Fixing Player engagement DEV pls consider

[Ath192]

I can definitely see a system like this leading to problems.

"I want a gold medal, AST buff me more!!!"

"Hey! Switch to me for dance partner! I just need a few more gold..."

"I DON'T CARE I'M TANKING, DRAGOON GIVE ME YOUR TETHER!"

And the inevitable PF's for farming medals would undermine much of what the system would be trying to accomplish.

Also, if you could get medals from EX content they would quickly become worthless while people farmed the weapons/mounts.


But it's a moot issue.
Yoshi P. has said they'd never add anything in game that rates/ranks your performance.

=/ But they did, in PVP you have a giant performance chart at the end, and also earn more medals if you win, and in Bozja you can't get a duel if you dont perform well with a set of criteria.

[Ath192]

I think it seems the general consensus is that there are some reasons people would not prefer this, and that is okay, it is always easier to do nothing, but I think people are failing to analyze the other side of this equation. Which is the current state of affairs, with the current system I've seen people kick poor performers without saying a word or helping them for fear of being reported, High end raids get locked behind super high ILVL so people who haven't raided cant get in and have fun, elitism is very common, I've even heard poor performers get black listed so that you don't see their listings in party finder. People have found ways to segregate themselves, and even here we have a person who has confessed that as a healer they don't heal and just dps, this in my opinion would be grounds for no medal since healers are supposed to keep the party alive and do damage when there's no healing or raising to do.

Encouraging better performance for the base population may somewhat alleviate these issues. I don't know what the exact criteria and balance of this formula would look like, but ideally it should encourage healers to heal, raise and do damage when not busy, tanks to tank, use cooldowns to mitigate and DPS to perform their rotations well and do damage, which seem to be the base required functions of each role. It's not all about uptime and damage like people here seem to be interpreting. That is categorically wrong and not the purpose of the system.

But if this is what the community deems preferable of course I am just one person that disagrees. None the less the idea is out there, and even better ideas are welcome and encouraged. All I'm seeing here is doubt, but what we currently have definitely isn't perfect in my opinion.

[Seera1024]

I think it seems the general consensus is that there are some reasons people would not prefer this, and that is okay, it is always easier to do nothing, but I think people are failing to analyze the other side of this equation. Which is the current state of affairs, with the current system I've seen people kick poor performers without saying a word or helping them for fear of being reported, High end raids get locked behind super high ILVL so people who haven't raided cant get in and have fun, elitism is very common, I've even heard poor performers get black listed so that you don't see their listings in party finder. People have found ways to segregate themselves, and even here we have a person who has confessed that as a healer they don't heal and just dps, this in my opinion would be grounds for no medal since healers are supposed to keep the party alive and do damage when there's no healing or raising to do.

Encouraging better performance for the base population may somewhat alleviate these issues. I don't know what the exact criteria and balance of this formula would look like, but ideally it should encourage healers to heal, raise and do damage when not busy, tanks to tank, use cooldowns to mitigate and DPS to perform their rotations well and do damage, which seem to be the base required functions of each role. It's not all about uptime and damage like people here seem to be interpreting. That is categorically wrong and not the purpose of the system.

But if this is what the community deems preferable of course I am just one person that disagrees. None the less the idea is out there, and even better ideas are welcome and encouraged. All I'm seeing here is doubt, but what we currently have definitely isn't perfect in my opinion.

In the first post you state the problem is engagement.

This post states the problem is people not playing with a certain skill level.

Which problem are you trying to solve?

No system will solve the latter one. Players have to want to learn and no amount of carrots will make people want to learn if they don't want to. They'll just complain that they can't get the carrots instead and that the content should be easier.

Engagement simply means people actively playing the game. Even if they are doing so at a low skill level. Which the game already does a good job of doing.

Could they make it easier for those who want to learn to get the skills by updating the Hall of the Novice and/or adding in a Hall of the Intermediate and/or Hall of the Expert? Yes.

But dangling a carrot isn't going to suddenly make players who weren't ready to learn suddenly ready to learn. They'll just complain that they can't get the carrot.

[Ath192]

In the first post you state the problem is engagement.

This post states the problem is people not playing with a certain skill level.

Which problem are you trying to solve?

No system will solve the latter one. Players have to want to learn and no amount of carrots will make people want to learn if they don't want to. They'll just complain that they can't get the carrots instead and that the content should be easier.

Engagement simply means people actively playing the game. Even if they are doing so at a low skill level. Which the game already does a good job of doing.

Could they make it easier for those who want to learn to get the skills by updating the Hall of the Novice and/or adding in a Hall of the Intermediate and/or Hall of the Expert? Yes.

But dangling a carrot isn't going to suddenly make players who weren't ready to learn suddenly ready to learn. They'll just complain that they can't get the carrot.

I disagree, and the problem is one and the same, what I consider engagement is people focused on the fight doing their job well. I am not sure what you mean by actively playing if its not the same as me, since bad performance is correlated with just playing, disengaged and not really active. Dangling a carrot does work in my opinion, in the same way relics are dangling carrots for people to grind old content, and they do with great success. Some people may complain about it but I still am of the mind it would help rather than detract from gameplay.

[Seera1024]

I disagree, and the problem is one and the same, what I consider engagement is people focused on the fight doing their job well. I am not sure what you mean by actively playing if its not the same as me, since bad performance is correlated with just playing, disengaged and not really active. Dangling a carrot does work in my opinion, in the same way relics are dangling carrots for people to grind old content, and they do with great success. Some people may complain about it but I still am of the mind it would help rather than detract from gameplay.

To me engaged means they aren't AFK and are playing. They may not be caring at the moment about how well they are playing - not all play with a group of random players - but they're playing.

A player with a disability that means that they can't get gold but is doing the best they can is engaged with the game.

A new player who hasn't learned a fight well enough to not get hit by enough mechanics and still do decent DPS is engaged with the game.

A player who in their group of friends is with permission of all in the group role playing an ice mage in a dungeon is engaged with the game. He's not doing great DPS, but he's engaged with the game.

A player who has a low or medium skill level but no desire to currently improve but is able to complete DPS checks in the content they play but not get enough DPS to get gold is engaged with the game.

Yea, it gets players to play the content, but that doesn't mean they are improving. It doesn't mean that if the skill level necessary to earn the reward is higher than their current level that they won't complain.

And as others have mentioned, it's more apt to bring out the negative in others than it would the positive as players who want the gold medals will be less forgiving of players making mistakes. Because the more mistakes are made, the longer a fight goes on giving more time for others to make mistakes that end up costing the players gold medals. The medals will increase the chances of players with different goals for the content getting into the same group. When goals differ enough, it can cause problems for groups. Players looking for efficiency in order to get gold are less likely to be forgiving of mistakes than of someone looking to full clear a dungeon.

[Vahlnir]

And as others have mentioned, it's more apt to bring out the negative in others than it would the positive as players who want the gold medals will be less forgiving of players making mistakes. Because the more mistakes are made, the longer a fight goes on giving more time for others to make mistakes that end up costing the players gold medals. The medals will increase the chances of players with different goals for the content getting into the same group. When goals differ enough, it can cause problems for groups. Players looking for efficiency in order to get gold are less likely to be forgiving of mistakes than of someone looking to full clear a dungeon.

Well said.

[Brightamethyst]

Encouraging better performance for the base population may somewhat alleviate these issues. I don't know what the exact criteria and balance of this formula would look like, but ideally it should encourage healers to heal, raise and do damage when not busy, tanks to tank, use cooldowns to mitigate and DPS to perform their rotations well and do damage, which seem to be the base required functions of each role. It's not all about uptime and damage like people here seem to be interpreting. That is categorically wrong and not the purpose of the system.

No one knows what the criteria should be because it's different for every person every time.

"Tank didn't use all their CDs. Healer barely healed. No medal for you!" Well what if you outgear the content to the point where you don't need to heal as much or use defensive CDs? What if you you're the second tank or healer in a fight that doesn't really need it? There is no system that would even come close to evaluating most players in a meaningful way.

[ItMe]

=/ But they did, in PVP you have a giant performance chart at the end, and also earn more medals if you win, and in Bozja you can't get a duel if you dont perform well with a set of criteria.

Yeah. It's weird.
I can only assume he was referring to never adding one to PvE, but more consistency would be nice.

[Iscah]

=/ But they did, in PVP you have a giant performance chart at the end, and also earn more medals if you win, and in Bozja you can't get a duel if you dont perform well with a set of criteria.

PvP (or Frontline at least) battle performance is pretty basic and doesn't try to rank you against a concept of "playing well"; it's just raw numbers and it doesn't give you any points. Winning is a team achievement, not individual.

And getting into Bozja duels isn't a complex judgement of who performed well, just a simple criterion (did you dodge all the AoEs?) to get in a lottery with no additional skill.