Nord Champion 说:
Aura (Zaffa) 说:
The point of a scrim is for your team to win. It is that simple. You don't need to be "rewarded" just for helping your team. Just like a Moba support char, it is to be expected that some chars will accumulate more gold throughout the game than others. People are judged on how much they help their team, not by how much gold they get.
First off, Warband is not a MOBA.
MOBA supports
DO get rewarded with an assist bonus. There is a big difference from getting 50% gold from an assist to 0% gold from one. That's huge. We get that people are not judged about how much gold they get, but, you know, it kinda helps them in future battles. Also, in MOBAs, you get gold per second (or minute?) and you kill minions to gain gold, meaning that there is a lot of other opportunities to gain gold in MOBAs than in Warband.
The point was that people in Mobas recognize that some classes will garner more gold than others. Supports are not supposed to get direct minion kills, instead saving the gold for their teammates. While they do get a small percentage of the gold if they buy items correctly, it is not the same as a direct kill. The same is true of supports trying to avoid getting the killing blows when possible in engagements. People know that certain roles can make better use of the gold than others, and there is no reason that this same concept cannot be applied to warband.
Nord Champion 说:
Aura (Zaffa) 说:
However, unlike a Moba, we don't have to worry about success in a match carrying on to future performance. War and has no experience system and gold doesn't carry over outside the match. As such, this "unsung hero argument doesn't carry much weight".
In MOBAs, experience that a player gets is the same for the whole team and gold (I'm assuming you mean in-game currency) is as well, so no it doesn't affect future performance. Hell, the in-game currency can only really be used to purchase skins, and characters if you don't have them, and experience just limits if you can play ranked or not (usually). So, it doesn't really affect future performance at all. I don't get what you're arguing here.
The point that was being made here is that unlike games like League, there is no race to 30 or elements of the game existing outside the match settings. People do not need to purchase runes, rank up, etc. Each match is its own self contained environment. As such, there isn't really a reason why players need to be rewarded through a round bonus just for participating. The gold is just going to disappear as soon as the match ends.
Any gold rules should be constructed on what creates the most competitive and creative environment for teams to participate in, not on creating equality among team members.
Nord Champion 说:
Aura (Zaffa) 说:
As for the Rambo mode behavior, this is something teams would personally have to iron out, just as people do in mobas. It baffles me as to why people in mobas can be expected to give the kills to certain players but in a back and slash this is unreasonable. It is a simple concept that amounts to basic communication, player restraint, and weighing the risk of not taking the sure kill.
Again, in MOBAs there is an assist bonus. Its more reasonable to not get the kill.
Even with an assist bonus, there is a stark difference in the kill and assist bonus. Again, people recognize that it is better for some classes to build up their gold supply than others. This same observation applies to warband. Depending on the situation, teams may want to focus the bulk of their gold on their cav (to get a heavy horse) rather than their archer (who cant spend the gold). However, it should be up to teams to determine the best way to make this possible rather than crutch on the 500g bonus at the end of round.
Situations would probably be far more interesting if a near dead player had to actually get a kill to increase his gold rather than just run away, let his teammates kill the last player, and get gold at the end of the round.
Nord Champion 说:
Aura (Zaffa) 说:
As noted before, removing the round bonus and increasing the combat bonus would allow for significant growth in the game's meta.
I still don't see it. You're argument is that removing the round bonus will get rid of rewarding surviving the round and teams will be more aggressive. But, earlier, you just said what matters is winning the round. Well, the primary objective of battle is to, well, survive the round. So that is going to be the primary way to win the round no matter what we change gold wise.
The way battle works, flags aside, is that
somebody needs to still be alive on your team to win. The obvious reward for this is that your team earns a point against the other team. However, under the current system, teams are doubly rewarded by getting 500g to all their surviving members. This bonus comes irrespective on contribution and has no greater tactic to it other than "survive".
What if instead players had to wager not getting the gold they need to upgrade with surviving the round. At the moment, if I become injured in a match and enough of my allies remain, I can simply sit back where I know I cant be killed and still be guaranteed an additional 500g after the round. If instead I had to decide between continuing to fight at 10% health or getting no additional gold, there are additional considerations to be had.
These calculations become even greater when teams are deciding how best to split the hold among the remaining teammates. For instance, say I have an archer and inf left on my team, but only 1 inf remains on the other team. At present, regardless of who gets the kill, both the archer and inf are guaranteed an additional 500g if they survive. However, if there was no round bonus and only an increased combat bonus, teams may try harder to force a particular player to get the kill.
There is another aspect to this though that hasn't been discussed.
Getting rid of the round bonus and substituting it with a higher combat bonus will decrease the steam roller effect when a team gets aced. 3500g + 7 x (combat bonus) is a crazy amount of gold to have added to one's team. Also, because this gold is so evenly spread out across one's team, it becomes tougher to mitigate this gold in future rounds. However, if the gold were attributed according to combat bonus, players who go on a killing spree would have a "diminishing cap" working against them on how they could spend their gold. Likewise, the other team team has more options available to them to reduce the impact of this gold discrepancy:
1. The disadvantaged team can focus fire the character, equalizing much of the gold difference with his death.
2. The disadvantaged team can have a player tie him up while the rest of the team engages in equal gold distribution fights. Afterall, it is much easier to deal with 1 highly geared character and 6 lowly geared characters rather than 7 moderately geared characters. This is because the increased glance chance / kill potential is only assigned to one player, and all it takes is a stray jav or arrow to headshot him. The chance of such precision shots equalizing a match is much less as gold is spread across players.
Point is that removing the round bonus and increasing the combat bonus will add a number of new dynamics to the scrim scene, while at the same time reducing the steam roller effect seen by early round wins.
