Increase rewards for losing team

[Imapooonu]

"People will do it regardless" isn't a reason not to consider the factor.

It certainly is.

Increase rewards or decrease the cost of pvp materia please.

Thanks in advance.

[realistic1]

People bot because 10 marks all day long will net them a decent amount of marks per effort (zero) each day. If you increase the rewards for a loss, you will increase the incentive for people to bot resulting in more bots.

The best idea for increasing rewards for those currently gaining at a slow rate is to make a change to the system so that those that queue in 3 man premades are paired against other premades. The win rate and marks gained for those now doing solo queue should increase significantly with this one change.

[Imapooonu]

People bot because 10 marks all day long will net them a decent amount of marks per effort (zero) each day. If you increase the rewards for a loss, you will increase the incentive for people to bot resulting in more bots.

The best idea for increasing rewards for those currently gaining at a slow rate is to make a change to the system so that those that queue in 3 man premades are paired against other premades. The win rate and marks gained for those now doing solo queue should increase significantly with this one change.

Whether or not people bot should not be a factor in deciding whether or not the rewards are adequately dispersed.

People will bot until banned. Nothing will change that. Botting should be a problem universally addressed regardless of the medium they use to bot.

[Mitski]

Whether or not people bot should not be a factor in deciding whether or not the rewards are adequately dispersed.

This. ^^

SE should try to make the best game possible for legit players, and find other ways to go after people who cheat/exploit.

[LongNu]

Whether or not people bot should not be a factor in deciding whether or not the rewards are adequately dispersed.

People will bot until banned. Nothing will change that. Botting should be a problem universally addressed regardless of the medium they use to bot.

Good post.

[realistic1]

Whether or not people bot should not be a factor in deciding whether or not the rewards are adequately dispersed.

The problem is not whether adequate rewards are being dispersed for losing; it is the frequency of losing versus winning. You would not be posting in this thread if you won 90% of your matches.

If the problem is the win/loss ratio, then you need to look at why this is so onesided. Two reasons for losses (there are more of course) are solo queue matches against 3 man premades and bots. People that call for higher rewards for losing are simply asking to exacerbate one of these problems and exacerbating any issue that contributes to the lopsided win/loss ratio will do nothing but intensify the existing problem.

I would much rather focus on the true issue (lopsided win/loss ratios for those not doing premades) such as seeing the game changed so that anything greater than a 2 man premade is paired against other premades and/or pairing teams with similar average gear levels than increase the marks for losing.

People will bot until banned. Nothing will change that.

I completely agree with the above but there are things than can certainly escalate the amount of bots and rewarding them with an increase in marks for botting and losing is one of these things. No one is claiming that bots don’t exist or need to be banned but why the heck would we be thinking of rewarding the botting action even more?

[mirth12]

I feel like if a 4v4 loss would net double what it currently does there would be more activity in the 4v4 Q's. Right now if you Q 4v4 and your team is good, you usually win ever match against 1 or 2 teams until they decide they want to stop Qing up and then the fun is over and you sit in Q for 40+mins with no Q pop.

If they double the loss rewards only in 4v4 it would encourage people to Q with others from their server and make 4v4 q's pop, which would alleviate the 3Q and 4Qs in the solo games, cause its more efficient to Q with 4 people in 4's. I know alot of people are Qing 4 into solo Q cause they wanna play with their friends and 4q never pops i think this would help.

[Imapooonu]

You would not be posting in this thread if you won 90% of your matches.

I certainly would. Objectivity is my strong suit. And I think you mean, “would not have made the comment I made”. Simply posting in a thread does not stipulate intention or agenda.

Right now the only real incentive to que matches in the duty finder is passion for pvp. Can you win in pug groups? Sure, but let’s be realistic. The incentives need to cater to the populous of the demographic, not a target group. The incentives available cater to premades. No one should be forced into premade groups to obtain rewards in a timely fashion. Should being in a premade have a distinct advantage? Yes, but as of now that advantage is lopsided.

I agree with some of your theory crafting as to why and/or how to fix the problem with premade groups and their advantages, but some consideration should be given to people who are simply going to pug for awhile and see what happens. 10 marks is simply not enough. Should it be 100? No.

I completely disagree with your opinions on boters.

[Imapooonu]

Actually, they are reducing the cost of the materia.

I know. The amount rewards need to be increased is partially contingent on this factor. So until we actually know what that adjustment will be, it stands to reason the exact solution will remain unknown at this time. So, if the price for pvp materia is lowered 1%, then another adjustment would be needed for example.

And No, it certainly is not.

"People will do it regardless" isn't a reason not to consider the factor.

Then I don’t understand this. It sounds to me like, “It is NOT a reason to NOT consider a certain factor”. I’m saying that “people will do it regardless” IS a reason to NOT consider it in the proposed solution. I just took what you said in a literal sense and feel boting should be a problem dealt with in a way that makes boting the core problem that inspires said solution.

And people who bot do it in their sleep and will continue until they buy the gear they want. So in theory, the quicker they get their gear, the SOONER they will stop boting. Also, a group with an excellent bot strategy will also win against most pug groups. So it makes sense to say that raising the rewards for the losing team will not affect the boting problem in almost any way.

[realistic1]

I completely disagree with your opinions on boters.

Which opinion- that bots can result in a team losing or that we should not provide bots extra incentive (higher reward for loss) as it will increase the amount of bots we are seeing?