This is realy bad idea, if one side is loosing and people start leaving that BG its good, either there will be new people and chances to win rises or there wont be any people and this side will loose bit quickier, so less time wasted, with still at least some reward.
Also random BGs should be for fun mostly.
Switch alliance side if you want difficulty.
When you switch alliance side , when your team give up but the game is winnable it kinda look like this :
Afkers kicked out, so they wont get anything.
You just have to move a little so you dont get flagged. Or you can pretend youre defending a base or so and the other players wonât suspect you for afkâing. Itâs more common than you can imagine. Especially in epics.
In theory, what you say is good.
In action? People will sit afk somewhere in bgâs to optimize reward gains, since winning and losing wonât be too different. And before you say, weâll just kick X and Y for being afk, you have to understand that thereâll be a lot more than 1 or 2 afk individuals per run.
So this is yet again, another idea thatâs good on paper but really bad in reality.
Yes one thing i forgot to mention, that the rewarding system should be changed aswell.
The more active you were, more rewards u will have. Example swtor has a system for this, you gain medals, based on your activity, and rewarded according the number of medals.
I think this also could help people to not afk, but do fight.
Thatâs flawed too. Bgâs arenât about kills or damage or how many flags you carried.
Imagine 2 scenarios. One guy who stands in the middle and constantly fights, doing massive amounts of damage and kills.
Another guy who follows the flag carrier, defends them, CCâs anyone who gets close which results in him not doing much damage but only protecting the flag.
The guy in the middle has better stats and contribution. The guy doing the objective on the other hand would be less apparent and thus, less rewarded.
That system also doesnât work. You canât quantify usefulness that easily.
Yes probably many factors play in this, but i think its still could be better, than the current system we have right now.
what does the winning side get?
As far as I can tell, both sides get worthless rewards no matter if you win or lose.
Honor is basically meaningless
Not really no. Is it impossible to make it better? No.
But itâll take too much effort. Effort that can be otherwise spent on something else.
If the current system was broken and in dire need for a big change i would have agreed with you. But itâs not. The systemâs fine. Thereâs room for improvement, sure. But that improvement isnât easily obtainable. And designing a system that rewards effort, will either consume a very significant time to build, wonât be able to properly calculate, or itâll result in people figuring out the most efficient system of earning rewards and therefore changing the rules of the mode and focusing on the reward instead of objectives.
So, not going to happen dude.
So if i run flags i get less rewards? Got it, camping the GY!
You should get all rewards removed if you spam the chat with âlooseâ or âloosingâ.
Ignored content
Remove the reward for the losing side completely instead. You donât want a drawn out matches. If youâre losing, the best thing is to end it quickly. In Allods, if one team completely dominated the battleground for about half a minute, theyâd start generating victory points 4 times quicker, and the match will end quickly. I really dislike this idea that losing matches need to be drawn out. Nobody likes to stay in a losing game, regardless of the reward.
Even if the reward was the same, staying for 20 minutes in a match where you get completely destroyed is an awful experience and Blizzard shouldnât encourage it.
I donât mind losing battlegrounds, though I do think that things like win 5 bgs should really be finish 5 bgs. The Mythic one isnât ârun 5 timed M+â either.
Conquest should still be provided for losing matches, even if itâs only 5 for an EBG. The other rewards? 1 mark of honor in addition to what you get now and it should be fine.
Losing shouldnât be incentivized, indeed. Sadly you can have 39 player with you that literally waste your time and thereâs nothing you can do about except waste 40 minutes of your day. Having to rely on others to progress your game is no fun and should be avoided by having mechanics in place that will not reward you, but still lets you catch up.
Will I still finish an isle of conquest or wintergrasp if I join a losing battle that has already started? No, not even with increased rewards. Ashran or AV? Sure, why not. At least I wonât get stomped by vehicles the entire run.
I understand this, in the leveling bgâs even if you lose you gain quite abit of exp so I usually stay and help out. But at max level I instantly leave if itâs clearly a losing game as you get nothing for staying, I feel like Iâm wasting my time and it would be easier to put up with the 15 min deserter and try again after the deserter is over.
But seeing alot of people are against your idea, I donât see a way of encouraging people to stay and try.
people might actually want to play to win if blizzard actually put some work into actual pvp balance for once, mostly involving leather and cloth wearers doing 50% damage in pvp environments due to their vastly superior mobility and cc capabilities.
And removing the damage reduction from healers versatility is important too.
That doesnât actually matter, because it is a team environment, so you can reasonably expect randomized comps for both teams in RBGs. When Iâm in an RBG I reasonably get in the top 3 damage dealt. Yeah, clothies do a lot of damage, but fire mages also get deleted immediately, they are high priority targets. This type of balance youâre talking about only really matters in 2v2.
when did people start calling normal BGâs as âRBGâ aka Rated Battlegrounds???
the R in my RBG stands for Random. This of course is different from RBGs where the R is Rated.