[SUGGESTION] Tie PvP Experience to Point Results

[TankHunter678]

No. WRONG. "Losers" can get more XP by scoring more points. ALMOST AS MUCH as a "winner." For example, if your team scores 99% of the possible points, you can earn 99% of the possible experience (vs. the 66% or whatever for 2nd place that is currently the value).

Currently they get 70% for not winning, but with your idea a person could try as much as they can, but only get 30% of the xp because regardless of their personal contribution the team sucked.

You simply can't base your view (and expect any reliable accuracy) from such a small sampling. Especially when it seems obvious (from comments below) that you're getting your information almost entirely from the forums!!!

And personal experience because hey there is something you forgot...

I can't process this statement... if you kill a player, you "shift" the overall team score. If you damage ice, you "shift" the overall team score. Do you even PVP?

I can smash an ice all by myself, only for my greedy team to get caught in a pincer and all die, wasting all of my effort. I can score a couple kills, only for my team to die as they try to take a big ice that is dominated by an entire team cause one side is more focused on killing my team, thus wasting all impact I personally had.

I see this all the time, in every game. If you do not see it then maybe you are not paying attention to the map. So to answer your question, Yes I did pvp, but the xp reward and the heavily slanted loss rate I get makes it not worth it anymore. Its very easy for all personal contribution to mean nothing because trying to get a team of defeatists and bots to work together is like trying to herd cats.

You clearly didn't read my original post. You can't do it this way without punishing players who are engaging in (for example) distractions to draw enemy players away from key positions, or dividing their forces, et cetera. It's just not possible to quantify all of the actions a player could perform that contributes to your teams points/ victory.

But the stuff we do already have quantified we can reward and incentivize people to pursue without punishing people because their team sucks.

If you get the same XP for 2nd place in the base, or in the field fighting, there is no incentive for "trying to do their best to score as high a personal rating as possible." The whole point to my suggestion is to provide an incentive.

By the sound of things you did not even read my idea.

You idea does not provide an incentive, because when people get bad teams there is nothing they can do. They will be punished because they landed on a bad team.

My idea incentivizes them to play to the objectives to the best of their ability, because they will get an XP bonus according to their contribution and efforts irregardless of the performance of their team as a whole. As long as they played smart, they could even get more xp then most of the winning team who got carried. So that even if their team lost, they still won in the end cause they tried.