Frontlines: There should not be ANY rewards for 2nd or 3rd place

You should get some rewards for putting in effort and trying, but still losing.
The issue is dead weight gets rewarded.
Perhaps those with less than X contribution (say; player dmg) dont get anything.

This is a really bad idea. This is the fastest way to cultivate an extremely toxic environment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MatchaokaCha

This is a really bad idea. This is the fastest way to cultivate an extremely toxic environment.

---

It's already plenty toxic when 50% of the team does less than 200k damage, 0 kills, pitiful amount of assists and handful of deaths.

I shouldn't have to spend 10 minutes after every frontlines match reporting players because the system allows such players to leech from others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MatchaokaCha

This is a really bad idea. This is the fastest way to cultivate an extremely toxic environment.

---

How is telling people who ELECT to join a "team-based PVP mode" that they must contribute to said PVP or get nothing, toxic??
Even setting the dmg bar low; 100k dmg, would probably prevent 7 players per match from getting rewarded. (Dmg is an example, could be another metric)
Forcing them to participate or not que. Allowing someone who wants to play/try to join.
Enforcing people to do what THEY SIGNED UP FOR, is not toxic.

It is more toxic for a person to join a TEAM based environment, mode, game, or setting, and not do anything constructive to help the team.

A lot of these ideas would kill Frontlines. The only reason Frontlines is popping is because of the rewards people are trying to take away. Back in the day, those rewards did not exist. And it took hours for a match to pop.

I think one has to focus on individual performance rather than team rewards.

If those of us who play regularly can identify non-combatants during the match, or afterwards from the stats summary, SQEX should certainly be able to do so given they have data for individual players over all their matches.

The idea of at least obtaining BH1 once in the match that someone else suggested is one of the better ideas IMO. The only map it potentially falls down is Shatter, which is another reason for removing Shatter from a PvP mode.

One could simply auto-boot players failing to reach that threshold after ~ 8 minutes so replacements can be brought in before the 10-min deadline.

I'm sure even this could be abused by people who are freeloading, but it does provide direct motivation for players to engage and even learn the damn game, and places the onus on SQEX to actually enforce ToS.

Right, I haven't seen anything nearly that bad since 7.1. Certainly if teams are massively lopsided then even BH1 might be a struggle. But in that case your team will lose anyway, so it's a push relative to team-based rewards.

but if you are on the winning team, you get rewarded regardless. its only on the losing teams, that not contributing would mean no/reduced rewards. you would hope that even if you are winning, you are being productive. but definitely, 2nd/3rd spot, if you are doing nothing or just feeding, there should be some way for Square to tell - what buttons were pressed, what movement did they make on the map etc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChrysOCE

but if you are on the winning team, you get rewarded regardless. its only on the losing teams, that not contributing would mean no/reduced rewards. you would hope that even if you are winning, you are being productive. but definitely, 2nd/3rd spot, if you are doing nothing or just feeding, there should be some way for Square to tell - what buttons were pressed, what movement did they make on the map etc

---

Yeah exactly so, and with 24-person teams, I don't see the AFKers being motivated to try based on team rewards. They'll hit 33% same as always.

Frontlines would be DoA with changes like that.

This is a problem around designing it around 24v24v24, it's incredibly saturated, and more often than not you get people in there that either play lethargically, or play to do kill stomping (e.g., don't care about win/loss, but about kill count for achievement)

Whilst it is annoying -- This is a horrible solution, and all it will do in the long run is lend itself to being a more toxic environment than it already is, tbh.

Trying to enforce this is an incredibly bad decision, again, just on saturation alone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaurhz

This is a problem around designing it around 24v24v24, it's incredibly saturated, and more often than not you get people in there that either play lethargically, or play to do kill stomping (e.g., don't care about win/loss, but about kill count for achievement)

Whilst it is annoying -- This is a horrible solution, and all it will do in the long run is lend itself to being a more toxic environment than it already is, tbh.

Trying to enforce this is an incredibly bad decision, again, just on saturation alone.

---

I definitely think the better solution is to suspend players for lethargic play.

But the toxicity is mounting around this issue. A vote kick went through today. This led to an apparent friend of the dismissed ("They weren't AFK, I was talking to them on VC") rallying the party to report the vote kick to the GMs, recommending that whoever initiated the vote kick have their account suspended.

I hope I don't have to report back on how that ended up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mawlzy

I definitely think the better solution is to suspend players for lethargic play.

But the toxicity is mounting around this issue. A vote kick went through today. This led to an apparent friend of the dismissed ("They weren't AFK, I was talking to them on VC") rallying the party to report the vote kick to the GMs, recommending that whoever initiated the vote kick have their account suspended.

I hope I don't have to report back on how that ended up.

---

This is exhausting to constantly be vigilant of and probably not sustainable for GMs to be on constant watch (even though I do wish we had active moderation to begin with). I think killing the incentive for lethargic play is the way to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atreus

This is exhausting to constantly be vigilant of and probably not sustainable for GMs to be on constant watch (even though I do wish we had active moderation to begin with). I think killing the incentive for lethargic play is the way to go.

---

Right, which is why I think extending auto-kick beyond the current 2-min AFK and/or auto-suspensions for repeated sub-standard engagement numbers. SE have the data.

Like yesterday I had two 0/0/0s in the summary stats. The process of me reporting them and a GM reviewing those numbers (assuming they do) is unnecessary. Once in a blue moon any automatic system will flag someone who had some disaster with a bowl of soup or something, but it's easier to automate the kick/suspension process and allow a rare appeal than the current system.

In other words, I think you kill the incentive for lethargic play by imposing ToS, not via rewards. Because in a 24-person teams it's too easy to do nothing and get carried to a win.

I think they should start making people play the different classes in frontlines. Whatever you join in as is the class you play instead of being able to switch. Yes, it has helped me level alt classes, but it also gets annoying to join as a melee person and everyone else on the team is ranged. Im seeing that majority of players on FL are ranged (mainly being either bard or summoner) now being they all have push back and pull in skills. Its really frustrating when playing as a melee and its pointless as you cant do anyhting at all cause you get pulled and pushed around 10+ times before being stunned and then destroyed. In my opinion it should be either even out the teams between ranged and melee or take away all push back and pull in skills and start making players actually fight instead of cheap kill players. Yell at me if you will, but thats my take on it. I try to fight in pvp but all pvp players wanna do is a cheap slap and run away and hope the enemy gets stunned and killed by others. And give more awards to those that actually try and fight while taking over bases and such instead of just pushing and pulling people all over the place. If the malmstones did not have any rewards to work for, i would never do pvp cause theres no fighting each other unless its a gauranteed 10 on 1 victory.

Honestly, a lot of people here are saying, "If you change Frontline rewards, no one will play it." And if the reason why people play a game mode is because you are being overgiven a reward? Then, the mode itself already failed in its purpose of being an engaging experience? It creates a bad mode.

And Frontline is precisely that, a low effort, big reward mode that requires none or a bare minimum of skill expression within a competitive system with other players.

Sadly, you cannot remove the rewards. As said, people would not play it, and they indeed would not play it. FFXIV players have little-to-no care about PvP, they want the gratification, and the system itself rewards that kind of behaviour and mentality. As it stands, the game whole PvP system needs a massive overhaul to pursue improvement and try to be more engaging for players. It is genuinely sad.

At the very least they could add Rival Wings to a PvP Roulette, so we could have a proper variety when playing that perhaps leads to a lesser frustration. Granted, rewards are not just given based on the PvP system itself but the bonus reward from the Roulette system. PvP by itself gives basically 0 rewards, no matter if you win or lose. Just add more modes to it, I think it will improve the situation a tad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OMGJesuis66

Honestly, a lot of people here are saying, "If you change Frontline rewards, no one will play it." And if the reason why people play a game mode is because you are being overgiven a reward? Then, the mode itself already failed in its purpose of being an engaging experience? It creates a bad mode.

And Frontline is precisely that, a low effort, big reward mode that requires none or a bare minimum of skill expression within a competitive system with other players.

Sadly, you cannot remove the rewards. As said, people would not play it, and they indeed would not play it. FFXIV players have little-to-no care about PvP, they want the gratification, and the system itself rewards that kind of behaviour and mentality. As it stands, the game whole PvP system needs a massive overhaul to pursue improvement and try to be more engaging for players. It is genuinely sad.

At the very least they could add Rival Wings to a PvP Roulette, so we could have a proper variety when playing that perhaps leads to a lesser frustration. Granted, rewards are not just given based on the PvP system itself but the bonus reward from the Roulette system. PvP by itself gives basically 0 rewards, no matter if you win or lose. Just add more modes to it, I think it will improve the situation a tad.

---

I think it'd be a mistake to add RW into a general PvP roulette. From a personal point of view, it would mean I wouldn't play 2-3 days out of every 5, and I suspect that would not be uncommon.

What I'm really frustrated about right now is that the recent FL changes have been good. I agree with you if people only engage in a mode then it is a poorly-designed mode, but I feel FL is rising above that. The issue is 72-person instances are difficult to populate by nature, particularly while we have this silliness of having division by DC.

I'm optimistic about the mode because, in most matches at any time of day, I see a lot of players I recognize. There is a dedicated FL community. IMO it wouldn't take much on NA for players who want to play the mode to support tolerable queue times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mawlzy

I think it'd be a mistake to add RW into a general PvP roulette. From a personal point of view, it would mean I wouldn't play 2-3 days out of every 5, and I suspect that would not be uncommon.

What I'm really frustrated about right now is that the recent FL changes have been good. I agree with you if people only engage in a mode then it is a poorly-designed mode, but I feel FL is rising above that. The issue is 72-person instances are difficult to populate by nature, particularly while we have this silliness of having division by DC.

I'm optimistic about the mode because, in most matches at any time of day, I see a lot of players I recognize. There is a dedicated FL community. IMO it wouldn't take much on NA for players who want to play the mode to support tolerable queue times.

---

No need to make RW compete with Frontlines for the PvP Roulette.
We already have Frontlines as something separated in the unused "Daily Challenges" section. Just add Rival Wings as the extra "Daily Challenges". Both with the same degree of rewards, given it's PvP. You finish Frontlines, you queue for Rival Wings and that's that.
This is the only reason why Frontlines has the peak of engagement it always has, and while it is nice to see there *is* a dedicated FL community, in counterpoint, we have people complaining that such a thing is rising due the crescent amount of premade groups.

Personally, I would love it if the same love was given to Crystalline Conflict, *the* mode where PvP genuine has a skill expression.
It was quite disappointing when I wanted to try Monk in PvP, went to look around for any guides or anything to explain more or less combos of the class and goal of how to play the class in the PvP modes and the only thing I found was one YouTube video with surface level explanation of it. Hells, even the forums here have almost none conversation about Crystalline Conflict.

Perhaps with the rising level of engagement within Frontlines, a hopeful more attention in Crystalline Conflict, SE could make more PvP modes where they walk away from 72-man instances and instead give us 16 or 24-man instances. I lean more toward the 16, so this way you could have just Team A vs. Team B rather than 3 teams competing. I think that would do *a lot* of favors to the whole game mode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterNublet

It's already plenty toxic when 50% of the team does less than 200k damage, 0 kills, pitiful amount of assists and handful of deaths.

I shouldn't have to spend 10 minutes after every frontlines match reporting players because the system allows such players to leech from others.

---

So what about the other players who genuinely do try? This all or nothing attitude is NOT how you're going to get me to queue for PVP, since you're effectively turning this into a complete dice roll and punishing other players for participating. If my efforts result in no rewards, then whats the point of me even playing this mode? Have fun getting Rival Wings queue times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avarence

How is telling people who ELECT to join a "team-based PVP mode" that they must contribute to said PVP or get nothing, toxic??
Even setting the dmg bar low; 100k dmg, would probably prevent 7 players per match from getting rewarded. (Dmg is an example, could be another metric)
Forcing them to participate or not que. Allowing someone who wants to play/try to join.
Enforcing people to do what THEY SIGNED UP FOR, is not toxic.

It is more toxic for a person to join a TEAM based environment, mode, game, or setting, and not do anything constructive to help the team.

---

Yes, you're taking away any motivation to even play Frontlines.

You don't want the atmosphere turning into a MOBA brainrot cesspool. You really don't. This will actually deter average players that are interested in learning PVP.

Not only that, but you're going to incentivize more people to cheat with only one team being able to reap the rewards. This is not the solution you think it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MatchaokaCha

Yes, you're taking away any motivation to even play Frontlines.

You don't want the atmosphere turning into a MOBA brainrot cesspool. You really don't. This will actually deter average players that are interested in learning PVP.

Not only that, but you're going to incentivize more people to cheat with only one team being able to reap the rewards. This is not the solution you think it is.

---

Mm I believe you think that my suggestion applies team wide, not individually.
If you join a Pvp mode, you should not be avoiding it. The motivation is to pvp as the mode itself describes. "Challenge mode, team-work required".
I am not in favour of only 1 team getting rewarded. I believe all players who try should be.

My EXAMPLE bar/metric is set low that it can be reached after 3-4 engagements.
Plus I never said "After ONE game". This would be repeat INDIVIDUAL offenders that do not contribute after multiple matches. And a precedent is set. And again, dmg is only an example.
I have seen multiple instances where a player will walk into the middle of the enemy team, do nothing, die, repeat.
Or how about that player who hides on South-East docks on Seal Rock all game? They both deserve to be rewarded? Are you saying you're ok with this and encourage this behavior?

Because this is based on the INDVIIDUAL, not team based, and therefore would not affect the other team members.

As a pvp vet and FL solo player, if I actually queued for the rewards (which I did a bit when the expansion released), I'd probably stop doing it altogether if I only have 40% chances of getting rewards (I think my winrate floats in that ballpark). I don't queue for gamba. Rewards are already lower depending on the place the team achieves...

How about just massively increase the winning team's rewards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThaCa

How about just massively increase the winning team's rewards.

---

Probably make the situation worse by bringing in even more people who rely on their team-mates and hope to hit 33%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avarence

Mm I believe you think that my suggestion applies team wide, not individually.
If you join a Pvp mode, you should not be avoiding it. The motivation is to pvp as the mode itself describes. "Challenge mode, team-work required".
I am not in favour of only 1 team getting rewarded. I believe all players who try should be.

My EXAMPLE bar/metric is set low that it can be reached after 3-4 engagements.
Plus I never said "After ONE game". This would be repeat INDIVIDUAL offenders that do not contribute after multiple matches. And a precedent is set. And again, dmg is only an example.
I have seen multiple instances where a player will walk into the middle of the enemy team, do nothing, die, repeat.
Or how about that player who hides on South-East docks on Seal Rock all game? They both deserve to be rewarded? Are you saying you're ok with this and encourage this behavior?

Because this is based on the INDVIIDUAL, not team based, and therefore would not affect the other team members.

---

I was addressing OP's original idea of not rewarding any other team that doesn't come in first place. I got the implication that your post earlier was based on that.

Griefing and feeding should have been reportable. The solution is literally there, but smol indie corporation SE won't implement it. You know why? Because it would require them to spend 0.5% of their profits to acquire the resources and labor. Main reason why so many other reports on people blatantly cheating go unnoticed.

After the way they balanced pve jobs and flubbed their blacklisting exploit spectacularly, I really don't trust SE to be competent enough to set up metrics to determine what is 'lethargic' gameplay.

At this point, i think a better option is to add a requirement to Series Reward (Gear/Mount).
The requirement would be something like 200 wins
Right now it is too easy for leechers to leech the series reward by just AFK

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinemights

At this point, i think a better option is to add a requirement to Series Reward (Gear/Mount).
The requirement would be something like 200 wins
Right now it is too easy for leechers to leech the series reward by just AFK

---

Oh please, no. Again that just compounds the problem.

SE needs to take direct action against players who are violating ToS and the guidelines in the Director's Letter that explicitly addressed lethargic play.

The current situation is as bad as I can remember. The only slightly encouraging thing is more vote kicks are getting through, but both this and post-game reporting is massively inefficient compared to SE using the data they have to caution, then suspend, players who are violating ToS.

Can someone remind me why people even care about leechers that much? Every team is bound to have them, so what? Report/kick and move on? What's the difference is you happen to play 19v20v21 instead of 24v24v24 realistically?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

Can someone remind me why people even care about leechers that much? Every team is bound to have them, so what? Report/kick and move on? What's the difference is you happen to play 19v20v21 instead of 24v24v24 realistically?

---

I think if report/kick were easier and removed these players from the field semi-permanently, there'd be less motivation to find other solutions.

You're right that long term this sort of thing evens out. My primary motivation is to raise the skill floor by preventing people from playing who are basically mocking the mode and their team-mates. Plus I don't like carrying water for others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinemights

At this point, i think a better option is to add a requirement to Series Reward (Gear/Mount).
The requirement would be something like 200 wins
Right now it is too easy for leechers to leech the series reward by just AFK

---

That's Too strict, but they should reduce the process you get for losing. Like in gw2, there is a special series for ranked. Winning get 10 pips, but losing only get 3. I don't know about frontline, but for cc, l think winning is 900 and losing is 700? The reward for losing needs to be reduced to 450 at least. Same goes for frontline

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eastwall

That's Too strict, but they should reduce the process you get for losing. Like in gw2, there is a special series for ranked. Winning get 10 pips, but losing only get 3. I don't know about frontline, but for cc, l think winning is 900 and losing is 700? The reward for losing needs to be reduced to 450 at least. Same goes for frontline

---

You have to realize GW2 is different game and it is a MMO that build with PvP in their concept when game is still on the drawing board
FF14 originally for PvE only and PvP is add in after release
Majority of audience is PvE originally, this is why you are seeing so many players do not respect other people's experience on Frontline
Through out almost 10 years with Frontline, only time you are seeing less afker/leecher is the time everyone want 200 wins for mount reward (Seize/Shatter/Rival Wing)

Also, people don't afk in PvE because if you failed, you have to keep trying until you bring boss down to zero and get the drop you want
Why PvP don't have same penalty system?
PvP should not be reward for participation and people need to focus on outcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mawlzy

I think if report/kick were easier and removed these players from the field semi-permanently, there'd be less motivation to find other solutions.

You're right that long term this sort of thing evens out. My primary motivation is to raise the skill floor by preventing people from playing who are basically mocking the mode and their team-mates. Plus I don't like carrying water for others.

---

I carry water in pve all the time for others and I don't mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valence

I carry water in pve all the time for others and I don't mind.

---

Fair, but I think there's a qualitative difference between team-mates that are poor with their rotations, and those that are refusing to engage at all.

Like if you were running a roulette dungeon and someone decided it would be funny to walk through it, I imagine you'd be miffed and that they'd be kicked.

I have a better one, remove the xp from frontline, so people that come to play it are there for the mode, not for the free xp. Between that and obvious win trades, it's frustrating. Pvp has been the only content with replayability, but everytime I do a frontline, I just disconect and wonder why I'm still even bothering with a game the dev obviously don't care about. Continue to run your game like the rest of your company, right to the cliff. That's the best. At this point, is having a fast queue even worth it if the majority of the time, the game's gonna be rigged.

Honestly, I'd like the game mode more if you removed the crowd control and removed a team. 3 doesn't work. It hasn't worked. All 3 teams do is make two teams fight for 2nd place. It's absolutely moronic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardeth

Honestly, I'd like the game mode more if you removed the crowd control and removed a team. 3 doesn't work. It hasn't worked. All 3 teams do is make two teams fight for 2nd place. It's absolutely moronic.

---

3 team does work.
If there is a huge gap between 1st place, the 3rd place definitely will attack the 2nd.
They are not NPCs.
During this scenario, if there is no 3rd team, first place team will dominate game because of battle high.
10 years of WoW battleground already proven that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinemights

3 team does work.
If there is a huge gap between 1st place, the 3rd place definitely will attack the 2nd.
They are not NPCs.
During this scenario, if there is no 3rd team, first place team will dominate game because of battle high.
10 years of WoW battleground already proven that

---

What happens when the 2nd place team bullies the 3rd? That's happened in multiple games for me as well. You can't say in that scenario that if it wasn't binary, it wouldn't just work how normal pvp works. The better team will always win.

You'd have a better agreement about removing Battle High, and I'm 100% on board with that. Battle High is terrible as well.

Frontlines has enough going wrong for it. It's a clown fiesta, the gametype changes daily, battle high, a mountain of crowd control and just bad attitude given the fact that it has a chat.

And you wonder why people afk through it or feed to end the game. It's just plain, not fun. It never has been. If you removed the battle pass and the tomes, I wouldn't touch it because of how god awful it is as a play mode. I can't even play CC because the queues are always dead. So I'm stuck doing my once a day purgatory that is the shit slop they serve up as pvp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardeth

What happens when the 2nd place team bullies the 3rd? That's happened in multiple games for me as well. You can't say in that scenario that if it wasn't binary, it wouldn't just work how normal pvp works. The better team will always win.

You'd have a better agreement about removing Battle High, and I'm 100% on board with that. Battle High is terrible as well.

Frontlines has enough going wrong for it. It's a clown fiesta, the gametype changes daily, battle high, a mountain of crowd control and just bad attitude given the fact that it has a chat.

And you wonder why people afk through it or feed to end the game. It's just plain, not fun. It never has been. If you removed the battle pass and the tomes, I wouldn't touch it because of how god awful it is as a play mode. I can't even play CC because the queues are always dead. So I'm stuck doing my once a day purgatory that is the shit slop they serve up as pvp.

---

That is funny, because I am seeing more AFKs on WoW battleground than in FF14 Frontline
It is even worst on the Epic Battleground (in which this is your ideal PvP format)
It has no Battle High, maybe except more crowd control.
Has Horde even able to win one Alterc Valley at all?
Expand from this, if there is a 3rd faction on North East corner, do you think Allies still can choke hold Horde at checkpoint?

People are afk because they are lazy and lack of respect to others and the culture is not based on collectivism; not necessarily because mode is bad
In your truly those AFKs in 24 men raid because they know they will be carried
If they get same penalty as PvE, do you think they will even afk?
Will they still afk when they are no longer rewarded for participation?
This is the core discussion of this thread

2nd place team bullies 3rd?
Of course it will happen when there is no shot caller or commander
It is also more about Battle High rather than 3 ways format
People lack of understanding that first spawn of nodes are pointless on Onsal Hakir and Seize and it is essential to obtain BH.
By the time the objective goers realize they are way behind on BH, of course they will attack 3rd place in order to compete with first one
If team has maintained reasonable level of BH, they will go for first place instead

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardeth

What happens when the 2nd place team bullies the 3rd?

---

That's because the average FFXIV pvp players are freaking dumb. They cannot read what's happening in the light of the current score and the map. You can make all the gameplay adaptation you want, if your player mentality is such as it is in FFXIV, it always gonna be bad.

People rush the closest group of enemies without any basic strategic thinking. Granted, one of the maps is very bad for pincer attacks, so it kinda suck, but with the other, there is no excuses. Between the guenines idiots, the obvious wintrades and people that don't care because they're there for the free xp, this mode is such a mess, and you're lucky when once in a while you get to have fun in this because you are in a game with 3 teams that wants to play the game..

There are 3 teams and nodes spawn randomly are to make it so that the gamemode is beginner-friendly in a way that the losing factors are less controllable, and when you lose you can say something like "the other 2 teams were bullying us" or "cringe spawns" and get over it.

Frontline is supposed to be a casual PvP content, the massive EXP bonus is in the daily challenge so that players whom wouldn't queue for PvP otherwise would consider joining, so that the queue actually pops frequent enough for us whom put some effort into it.

I am not saying it is absolutely correct or I fully agree with it but I can see why it is how it is. Perhaps try Rival Wings if you want a 2 teams large scale PvP. The only thing I hope they improve on is get rid of the AFK players, in my opinion that isn't just us carrying water for them, we are more like having to slow down the pace to feed them water.