progg Wrote:I love the idea Bob, but i think decreasing the bounty to 0 isn't best way. it's still a tank with hp, wepepons, able to kill, able to creep.
True, but assuming the respawn time and let's say 5 seconds to engage a battle after respawn would be a minimum of about 25 seconds delay after death. Even starting at 0% of the bounty, it would have reached 25/300 = 8.3% of the at the time the tank first is in a fight. Wouldn't be much, but about 20 gold maybe in mid game. However, the starting percentage could be adjusted. While I still think, it's cleaner to start at 0% bounty, maybe raising it faster, in 3 or 4 minutes.
progg Wrote:i think we can discuss also increasing bounty for players who didn't die for a long time. like 10-15% for each 5mins (from base bounty couse compound interest could make bounty ridiculusly high)
Well possible, but I hate surviving for some time, just to later see that I swap the lane and start to feed due to higher bounty. It's not directly associated with your suggestion, but raising bounty too high over time can lead to something like that. E.g. not dying isn't good any more, since the first death will give the enemies more money then. Of course there will be a small difference still, but it will be reduced. Regarding my idea, maybe the bounty does not need to grow linearly, it could also grow 1-0.9^time maybe, growing very fast just after the death, growing slower and slower the longer a player survives. (Though I actually like the idea of a sharp break where the bounty no longer raises at all)
progg Wrote:on the other when u apply this change we should make something force players to teamplay better. maybe increase assisst bounty?
Yes that wouldn't be bad. Actually, as we know all attacking players, maybe the bounty can be distributed equally between all of them? Would be quite radical again of course, but this would help good assisting players to get back into the game. (As it's difficult to get a kill with a weak tank when attacking in a group)
eSVau Wrote:And i think this mode is way tougher for those so called pro's: porter+poison+"wait for an easy target" won't help you here, you actually need to play the game
Yeah, not only, that weak players won't feed so much, maybe they aren't farmed so extreme any longer, because a kill isn't worth much, unless it's of strategic use.
eSVau Wrote:well, every mode adjusts someones bounty by death count, but the impact differs much - on league mode u don't even recognize it without knowing
I know, but it's not changing anyones style of play or the hate against feeders I think. And my suggestion seems to be compatible with pro and noob games, rendering different modes for everyone useless. In general I dislike too many different modes, I prefer one solid mode, balanced and working for all. That's another topic, but maybe for the tank bounty a single solution for all modes is possible.
AeroniumX Wrote:I think 5 minutes is quite long. Maybe 1 or 2 minutes is ok for league? At end games you tend to die more often so I'm not sure this is a good solution. It's quite radical idea.
Yes, maybe 5 minutes is a bit too long. It should be the border to being a feeder, maybe a bit higher than the deathrate you would kick a player for. So maybe 3 minutes, that would mean that in one hour a player could not give the enemies more money than the bounty of 20 deaths. This will probably reduce the bounty income a bit, if you look at games where you clearly won, however from the enemies' point of view those players may have been feeders, and it would still be possible to raise the base bounty a bit.
UnifiedDoom Wrote:While I admit that feeders are a problem. I think a change like this will encourage the oh-so-annoying and oh-so-arrogant style of gameplay in which players "suicide for kills." I'm sure most people have played league games in which one player has the "most kills" but also the most deaths. The player usually acts like hot stuff because he did the "most work" and demands armor upgrades and tries to kick other people because they are "useless" and "feeders" even though he has more total deaths than they do. These kinds of players are the kind that piss me off the most in btanks. To encourage such reckless gameplay I feel would be a mistake and only reward this idiotic behavior. I've always felt survivor was a more "worthy" award than "tank killer."
It is true, that this allows a more aggressive style, and I like being the survivor more, too. But the reason for this is actually feeding again, since I try not to feed. If it wasn't about that gold, I wouldn't have a big problem with more aggressive players (maybe making the games shorter). Still, in case players become too aggressive, I would prefer something which doesn't damage the whole team, but the suicide player himself. Increasing the respawn time a bit for example. Currently they can die as often as they want, and the "Survivor"-player will have a hard time because of them. It's actually just another dimension of feeding.
UnifiedDoom Wrote:As for the imbalance in the games you played. I believe I was there for quite a few of them. At first I thought you were a spoofer actually but I chose to remain silent. I think you should try some ranked games before you make a judgement that "20% of the time teams were unfair from the beginning," it's not everyday a 1600 elo player randomly decides to play 5 qualify games in a row.
Yes, that was me. And ranked games may be more fair. And regarding the high waiting time, only players who really want to have a good game are in there, but I don't think I am playing well enough to really do a ranked game any good. Played some ranked games already, and they were okay, but whatever, we should also try to make the qualify games good games. And if there's a good player around, it might be a challenge to fight him, but nowadays this actually leads to one player trying to kick the player with the most deaths out of his team. Just last game I had it again, an ally tried to kick another player who had 0-3 stats... I simply hate how things like that cause a fight inside a team. And the reason are feeders almost all the time. So I even think it's necessary to change something there.
So now I am defending my idea. What about other options? I think I won't support no change at all here, but other ideas are welcome. If I'm correct, these ideas are around:
- Changing bounty regarding the last time of death (linear increase, maybe above 100% after some longer time)
- Changing bounty regarding the total deaths of a player
- Increasing respawn time
- (Not influencing feeders) Increasing assist money
And I've said it before, but I would like to have a "clean" bounty formula, so that maybe the kill/death-ratio is removed from the bounty, so a player can actually know what affects his bounty.