking enemy bases, defending theirs and killing enemy players. Those increase team score and should be rewarded. 

[Nimris.3781]

@Josh Davis.7865

Honsestly after this week WvW match i can say that proposed changes are absolutly terrible, here is why:

my link, RoF+Vabbi are badly losing current match, 257points vs 307 and 312 for other servers and as you can guess this reflects my pip gains, here are my stats:

• 250 top war score
• 180 2-nd war score
• 258 3-rd war score
• 181 bronze rank
• 181 wooden chest
• 405 outnumbered

and you might think, i was activly chasing outnumbered.  well often i didnt have to, as even EBG was outnumbered sometimes.

Outnumbered buff serves as incentive for people to join maps that are outnumbered and do something there but also is balancing pip gains for servers that are often on 3rd place. Right now you can be always 1st and never get outnumber or be always 3rd and have it most of time and both sides will have simmilar pip gain.

Everyone is so focus on chasing down tiny portion of poppulation that activly seek outnumbered, that they completly miss the big picture. With these changes people that care about pips will avoid playing when their server is losing skirmish.

Besides, the truth is noone would activly chase outnumbered or abuse wall repair if reward system was simply rewarding for play time. Finishing dimond chest shouldnt feel like a chore and everyone that enjoys WvW should overcap pips to get reapetable dimond chest for more rewards.

However if you want a bandaid fix for now, this is what i would personaly do:

• +1 pip for rank 1-149 is absolutly fine and change pips for skirmish to 5/6/7  (for a total of +3 pips increase)
• drop outnumbered bonus to +3.

this way everyone gains something before alliances arrive and it should make wvw feel a bit more rewarding for time spend.

Edited October 22, 2021 by Nimris.3781

[Otter.3841]

8 minutes ago, Infusion.7149 said:

Which means in the new system you would lose 105 pips from outnumbered and gain 2x Commitment = 188 pips. A net gain even in your case.

 

8 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

And under that new system you would have 105 less outnumbered pips and 150+ extra regular pips. So what what is the problem you have? How is loosing outnumbered a "big deal" when you would have gotten considerably more pips had the new system already been in place?

There is a point where outnumbered will beat out the extra pips for sure, but you're not there. Even the guy above with 36% of his total ticks being outnumbered wasnt there.

Let me say this again since everyone wants to keep acting like I'm wanting the Outnumbered instead of the +2. I'm literally not. As stated many times in this forum, I'm all for the +2. Pips in WvW are slow enough as is. My point was, is, and continues to be: There is no reason to removed Outnumbered. It harms absolutely nobody to help out people who play on low pop maps or play during off hours. And if the Alliances creates a 2% population difference, thats great. But i still suspect that Outnumbered will occur. And when it does. Say, at off hours, it would be nice for those people playing Outnumbered to get some benefit from it.

[TeamTebow.5274]

3 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

How is loosing outnumbered a "big deal" when you would have gotten considerably more pips had the new system already been in place?

I feel like this misses the forest for the trees a bit. The big deal is more in where incentives lie. Will people be willing to play in outnumbered zones without getting any additional rewards, when they could just follow a zerg? People might end up with a net-increase, but the incentives are different. It'd be like removing the commander pip bonus, but instead everyone gets a flat +1 pip bonus for no extra effort. Everyone is getting more pips, but theres no longer any reason to put in the effort to lead groups.

 

I'm still not sure why its such a crucial change it needs to roll out with restructuring, rather than at least letting the restructure settle out a bit, or why we're even concerned about the least rewarding mode possibly giving out a bit more rewards.

[Infusion.7149]

3 minutes ago, Soul SilverRose.6351 said:

 

Let me say this again since everyone wants to keep acting like I'm wanting the Outnumbered instead of the +2. I'm literally not. As stated many times in this forum, I'm all for the +2. Pips in WvW are slow enough as is. My point was, is, and continues to be: There is no reason to removed Outnumbered. It harms absolutely nobody to help out people who play on low pop maps or play during off hours. And if the Alliances creates a 2% population difference, thats great. But i still suspect that Outnumbered will occur. And when it does. Say, at off hours, it would be nice for those people playing Outnumbered to get some benefit from it.

Are you aware if a team has 2 people less they can still be outnumbered?

If team A has 30 , team B has 32 , team C has 35 then team B does not get outnumbered.
If team A has  5 people, team B has 10 people, team C has 35 people then team B does not get outnumbered.

As far as I am aware the reward track bonus and magic find bonus is retained, that is the benefit.

[subversiontwo.7501]

It feels like alot of the people responding to this thread has failed to read @Josh Davis.7865 comments about what promted the change. The changes were promted by the backdrop of that Alliances will make worlds more even and thus less prone to give the outnumbered buff to begin with. The better balance becomes the less of a factor outnumbered will be. If the system achieves ideally then the new pips may be more than what you would get from outnumbered then or do from outnumbered on average today. Taking the worst (or most rewarding) examples that exist today makes for pretty moot arguments as they are both outliers and a result of imbalances that we hope to do away with. 405 outnumbered pips, for example, isn't normative under either system.

Ed., if we're talking about the reward tracks and item progression, the big culprit in WvW is that the marks leading to ascended pitstops for new players do not accrue at anywhere near okay levels. If people are to be able to gear for WvW through WvW then those marks should drop at a rate where it is reasonably attainable to build the precursors without PvE / tradeskills. Tickets taking longer than PvP or PvE (especially for your first set, where PvE has a bonus) is one thing. However, the marks dropping but dropping nowhere near more than just being a little supplement is more of a threshold for players into gearing for/in WvW.

Edited October 22, 2021 by subversiontwo.7501

[Otter.3841]

So you want to deprive Team A of any bonus simply because Team B doesn't get it? Even though Team A is outnumbered by two sides? You are literally saying that the team with the least people should get punished because Team B has more people than them but still less than C. That point is not really relevant. Do you know what Outnumbered means? If you don't have the least people, you are not Outnumbered. Plain and simple. @Infusion.7149

Edited October 22, 2021 by Soul SilverRose.6351

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

1 minute ago, subversiontwo.7501 said:

It feels like alot of the people responding to this thread has failed to read @Josh Davis.7865 comments about what promted the change. The changes were promted by the backdrop of that Alliances will make worlds more even and thus less prone to give the outnumbered buff to begin with. The better balance becomes the less of a factor outnumbered will be. If the system achieves ideally then the new pips may be more than what you would get from outnumbered then or do from outnumbered on average today. Taking the worst (or most rewarding) examples that exist today makes for pretty moot arguments as they are both outliers and a result of imbalances that we hope to do away with.

You're right in that this is getting lost in the discussion on pips. When this all gets fully implemented there should be fewer instances of the Outnumbered buff, which means that were was going to be fewer pips overall without any changes. This change will result in more pips overall once the new system is fully in place, which is a positive thing.

[Legionnaire.9478]

14 minutes ago, Infusion.7149 said:

Are you aware if a team has 2 people less they can still be outnumbered?

If team A has 30 , team B has 32 , team C has 35 then team B does not get outnumbered.
If team A has  5 people, team B has 10 people, team C has 35 people then team B does not get outnumbered.

As far as I am aware the reward track bonus and magic find bonus is retained, that is the benefit.

 

 

Okay but how does punishing a lower server population by taking away outnumbered benefit them in anyways? Why are we punishing low population servers before alliances are even out? If they want to monitor the effects of outnumbered, then they should wait till alliances are released to see if outnumbered is needed. Not take it away now when alliances are probably a year out. All you're doing is making it less incentive for low server populations to play during non-peak hours.

 

Also who cares if people chase the outnumbered pip bonuses? They are still capping camps, and taking sentry points, repairing walls and stuff for their server. 

 

The +2 pip bonus is great, I support that idea due to how low pips are to get now. Maybe instead of removing outnumbered completely they just bring it down 3 extra pips. I also am one that doesn't actively hunt down outnumbered pips being a roamer, but getting it while roaming is pretty nice. I enjoy that extra bonus and dopamine rush. 

 

Reward Tracks are also pretty terrible the way it stands right now. You either join the zerg or have slower overall progress if you are a roamer or run a small havoc squad. 

 

In all the honestly the entire wvw rewards need to be changed, but that can be addresses after they finish restructuring wvw and get alliances out. It's amazing how many people are like "Ya take away extra rewards for playing a game mode that already suffers from bad rewards and real life time it takes".

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by Legionnaire.9478

[Gotejjeken.1267]

7 hours ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

Have you considered that maybe one button gameplay shouldn't be the deciding factor?

Where are you getting 'one button gameplay'? 

Had a siege of air keep later that night, with a group of 10 of us vs. 10 of them--the difference is the 10 defenders sieged up the place and made it a whole lot harder to get into.  If they wouldn't have done that and done the 'wall down let's fight' strat, they probably would have gotten rolled (as they seemed to have more newer players among their ranks).

Regardless of who gets rolled though, it felt WAY more WvW then just two blobs trying to whittle eachother for 10 minutes.  

Edited October 22, 2021 by Gotejjeken.1267

[Zyreva.1078]

8 minutes ago, TeamTebow.5274 said:

I feel like this misses the forest for the trees a bit. The big deal is more in where incentives lie. Will people be willing to play in outnumbered zones without getting any additional rewards, when they could just follow a zerg? People might end up with a net-increase, but the incentives are different. It'd be like removing the commander pip bonus, but instead everyone gets a flat +1 pip bonus for no extra effort. Everyone is getting more pips, but theres no longer any reason to put in the effort to lead groups.

 

I'm still not sure why its such a crucial change it needs to roll out with restructuring, rather than at least letting the restructure settle out a bit, or why we're even concerned about the least rewarding mode possibly giving out a bit more rewards.

Playing on an outnumbered map does not equal "putting in more effort" as it has nothing to do with the actual map state. Players who primarily play for the rewards are not only attempting to maximise rewards (= chase outnumbered) but typically also going to try and minimize the effort (afking at spawn to flip a nearby camp once a while), which is not beneficial for the game mode. Rewards shouldn't be the main driving force in a PvP game mode, because they tend to shape player behaviour in a very anti PvP manner.

 

15 minutes ago, Nimris.3781 said:

Finishing dimond chest shouldnt feel like a chore

If it does feel like a chore, you picked the wrong game mode.

 

3 minutes ago, Legionnaire.9478 said:

Reward Tracks are also pretty terrible the way it stands right now. You either join the zerg or have slower overall progress if you are a roamer or run a small havoc squad. 

Reward track progress is not increased by zerging or any other specific play style.

[Legionnaire.9478]

2 minutes ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

Reward track progress is not increased by zerging or any other specific play style.

 

 

Interesting cause when I roam, My reward track  gain is incredibly lower compared to when I join a zerg. Because you are able to capture more stuff with a zerg, and keep activity high compared to roaming.

So it definitely favors joining up with the zerg to maximize reward track. But I don't like following a tag around, and due to that I do suffer from less participation rewards. 

Edited October 22, 2021 by Legionnaire.9478

[Gotejjeken.1267]

4 minutes ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

Reward track progress is not increased by zerging or any other specific play style.

 

Good luck keeping up pips if they take participation credit away all the non-zerg activities (like repairing). 

Not everyone is a roamer  that's just going to go take a camp--some people truly are better behind a wall playing 'hands off' defense.  Which would be repairing walls, building siege, refreshing siege, scouting from walls, etc.

It may annoy the 'fight people', but it is a legitimate strategy in the mode...and if someone doesn't like it they can go to PvP.  

Edited October 22, 2021 by Gotejjeken.1267

[Zyreva.1078]

4 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

Where are you getting 'one button gameplay'? 

Had a siege of air keep later that night, with a group of 10 of us vs. 10 of them--the difference is the 10 defenders sieged up the place and made it a whole lot harder to get into.  If they wouldn't have done that and done the 'wall down let's fight' strat, they probably would have gotten rolled (as they seemed to have more newer players among their ranks).

Regardless of who gets rolled though, it felt WAY more WvW then just two blobs trying to whittle eachother for 10 minutes.  

 

Well, using siege = 1 button game play and you were complaining that a fight for an objective was decided by players actually fighting instead of siege only. Now you state the opposite and tell me, siege is actually impactful? So what's your problem exactly?

 

Just now, Legionnaire.9478 said:

 

 

Interesting cause when I roamer, My reward track bonus is incredibly lower compared to when I join a zerg. Because you are able to capture more stuff with a zerg, and keep activity high compared to roaming?

 

So it definitely favors joining up with the zerg to maximize reward track. But I don't like following a tag around, and due to that I do suffer from less participation rewards. 

 

You only need to kill a player or cap something every 10 min (5 for sentries) to keep participation maxed out. If you can't do that as roamer, the issue is on you, not the reward system.

[Otter.3841]

1 minute ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

Playing on an outnumbered map does not equal "putting in more effort" as it has nothing to do with the actual map state. Players who primarily play for the rewards are not only attempting to maximise rewards (= chase outnumbered) but typically also going to try and minimize the effort (afking at spawn to flip a nearby camp once a while), which is not beneficial for the game mode. Rewards shouldn't be the main driving force in a PvP game mode, because they tend to shape player behaviour in a very anti PvP manner.

 

If it does feel like a chore, you picked the wrong game mode.

 

Reward track progress is not increased by zerging or any other specific play style.

First point, roaming is definitely more work than zerging. Point two, despite being leeches, AFK camp capping is still beneficial as it disrupts enmy supply lines, ups our world score, and gives us free supply. (Have you played WvW?)

 Third point, chores dont have to be  miserable but they doesnt make them less of a chore. The value of one's personal time and desire for rewards is what makes it worth it or not.

Fourth, in the sense of pips which are tied to participation, it is definitely increased. Zerging is much more capable of keeping you at max participation at all times versus roaming. And with participation being in a state of limbo at the moment, its more favored towards mindlessly zerging.

[silvermember.8941]

18 minutes ago, subversiontwo.7501 said:

It feels like alot of the people responding to this thread has failed to read @Josh Davis.7865 comments about what promted the change. The changes were promted by the backdrop of that Alliances will make worlds more even and thus less prone to give the outnumbered buff to begin with. The better balance becomes the less of a factor outnumbered will be. If the system achieves ideally then the new pips may be more than what you would get from outnumbered then or do from outnumbered on average today. Taking the worst (or most rewarding) examples that exist today makes for pretty moot arguments as they are both outliers and a result of imbalances that we hope to do away with. 405 outnumbered pips, for example, isn't normative under either system.

Ed., if we're talking about the reward tracks and item progression, the big culprit in WvW is that the marks leading to ascended pitstops for new players do not accrue at anywhere near okay levels. If people are to be able to gear for WvW through WvW then those marks should drop at a level where it is attainable to build the precursors without PvE / tradeskills. Tickets taking longer than PvP or PvE (especially for your first set, where PvE has a bonus) is one thing. However, the marks dropping but dropping nowhere near more than just being a little supplement is more of a threshold for players into gearing for WvW.

Yes, once alliances gets fully implemented it would be a great change. However, RIGHT now, taking out the outnumbered buff is a terrible idea since servers are inbalanced.

 

If Arena Net wants to change stuff after alliance are fully implemented, great. We will all cheer for them, for now we need outnumbered buff.

[Legionnaire.9478]

5 minutes ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

You only need to kill a player or cap something every 10 min (5 for sentries) to keep participation maxed out. If you can't do that as roamer, the issue is on you, not the reward system.

 I do kill a player and cap things. Maybe not every 10 minutes. Because there are variables at play that can stop that from happening especially if you are playing during non-peak hours.  And if you get into a really good fight, I have had fights last 10+ minutes. 

 

Once again joining a zerg will maximize the gains you get with reward tracks. Because you are constantly running around, capping things, fighting enemy zergs etc. It still hugely benefits the zerg/blobbing style. Not sure how you can deny that....

 

But I am getting off topic. The reward track can be changed after restructuring. The main thing I am against is the outnumbered pip loss.

Edited October 22, 2021 by Legionnaire.9478

[TeamTebow.5274]

18 minutes ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

Playing on an outnumbered map does not equal "putting in more effort" as it has nothing to do with the actual map state. Players who primarily play for the rewards are not only attempting to maximise rewards (= chase outnumbered) but typically also going to try and minimize the effort (afking at spawn to flip a nearby camp once a while), which is not beneficial for the game mode. Rewards shouldn't be the main driving force in a PvP game mode, because they tend to shape player behaviour in a very anti PvP manner.

 

So make changes to eliminate those minimal effort maximal rewards choices? I don't see how outnumbered is to blame there.

 

Rewards are literally the only driving force behind WvW,. Players aren't exactly playing for a Win/Lose screen like most queued PvP, they're doing whatever the game has decided is good to do. In structured PvP, if afking in base and then popping out was somehow beneficial to winning, people would do it. likewise, if WvW misplaces incentives where that behaviour is rewarded, then people are going to do it. If WvW gave equal rewards for taking a castle as a camp, then people probably wouldn't bother with sieging castles. Rewards are the driving force of WvW in place of winning/losing. With no rewards, people would probably load into WvW, say "whats the point?" and leave . Obviously they should enjoy the process of earning rewards, but the rewards are still important.

 

Effort needs to be put into making these incentives match what they consider healthy PvP, and for the most part they have. Outnumbered is good because without it, people would probably coalesce into large zergs exclusively, but it could be exploited to allow low effort behaviour. Why not target that low effort behaviour? Or is the goal here to make some BLs just 1v1s or just completely uncontested?

Edited October 22, 2021 by TeamTebow.5274

[Zyreva.1078]

3 minutes ago, Soul SilverRose.6351 said:

First point, roaming is definitely more work than zerging. Point two, despite being leeches, AFK camp capping is still beneficial as it disrupts enmy supply lines, ups our world score, and gives us free supply. (Have you played WvW?)

 Third point, chores dont have to be  miserable but they doesnt make them less of a chore. The value of one's personal time and desire for rewards is what makes it worth it or not.

Fourth, in the sense of pips which are tied to participation, it is definitely increased. Zerging is much more capable of keeping you at max participation at all times versus roaming. And with participation being in a state of limbo at the moment, its more favored towards mindlessly zerging.

First, roaming has nothing to do with playing on an outnumbered map. It can be done on any map.

Second, flipping spawn camps back and forth has very low impact on the map state and score and certainly does not warrant extra rewards (they are going to get flipped anyway, doesn't matter if it's by 1 or 20 players).

Third, keeping participation up as (solo) roamer is very easy as long someone is actively playing. Zerging still grants more rewards (directly and indirectly), but not in form of reward track progress and it is also something that is not impacted by the upcoming changes in any way.

[Charybdis.9042]

21 hours ago, TeamTebow.5274 said:

Why not leave outnumbered in, see how things play out, and then tweak it? Changing multiple things in one swoop just makes it unnecessarily harder to measure the actual impacts.

The "participation on repair" might just be enough for pip farmers to keep in tier 3 (and not need to do any other WvW content), so that's targetting one behaviour with two changes.

It might also have been found that pip farmers were enough to throw off the matching algorithm off as well (activity is not the same as engaging gameplay). All speculation as the calculations themselves haven't been described in full.

[Zyreva.1078]

3 minutes ago, TeamTebow.5274 said:

 

So make changes to eliminate those minimal effort maximal rewards choices? I don't see how outnumbered is to blame there.

 

Rewards are literally the only driving force behind WvW,. Players aren't exactly playing for a Win/Lose screen like most queued PvP, they're doing whatever the game has decided is good to do. In structured PvP, if afking in base and then popping out was somehow beneficial to winning, people would do it. likewise, if WvW misplaces incentives where that behaviour is rewarded, then people are going to do it. If WvW gave equal rewards for taking a castle as a camp, then people probably wouldn't bother with sieging castles. Rewards are the driving force of PvP in place of winning/losing. With no rewards, people would load into WvW, say "whats the point?". Obviously they should enjoy the process of earning rewards, but the rewards are still important.

WvW used to have basically zero rewards, heck, players were losing gold by playing it, yet it was more active than now. The best reward is enjoyable game play.

 

3 minutes ago, TeamTebow.5274 said:

 

Effort needs to be put into making these incentives match what they consider healthy PvP, and for the most part they have. Outnumbered is good because without it, people would probably coalesce into large zergs exclusively, but it could be exploited to allow low effort behaviour. Why not target that low effort behaviour? Or is the goal here to make some BLs just 1v1s or just completely uncontested?

There is absolutely zero effort - reward balance in WvW, nor does the current reward system incentivise "healthy PvP". "Outnumbered" also does not disincentivise players from stacking in huge zergs. Most do it anyway, and those who don't either prefer smaller scale game play - unrelated to the outnumbered buff -  or don't want to actively play at all. Getting rid of the latter is no big loss.

[Otter.3841]

8 minutes ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

First, roaming has nothing to do with playing on an outnumbered map. It can be done on any map.

Second, flipping spawn camps back and forth has very low impact on the map state and score and certainly does not warrant extra rewards (they are going to get flipped anyway, doesn't matter if it's by 1 or 20 players).

Third, keeping participation up as (solo) roamer is very easy as long someone is actively playing. Zerging still grants more rewards (directly and indirectly), but not in form of reward track progress and it is also something that is not impacted by the upcoming changes in any way.

Yeah ok, that tells me all I need to know. I think we can end this little back and forth here. You are trying to avoid the point of any of this and distracting from the real issue. Thank you for your time though.

[Zyreva.1078]

1 minute ago, Soul SilverRose.6351 said:

Yeah ok, that tells me all I need to know. I think we can end this little back and forth here. You are trying to avoid the point of any of this and distracting from the real issue. Thank you for your time though.

What is the real issue?

[Xenesis.6389]

3 hours ago, Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

For me on the wall repairs:

There have been times where garri was just defended and everyone else went off chasing bags and left the walls open and it was just me repairing the damage. It takes a while to repair inner and outer by yourself, to the point that decay starts or will start before I can go tag some other player/guard/objective.

So why should that not grant participation? Should I now leave the walls open and go tag other things to maintain my participation? See where I am going with this?

Afk sieging needs the participation nerf, not repairs. If they remove the participation gain from repairs, then you'll start to see more unrepaired walls and see objectives start to flip more.

 

Reason they leave the objective without repairing probably comes down to saving their supply for the next objective they're attacking(lazy), they don't care if it remains open so the enemy will come back to give them fights(lazy), or they know that worker bee scouts like yourself are around and will do it for them anyways. Maybe if they see less people repairing they may start doing it again.

 

Problem isn't this small window where you repair and get participation, the problem is when a pretend scout sits in an objective all day, repairing walls here and there, and giving out one liner scout reports that aren't even useful and you have to play 20 questions with them to get some answers.

 

Wall repair and afk sieging shouldn't be the major ways to maintain participation for anyone, going out and recapping sentries, camps, ruins, defending and killing players should be the major ways for a scout to maintain participation. Maybe they should remove the participation from doing siege damage(they really should) and wall repair, and increase them on all other defensive events like defending objectives, capturing sentry/camp/towers, and yes even escorting/killing yaks, to motivate players to move around the map. Or if anything, have wall repair give no participation but refresh the timer to 5 mins, giving you time to go out and find something else to get participation.

 

Speaking of scouts, they are so kitten lazy these days, I played mostly scout havoc for a few years and I know the struggle, but sometimes I feel like these one link spamming scouts need a swift kick in the fanny to get them to do something else as even the watchtower does a better job than they do...

/map spammed objective link in chat

/map what's there?

/map it's the enemy!

/map ok... how many?

/map a zerg!

/map no wait maybe 10-15!

/map ok who is it?

/map blue!

/map guild?

/map who

/map what?

/map wall down 40 blue on lords!

Or, you reach the objective and no enemy around and of course the scout doesn't bother to call that they left... 🙄

These are the scouts I don't care to reward for giving little effort to the game mode, the real scouts out taking care of the small stuff deserve some more love.

[Legionnaire.9478]

5 minutes ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

What is the real issue?

The real issue is the loss of pip bonuses with outnumbered. The +2 flat rate pip bonus is nice, but taking away outnumbered pip bonuses well before alliances are even ready. That 1) Punishes lower population servers especially during non-peak hours and 2) They should wait till alliances are ready to monitor if outnumbered is needed. 

 

Currently there is a huge server imbalance which is what alliances are supposed to change to make things fairer.  Don't even know why they feel like removing certain features was the right call  with how imbalance it is. 

Edited October 22, 2021 by Legionnaire.9478