Public Stopwatch needs a fix


(Szakalot) #1

This is from minlvl10 SW games, but would be surprised if it was any better on default servers.

Multitude of problems exist on pub SW servers. No solutions are perfect for a drop-in/out gamemode but i think a lot of things could be done to actually make this mode more playable:

  • game starts with a few players - typically a stopwatch game will start with 2-6 people on the server, which is not enough for the server to balance, and the game balance shifts dramatically with each good player joining/leaving. On average half of the first round is unrepresentative of how the second round is going to go. A weak team might steamroll a few obj only to get stomped when better players join and shift the balance.
  • players ragequit like hell - Since about one month into open beta the ‘leave the server after round is over’ meta kicked in, probably cancer spreading from CS. Few people leave cause they got the cancer, and then the rest of the players leave because ‘everybody is leaving’. No point in sticking around and being the only player left on a server, only to load the map and /disconnect.
    This mentality is beautifully illustrated by stocks, once certain shares lose value, investors panic-sell and the shares lose more value.

a simple fix could work here, that would actually also work for obj servers: give an incentive to play THE ENTIRE round, from the map beginning till the map end. A flat 10-20% credit bonus could suffice, or better yet a chance at a case drop (or better yet, an extra REALLY small chance at a elite/special case drop) People will thisk twice before ragequitting if they risk missing out on some special goodness. Why not subtly drop base credit-earn rate and give us that 10-20% credit bonus?

While community servers would flat-out solve this, middle ground solutions are desirable too.
This will encourage people to stay even if on a weaker team, and will also encourage people to stay on the server between maps, promoting good games from the beginning. Imo stopwatch is a great mode that actually gives defenders a reason to bother, cause defending on obj server is like ‘meh, ill just rack kills, next map ill attack hopefully’

Single fix for both SW gameplay problems.

ON a side note: can the server check if teams are balanced when mid-round before starting the 2nd round? Often some players leave after mid-match for whatever reasons, and the next round starts with 5/6v7 often screwing up the whole map.


(spookify) #2

Maps, Maps and Maps that is what it comes down to.


(mccrorie) #3

An issue I have with SW is the round will start while half the team is loading in. This happens to me a lot even though I’m using a SSD. In fact there doesn’t seem to be any rhyme or reason as to how long loading will take versus when the match starts. Too many times the first obj is completed because there are 3 out of the 5 or 7 defenders actively fighting, and by the time the others load-in the balance has already swung strongly in favour of the attacking side and the first obj is completed without much resistance. This leaves a really negative impression and I always feel slightly cheated.

OFC when it’s the other way around and you’re attacking and you easily push past the 2 or 3 active defenders the win can feel empty and worthless.

I’m not sure what to recommend other a longer wait time before the match starts.


(mccrorie) #4

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Szakalot again.


(Szakalot) #5

ehh, no?

yeah we need more maps; but that has little to do with how SW is being played out


(Kendle) #6

This happens in Execution as well, although the game mode is inherently less affected by it.

Game starts with few players - who trickle in during the first half - meaning at switch over the second half starts with a different balance / dynamic than the first half - meaning the result of the match is screwed, sometimes quite significantly - then everyone leaves at the end of the match - meaning the next game starts with the same problem.

The problem with a reward system that addresses players leaving between maps, is that it could only apply to those who were there when the match started, i.e. who’d played the previous match as well. So you’d need to play a match for no reward in order to play subsequent matches for a reward (otherwise you could join a match just before the end and get the same loot as those who’d been there since the beginning). I can’t see anyone doing that.

This has to happen IMO. The best incentive to “remain on the server between maps” is having something invested in the server itself, like it’s your team’s / your community’s / your favourite, because you know other people you want to play with are likely to be there.

The problem is I don’t think SD want to do this, because it doesn’t fit the “gaming as a service” model they seem to be intent on delivering.


(Szakalot) #7

[QUOTE=Kendle;540779]
The problem with a reward system that addresses players leaving between maps, is that it could only apply to those who were there when the match started, i.e. who’d played the previous match as well. So you’d need to play a match for no reward in order to play subsequent matches for a reward (otherwise you could join a match just before the end and get the same loot as those who’d been there since the beginning). I can’t see anyone doing that.
.[/QUOTE]

Where is the problem? typically people play more than one map per gaming session. You will still be encouraged to stay on the server, to start the new map from the beginning. Call it a ‘loyalty bonus’ and be happy. You would still get normal rewards (you join your first server of the day and start completing missions), you’ll just be encouraged to stick around on that server. Imo a simple fix that could significantly improve overall match quality (and balance)


(Glottis-3D) #8

‘PLay-to-the-end’ bonus would definitely help.
OR a ‘Ragequitter’ penalty


(Szakalot) #9

rather give people a bonus. While its annoying when people abandon ship at the first sign of unbalanced teams, there are plenty of legitimate reasons why you can’t play for 30-40min straight. Plus all the game-crashing.


(ZGToRRent) #10

credit bonus for playing entire match? That’s something.


(Raviolay) #11

I like the crate and money bonuses for staying the course for a match. However I don’t think the crate would be as alluring currently. Due to how stingy they are with cards. For example I purchased a pack of five recently, because of the added chance of containment cards. I received 5 silver cards… That is the last time I will spend money on crates, unless there is a massive overhaul, with how they work. I would suggest a subset crate that is tied to drop based on match completion, that has cards in it that you can only from that crate type.


(an3N1GM4) #12

I agree with everything said :smiley:

Even said it myself
http://forums.dirtybomb.nexon.net/discussion/comment/95099/#Comment_95099


(Loki.) #13

Well, its a horrible ‘service model’…
You made a very valid point as to why…

For a free game that has been out as long as it has, the decline in numbers, also proves you correct…

And Doesn’t matter if its in ‘beta’… many seem to think when it leaves beta, some magic pixie dust will fall upon the FPS gaming world and 100,000’s of players will flock to this game…

Reality is, they already have and flew away…


(Mustang) #14

Na, gaming-as-a-service doesn’t affect the ability to have community servers, it’s the free-to-play model that did that.

I think a happy middle ground would be to allow players to spin-up server instances themselves, this would allow a controlled hosting environment as needed for free-to-play, whist being community run and admin’ed and having a place to call home.

It wouldn’t even cost them any more because there would be less people playing on the current non-admin’ed publically run servers, meaning they wouldn’t need as many and the resources could be re-allocated to community servers instead.