The REAL reason people AFK ranked matches

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

14 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Here's a scenario for you:

Player 1 is camping home the entire time. The enemy pokes at them a few times, realises they never leave home, and proceeds to 5v4 the rest of the map, only sweeping into home to kill the bunker after wiping the rest of the team. Because the other points are almost permanently held by the other team, this player gets top defence.

Player 2 spends the entire match on far, beating their head against a bunker they can't kill. They get top offence because they're fighting on an enemy-held point the entire match, even though they never score a single point for their team. Constant combat means they might snipe top healing and/or damage too. Accounting for both Player 1, Player 2, and the enemy bunker, the game is now effectively 4v3.

Players 3 and 4 are more concerned about chasing kills than points, making it very easy for an enemy player to pull them off point. They'll share top kills and one of them might get top damage, because they're regularly getting kills off point, but they're not doing much to secure mid or far. Because they're fighting together, one might even score top resses.

Player 5 is actually trying to win the game - trying to secure mid or pushing to far to try to help player 2. But they're offset by two enemy players doing the same thing.

Who really deserves to get nothing in this scenario?

All 5 of them because they LOST and LOSING is LOSING

But if I had to choose anyone from this hypothetical to award pity points to(because that's what pips for losing are) it would be 2, 3, 4, and 5. Player 1 is a total moron in this incredibly unlikely scenario because they aren't even likely to get top defense because progress towards top defense is only made if a point is being contested, if you get kills inside or around a friendly or contested node, or recapping a friendly node. What player 1 is doing is essentially afking with extra steps and they should be banned from ranked for forever, put down the 🥦pipe, and clean their room. 😄

And I would rather have any one of the others on my team personally because at least they're doing something compared to the AFKs which do nothing.

14 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Now, I don't think I've seen all four of these in a match... but I've seen three, and loading too much on top stats would encourage it. You also don't need more than two to start squeezing out the top stats that you might get from playing properly. Let's say you just have the two easily-lured-off-point kill-hunters, but you also have a decent decapper and support. The decapper should get top offense by default, the healer should get top healing and is likely to get top resses if they have a res skill, and you're competing with the healer for top defence and the kill hunters fighting miles off point for damage and kills.

14 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Second place in multiple categories can still be a significant contribution to the team, and your aim should always be to do whatever is appropriate to push your team's score up - even if that means you're doing a little of everything and you're therefore likely to end up coming second in most or all categories and top in nothing.

Allowing more thresholds for scoring pips off points would, I think, suffice to ensure there's always an incentive to do just a bit better. There are a lot of ways to game top stats, but it's pretty hard to push the team score up without contributing to increasing the chance of a comeback. If you really want to punish afkers, there could be some thresholds in place, like if someone scores below 15% of the team in all categories they're deemed as having not made a meaningful contribution and docked pips. But the system needs to be one that rewards contribution and not gaming top stats, or people will start trying to game a top stat or two the moment they think their team is unlikely to win.

Like I said before, you already get extra pips per top stat. It's been that way since ranked was added. People could already try to load up on top stats if they wanted to for extra pips in the face of a loss. My issue is with the 3 you get just for being there. It's +1 pip per top stat and +3 just for being present in the match. At least the players with top stats try and contribute something even if unintentionally. The AFKs contribute nothing at all and yet they still get the equivalent of getting 3 top stats just because they showed up to the match, much to their team's chagrin.

It's all petty anyways. They shouldn't be fighting over loser rewards, there should really just not be any loser rewards. That's the best motivator for concentrated effort. Try, win, or get nothing, that's competition. The loser rewards should go to and should have always been in unranked.

[Bladestrom.6425]

On 2/5/2024 at 10:02 PM, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

All 5 of them because they LOST and LOSING is LOSING

But if I had to choose anyone from this hypothetical to award pity points to(because that's what pips for losing are) it would be 2, 3, 4, and 5. Player 1 is a total moron in this incredibly unlikely scenario because they aren't even likely to get top defense because progress towards top defense is only made if a point is being contested, if you get kills inside or around a friendly or contested node, or recapping a friendly node. What player 1 is doing is essentially afking with extra steps and they should be banned from ranked for forever, put down the 🥦pipe, and clean their room. 😄

And I would rather have any one of the others on my team personally because at least they're doing something compared to the AFKs which do nothing.

Like I said before, you already get extra pips per top stat. It's been that way since ranked was added. People could already try to load up on top stats if they wanted to for extra pips in the face of a loss. My issue is with the 3 you get just for being there. It's +1 pip per top stat and +3 just for being present in the match. At least the players with top stats try and contribute something even if unintentionally. The AFKs contribute nothing at all and yet they still get the equivalent of getting 3 top stats just because they showed up to the match, much to their team's chagrin.

It's all petty anyways. They shouldn't be fighting over loser rewards, there should really just not be any loser rewards. That's the best motivator for concentrated effort. Try, win, or get nothing, that's competition. The loser rewards should go to and should have always been in unranked.

I think your right re stats, make it 0 for just being present, and add more types of top stats instead, including some reward like say1 pip for being in combat for 75% of battle duration when not dead, which means even new players can be rewards by trying hard.  

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

On 2/5/2024 at 1:47 AM, draxynnic.3719 said:

Here's a scenario for you:

Player 1 is camping home the entire time. The enemy pokes at them a few times, realises they never leave home, and proceeds to 5v4 the rest of the map, only sweeping into home to kill the bunker after wiping the rest of the team. Because the other points are almost permanently held by the other team, this player gets top defence.

Player 2 spends the entire match on far, beating their head against a bunker they can't kill. They get top offence because they're fighting on an enemy-held point the entire match, even though they never score a single point for their team. Constant combat means they might snipe top healing and/or damage too. Accounting for both Player 1, Player 2, and the enemy bunker, the game is now effectively 4v3.

Players 3 and 4 are more concerned about chasing kills than points, making it very easy for an enemy player to pull them off point. They'll share top kills and one of them might get top damage, because they're regularly getting kills off point, but they're not doing much to secure mid or far. Because they're fighting together, one might even score top resses.

Player 5 is actually trying to win the game - trying to secure mid or pushing to far to try to help player 2. But they're offset by two enemy players doing the same thing.

Who really deserves to get nothing in this scenario?

Nobody does is the answer you're looking for, but nobody will if they play that properly.

If player 1 is bunker enough that they can stand on home and defend it unless they're outnumbered, players 3, 4 and 5 should be able to swing back home and kill whoever is amassing a group to push player 1. This is in 3 / 4s best interest, because they're killhunting. If they want top kills, they have to go where the opponent is.

if 3 and 4 are regularly getting kills instead of being kited, and player 2 has a build that lets them contest far all game instead of dying repeatedly at far (Well enough to get top healing/damage, since offence only counts on contested points), then this game is close to a winstate that hinges upon coordination between player 5, 4 and 3 swinging between home and far and supporting wherever there is enemy activity. 

player 5 gets top offense if they decap/cap mid as they're moving, since they're the only one actively pushing a point that is contested or owned.

Player 5 will never be in a situation where they are getting outnumbered/offset by 2 people unless they make an unwise play and go to far while the enemy team is respawning and 3/4 is not with them, or go to mid while 3/4 are not actively chasing whoever is trying to push mid. If they play off the momentum of 3/4, there is potential for a havoc group that not only makes this winnable, but potentially divides participation across all players in the case of a loss. 1 gets defense/damage, 2 gets healing, 3/4 get kills, and 5 gets offense and potentially kills, based on how tight they run with 3/4.  

The only person that needs to be watched closely is player 2, since 3/4/5 will likely see individuals stacking to push 1, and 2 could be killed by a respawn stack with almost no warning. If you ask 2 to say when outnumbered, you can mitigate that. All 5 has to do is decide whether you should be helping 3/4 or 2. And if nobody is trying to take mid, 5 take mid. 

This is kind of what I mean when I say if you have enough people tryharding for tiles, you might get something workable. Granted it can indeed go wrong, but there's probably ways to tailor the extreme disaster matches. 

 

Edited February 7 by Azure The Heartless.3261

[AIex.4105]

ppl would not afk if the PVP was balanced.

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

8 minutes ago, AIex.4105 said:

ppl would not afk if the PVP was balanced.

I've seen people ragequit tons of balanced games. Sometimes people are just sore losers. 

PvP isn't balanced yet though, no.

Edited February 7 by Azure The Heartless.3261

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

1 hour ago, Bladestrom.6425 said:

I think your right re stats, make it 0 for just being present, and add more types of top stats instead, including some reward like say1 pip for being in combat for 75% of battle duration when not dead, which means even new players can be rewards by trying hard.  

Appreciate the feedback and I like your idea. I'm all for rewards that encourage people to engage with PvP win or lose.

When it comes to new players specifically I think unranked should really have pips and reward chests too, exactly as they are now so that they can be rewarded as they learn the game. When it comes to ranked, I think pip gains should be doubled there with the caveat that if you lose and fail to contribute enough to not be held responsible for that L, then you get nothing.

We could see how long the bots and afks last in ranked when they get absolutely nothing out of it and I encourage everyone to point and laugh as they're bullied out of this game they helped ruin 😄

[draxynnic.3719]

4 hours ago, Azure The Heartless.3261 said:

Nobody does is the answer you're looking for, but nobody will if they play that properly.

If player 1 is bunker enough that they can stand on home and defend it unless they're outnumbered, players 3, 4 and 5 should be able to swing back home and kill whoever is amassing a group to push player 1. This is in 3 / 4s best interest, because they're killhunting. If they want top kills, they have to go where the opponent is.

if 3 and 4 are regularly getting kills instead of being kited, and player 2 has a build that lets them contest far all game instead of dying repeatedly at far (Well enough to get top healing/damage, since offence only counts on contested points), then this game is close to a winstate that hinges upon coordination between player 5, 4 and 3 swinging between home and far and supporting wherever there is enemy activity. 

player 5 gets top offense if they decap/cap mid as they're moving, since they're the only one actively pushing a point that is contested or owned.

Player 5 will never be in a situation where they are getting outnumbered/offset by 2 people unless they make an unwise play and go to far while the enemy team is respawning and 3/4 is not with them, or go to mid while 3/4 are not actively chasing whoever is trying to push mid. If they play off the momentum of 3/4, there is potential for a havoc group that not only makes this winnable, but potentially divides participation across all players in the case of a loss. 1 gets defense/damage, 2 gets healing, 3/4 get kills, and 5 gets offense and potentially kills, based on how tight they run with 3/4.  

The only person that needs to be watched closely is player 2, since 3/4/5 will likely see individuals stacking to push 1, and 2 could be killed by a respawn stack with almost no warning. If you ask 2 to say when outnumbered, you can mitigate that. All 5 has to do is decide whether you should be helping 3/4 or 2. And if nobody is trying to take mid, 5 take mid. 

This is kind of what I mean when I say if you have enough people tryharding for tiles, you might get something workable. Granted it can indeed go wrong, but there's probably ways to tailor the extreme disaster matches. 

 

Player 2 is getting top offence in the scenario I'm describing because being on any point captured by the enemy counts for offense, even if you're not actually making progress because it's defended. You're counted as contesting if you're on a point that isn't yours regardless of if you're making progress or not.

Sure, if there's a big enough skill gap you can win despite people doing stupid things, but I'm sure you can see that if player 1 had the awareness to know when it's better to camp and when they're being left and can swing around to help mid, player 2 found something more useful to do than banging their head against the other team's bunker, and players 3 and 4 focused more on helping their team get points rather than kill-hunting, the odds of a win would be much better. And if this behaviour starts when the team is already losing, it's not going to be conducive to a comeback.

The complexity of the scenario is that each of these behaviours, in moderation, CAN contribute to a win if used appropriately. There are times when the enemy roamer is constantly going for a decap and leaving a home guard is worthwhile. Constant pressure on far might keep a stronger enemy player pinned there. Sometimes, finishing off a wounded target is more valuable than trying to finish a cap right away, especially if the point is already decapped. So none of them should be being punished by an algorithm that can't recognise a good play from a bad one.

I think there is value in having a system that detects when a player just isn't contributing at all. Someone who never leaves base for half the match should be easy to identify, and after that the algorithm can be made to identify other means of afking until it reaches the point where fooling the algorithm is enough work that you might as well just keep playing. But the point I'm making is that basing everything on top stats would create perverse incentives that could get players to chase top stats rather than trying for a comeback.

Edited February 8 by draxynnic.3719

[Antho.7831]

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/142881-why-the-mmr-keeps-putting-double-duo-q-against-full-solo-team-remoove-duoq/?do=findComment&comment=2073715