I like the idea. My thoughts:
- If SE is implementing rewards, I like the idea that it seems to be limited to Vanity items only. This ensures that no one feels 'forced' to play nice to receive certain rewards that aren't vanity in nature. Non-Vanity items could result in all sorts of unintended consequences/behaviors. Rewards should be a non-consequential bonus, and nothing more.
To wear these vanity award items might have the benefit of encouraging others.
- Votes, as mentioned many already, should be made anonymously and only made available *after* the Duty has completed. This ensures there isn't any 'tit for tat' mechanic going on. What I would recommend even above and beyond that, is to only award MVP points to players once a week (or some such variable; could even be a week plus/minus some random seed value) in a bulk dump.
This ensures abusive players (or whatever term fits best) are not messaging those after the Duty, and giving them grief for not awarding them an MVP point or what have you. Though not impossible (especially if the player has only been in one Duty in said week), this mechanic better ensures you cannot tie MVP votes (or non-votes) back to specific players as easily.
- I understand concerns that DD classes may feel left out. As a primary Tank, I can say myself and the Healer are often the most visible in any given party. This is why I don't necessarily like the notion (if true) that you can only award one point for the Most Valuable Player. I feel players should be able to cast votes on all applicable players (ie. ones that have joined up using the Random Duty function; sometimes there may only be 1 of these players in any given group, but there may be more), and not just be limited to the one vote.
This way, DD classes are less likely to be left out as there is more than one vote that can potentially be cast.
- I do not subscribe to the notion that this in any way (if indeed the rewards are Vanity only) that this harms players loyal to their Free Company or LS'es. To those in those groups, they are already benefiting from being able to group with others (of their own choosing) and lessen the chance of a poor party experience.
To those in FC's or whatnot that feel slighted by this mechanic, I almost feel that is a slightly inward-looking perspective. The idea of this mechanic again, as I see it, is to help make those random Duty Finder experiences more positive or to help lessen queue times by incentivizing classes that are needed to fill empty DF slots.
- KaiKatzchen, I think I see where you are coming from, however, help me understand more. I understand this won't solve everything (it won't), but I think it's a small step in the right direction, however short-term it may seem.
There's always that careful balance between jumping into any satisficing [sic] solution and saving time, or taking the time (sometimes quite a while) to search for the perfect solution. I think this strikes an OK balance between the two.
There's that carrot and the stick analogy. You're describing SE needs to better police poor attitude players better - no one disagrees (and no one could ever, really). Though poor attitudes can be reported (if via a seemingly slow/inefficient manner according to what's on the forums), I can only see this complementing their toolset of encouraging better player experiences.
It may not address those players that are very intentionally set on griefing a Duty experience (it probably won’t), but it might encourage players to get involved a little more in their party, and I can’t see anything wrong with that.
To those that feel 'bribing' players doesn't fix anything, I can understand that. But so many things in life are exactly this, incentivizing a wanted behaviour vs. an unwanted one. Rational theory in economics has volumes on exactly this sort of idea. No one is suggesting we solve humanity or anything, but this is a small measure that I think will help as long as this MVP mechanic itself serves its purpose. (See suggestions above.)


Reply With Quote

