Give us 20% bonus for staying to the end instead of deserter penalties

Suggestions
1

Background

_
I feel like the 20% defecit on earnings for the next 2 matches is an ok punishment. A lot of people were proposing that a lockout of x minutes (anymore than 5 would be too much) if they desert a match. If anything could kill a game within a day, that would. Someone else was offering a system where they punish you based on frequency, which again, isn’t a bad idea, but I doubt the devs can implement it.

And the being able to quit when the team runs out of tickets is fine. It can get frustrating just watching the team doing nothing, or trying their best and getting slaughtered. But since it’s timed to 1 minute anyway, I don’t really understand the point. Still, it’s a feature.

But I feel adding deserter penalties straight up was the wrong choice. There are many other games out there that don’t penalise you for leaving, namely, Hell Let Loose. Arguably, Hell Let Loose is probably worse off for you leaving, because it encourages more active teamwork. Enlisted on the other hand, doesn’t require as much commitment. However, Hell Let Loose doesn’t punish their players…

The Proposal

_
What Hell Let Loose does instead is gives you a bonus, around 50%, for staying to the end. No deserter penalties whatsoever. And, it has a bigger player base too. They could afford to punish their players, however, they don’t. Why? Unlike Gayjin, they understand that people play games to unwind and relax, not because they don’t have a life.

I’m not proposing we do the same bonus (Gayjin is all about the grind in the end), but a small bonus, like 20% extra for staying to the end would be nice. It gives us, those who struggle, just enough motivation to continue struggling and playing the match. Some people have advocated for it to be a by-deserter basis, where you are rewarded an extra 10% per deserter. However, I’m not a fan of that idea as it’s not a flat rate bonus, which would be easier and more consistent to implement than a by-deserter basis.

Conclusion

_
Please devs, give us 20% bonus for staying to the end. The 20% deficits aren’t going to dissuade that many deserters, and those of us who have to desert for life reasons will get punished unfairly. Remove the deserter penalties and give us the bonus for staying instead. That should have been implemented instead, as punishing an already small player base that plays recreationally and just for fun, will kill the game faster than you can say "overpriced premium".

10 Likes
2

Meaningless, not addressing core issue, not fixing anything, not having the same effect on every player.

1 Like
3

The core issue is working on being fixed by the devs in the form of map feedback and adding map selection (no matter how bugged it is). That’s a step in the right direction.

I know for a fact the one thing veterans need / want most is silver. This 20% bonus will still affect them, as they are usually the highest performing in a match, and 20% extra can be a big deal. Either to fuel their gambling addiction or to purchase / upgrade new weapons.

I’m sure most people would prefer a bonus instead of deficit regardless.

4

That’s not core issue.

No, you don’t. 20% definitely doesn’t make significant difference. Complete joke.

Most deserters would definitely prefer not to be punished, I agree.

1 Like
5

If the core issue isn’t map design or game modes, then what is the core issue?

6

Benefits that comes from systematically bypassing the system and MM itself.
Which is simply not all about gamemodes/maps like some trying to make it looks like.

Btw. It’s so funny they do not even plan to change anything about desertion not influencing WR.

7

Not even…

Veterans… don’t need anything (I don’t).

Meaning, only newcomers or those still grinding will feel the consequences. For people like me, there would be no difference whatsoever.

BUT

You are 100% correct in that just adding punishment WITHOUT solving the reasons as to WHY ppl desert in the first place, is inefficient.
I see this as a chain link: one part is missing, it lose it’s use.

I’d see no problem in adding punishments, perhaps even harsher ones, if only things were well thought out.

They are not.
for example, stacks will still dominate matches and remain completely unbalanced. Mc Donald said that soon™ it MAY be worked on. Maybe.

…

with the very poor suggestion map choices… the solutions are not enough for the game to be engaging enough to prevent the need to desert. Not enough…

1 Like
8

I actually want figures on the percentage of veterans to newcomers, or veterans to those past BR I. It would be interesting to see player retention after BR I. Because then, it would dictate how certain things, such as desertion penalties, should be applied. I am still against desertion penalties (as I have said multiple times), mainly because Hell Let Loose doesn’t have any.

It would also give us good insight into how poorly / well the game is actually fairing. It’s good enough to retain older players, but if we can’t maintain the majority of BR I players, that’s a big issue.

Going too harsh will definitely kill the playerbase, veteran or not. How harsh were you thinking? I feel like even a 50% loss or 100% loss would be getting there. Being locked out from playing squads would be too harsh, but then it would work for veterans who have no need to grind. But then at the same time veterans and premium owners can just cycle new squads. It’s such a hard balance.

That is definitely the biggest issue affecting BR III down. Most new players probably leave because of stomps, followed by janky gameplay and confusing game mechanics. All of this needs to be cleared up, and especially the tutorial. I don’t just want to learn about “z is to crouch”. I want to learn how actually play the game, tactics and all. These are things that really need to be fixed.

2 Likes
9

That’s why I’m not happy about new measures. It will NOT help player retention, it will be detrimental because there’s no carrot. just the stick. ppl don’t play games for the stick. they play for the carrot. (so to speak)
I can’t get my mates to keep playing Enlisted. and desertion is never what they answered me as to why.

… It’s always balance. always.

So to avert their frustrations and try desperately to hook them up (eheheh) I as a vet can recognize unfair teams before the match even starts sometimes, or know if it will a slog after one minute. I propose them if they want to find something more suitable warning them the match we are in won’t be really pleasant.

Now imagine a penalty over this, without anything to ease their initial concerns. I don’t see this helping retention. Personally.

I don’t know, Just saying IF real measures were taken to solve core issues, I bet nobody would really complain about much harsher punishments (as they would then be justified better)

1 Like
10

I’ve been working up the motivation to completely rebalance the tech trees. Some guns do not deserve to belong on certain BRs, either because they’re too overpowered, or too underpowered.

My first step would be just to rearrange the guns as they are at the moment. So out of say 5 guns, the lowest performing would only get 1 point in damage if it has the lowest damage, whereas the other gun may get 5 points because it deals the highest damage.

However, the highest hitting one may get the lowest score in recoil because it may be too high. I would work it that way until we get to the total score, and the top 5th would be BR V, the lowest 5th would get BR I, and I would work that way closing in until I reach BR III.

11

Based on what?

Source? Trust me bro?

First of all, majority of playerbase are definitely not systematic deserters.
Second, penalties that effectively prevents to efficiently bypassing MM via systematic desertion are norm in many other similar games.

Some economical incentives are not. It’s completely made up BS by people who either have no clue what they’re talking about. Or they’re intentionally trying to undermine possibility to implement any effective anti desertion measures.

It is total failure such anti desertion measures weren’t present since day one.

12

oh no, not TT balance, that is mostly fine tbh.

mostly teams. You know when a 4 stack is pummelling your team. when I’m solo, I just get in the air and pretty much abandon the ground when this happens.

Newcomers don’t have the experience to recognize those stacks. they just feel the stomp, and it’s unfun for them from start to finish.

1 Like
13

I have made suggestions in the past where parties queue in a different game mode, like custom games. But still gives research points like squads. It wasn’t received too well for some reason.

14

That’s total nonsense. Deserters would always complain about loss of comfort. Because that’s what bypassing the system effectively does.
There are so many reasons for which one would want to just keep cherry picking matches unpunished, effectively creating his own MM based on his own criterias.

The problem is that it’s at the expense of all other players, undermining MM and any attempts to improve it in the future.

To prevent systematical desertion is where we should start, not where we should end.
Otherwise nothing will ever change. And someone will always bring up some pseudo justification for why ability to bypass the MM should be kept.

15

a simple mm where each time have the same amount of stacks would suffice, really.

world of tonks did it, worked very well. teams were truly fair (mostly)

1 Like
16

neither.

I believe it should be simultaneous.

1 Like
17

That’s just unrealistic. Because perfection doesn’t exist. Something that you think is the core problem causing desertion may be completely irrelevant to other deserters.

It’s going to be never ending problem.

And the longer cherry-picking via systrmatic desertion is allowed to continue with impunity, the harder it will be to take any effective action against it.

Totally naive approach to think otherwise.

18

Indeed, only God is perfect, so they say.

But it’s not because it’s impossible to attain, that we mustn’t try to attain it, to reach the next best thing.

… unlike what devs want to implement, which is just lazy in every ways.

2 Likes