Some people just want the round to be over when dragging out a near 100% guaranteed win is also beneficial.
No one knows what the next match might bring. Win or lose. You might get less SL and RP from a lose, or the next match is an uptier where you get stomped. Be useless and die early. You’re theoretically better off staying in the guaranteed winning match.
But hey… some people lack patience, needs constant stimulation or just don’t care. I think a good amount of people fall in the first two though. Some play to have fun and not minmax the grind.
Yeah. War Thunder is only a grind simulator if you let it be. Especially if you have no interest playing top-tier most of the time. I think it’s something you learn over time. This game has been here since 2012 for air, and 2014 for ground. There’s no rush. You don’t need to minmax your grind. Games not gong anywhere.
And why you want the round over? What good do you get from ending it?
And the win - is either certain, in which case you can just quit and go next round yourself, anytime, or, if there is any doubt the team would get a win, then it’s still a fight, and then it’s fair game and sound tactic on the last guy’s part, which you should respect.
If you don’t want to fight it out as the last player on the losing team you got three options.
Crash and let the match be over with.
Let the enemy team shoot you down.
Return to airfield, land and then J out.
You are not accumulating extra activity by spending X amount of time doing literally nothing but flying around, nor is anyone else. People can accumulate game activity by hitting the GTs or bases if not shooting down players and that’s all well and good because it counts more for activity compared to just dragging the match out by doing nothing, but flying around is doing literally nothing.
It’s better to just take the L for a lost match and move onto the next one.
The short answer is that one enemy dragging out the match only benefits bombers, ground pounders and the single person that gets the kill; for the rest of the team your time is much better spent in a different match because even if the match lasts 40 minutes, if all your kils are from the first 10 minutes, you are not getting a bigger reward. Same thing for the last guy in the enemy team, your time is much better spent in a match you can win unless you are actually trying to win and not just running.
You get to play the next round anytime you want, no matter what that one last guy does. I told already in 1st post: you wanna new round - you’re free to quit the one you’re playing and get the new one.
So, no, the last guy’s actions do not anyhow delay your new round. You do - by not pressing couple buttons needed to quit current round.
And who told you i don’t want to fight it out when i’m the last player? It actually depends. I sure want to, if there are any reasonable chance to win a fight. When there is not, i don’t want to - ain’t suicidal here. Recently, i won one when i was the last guy and enemy team had 7 folks alive, exactly by fighting it out.
But it depends on what kind of plane you’re in, and what kind of players remain in enemy team. Quite often, it is suicidal to fight. Example: you fly a jet which has no counter-measures, no radar, no RWR, no MAW, no all-aspect missiles - and you got a bunch of jets against you who got all of that and have shown they know how to use it, by scoring good frags in the match. Matchmaking allows such stuff. Trying to fight would be suicidal.
But that’s entirely different point. My 1st post is saying that IF the last guy does not want to fight - it’s a good thing for everyone who is playing to earn RP. Simple as that. You don’t like it? I don’t like it too. Our opinion does not change it, though.
As for your proposed options, they are not so good. “Crash to end the game”: doing this applies full SL repair cost. Why do it? “Let enemies shoot you down” - the same. “Land and jump out” - this one is OK only if you know you can safely land. Sadly, those days, it’s very often not the case: there are players who will destroy you when you’d try to land. Vultures, the old WT word for 'em - they prey on airfields, both with and without AA on them, to get easy kills.
About activity: after doing 3…4 total of destroyed enemy bases / enemy kills (including AI planes), activity gets over 80% even if you’d then spend more than half of a match doing nothing. There is many times more RP to gain via staying alive and increasing “time played” than what you can get by doing many more “actions” which score for activity - doesn’t get more than 100% you know.
And yes, the other team can and should keep hitting bases, ground units and NPC planes when that last guy is running away. They get triple benefit from such a prolonged game: 1st, direct RP rewards for bases and units destroyed, 2nd, several more percent of activity, and 3rd, more “time played” while also getting victory bonus over it all.
That is what i am talking about, man - that “last guy running away” and surviving for longer actually gives the other team ideal conditions to get more RP and SL from a match. They should thank him, if RP or SL is what they want. And like i said more than once already, anyone just wishing for a new match - can quit the current one and get new one any time. It’s just couple buttons to press. Ain’t too long or difficult, is it?
TL;DR What you want is to control the behavior of other players which will never happen no matter how much you want to. I will remind you what your options are as the last player if you don’t want to fight it out.
Crash and let the match be over with.
Let the enemy shoot you down.
Return to airfield, land and then J out.
Those are the only options you get as the last player on the losing team in a match. No more, no less. Deal with it.
If I interpret these calculations and conclusions correct, it only shows one problem to me:
The reward system doesn’t fit the current state of ARB at all.
The primary goal of ARB is to win a battle. And the reward system has to follow this goal. Actually it doesn’t.
All other problems of “bad” behaviour are symptoms of a public server design. You will never get rid of it. And the useless report system makes it even worse.
To control behaviour of other players, some meants of control are required. There are no such means - not for me, nor for any other player. Which means, it’s impossible for me to control other players. And i don’t have a habit to want any impossible thing.
And i never said a word about what any “other” players must do. I only spoke about what they can do. If they so wish, themselves.
As for the options you proposed - how about “4. Outrun and dodge other players”. How that is not an option in your list? It often takes skill to do it well, it can be fun doing it, and there are even in-game awards for doing exactly that, like “survivor” in air arcade.
It doesn’t fit completely, but it does fit certain purposes. It’s different. That’s why my 1st post uses specific phraze i used to describe this problem - not “doesn’t fit ARB”, but rather “the game’s automated routines to deal with “inactive” players, and majority of players in the game - all see such “combat avoidance” as something bad. In error.”.
It is exactly the game’s “inactivity” reporting tool, reward suppression subsystem and “potential bans” which needs revision. Not the entire reward system. Because there are important reasons RP and SL are awarded the way they are awarded, and changing them any much - would be inadvisable.
It sure doesn’t, yes. But thing is, it shouldn’t, too.
To win a battle - is not the primary goal in ARB. Nor in any “random” battles mode. To win battles - is the primary goal only in squadron battles and in team tournaments, in WT. Because there, everyone in the team gets rewards if the team wins, and everyone gets nothing if the team loses. This is the same with IRL team sports like basketball, volleyball, football, hockey, etc.
In ARB and other “random battles” modes, rewards are individual. Your team may lose, but if you personally did very good, you still get very good rewards. Your team may win, but if you failed hard, you get almost nothing anyway. That’s why in ARB and other “random battles” - the primary goal, for everyone, is to do well personally. Whether the team wins or not - is secondary, not primary, concern.
And then, the big thing about ARB and all other “random battles” modes reward system - is that, by design, it must both provide significantly bigger rewards for better individual performance, BUT in the same time, it must also provide significantly big rewards for vast majority of players, including those with low skill, ability and/or motivation to perform well. The former is to satisfy “better half” of all the players - the latter, to satisfy “worse half” of all the players, simply put.
You see, that reward system must provide “meaniningfully large” reward to keep people grinding, and all kinds of people - noobs and masters, weak and strong alike; but also it must not allow any way to massively (many-fold) increase of reward via this or that specific tactic or method of playing, because if such exist, someone among dozens thousands players will find and share it, and before long, lots of players do it and “break the system”, so to say.
Those, very understandable, needs - shaped up that key fact my 1st post mentions: “majority of RP gained - is from time played”. It is the “equalizer” part as well as “ain’t nothing there to massively increase RP gains via some specific gameplay tactic”. And as such, this feature is certainly needed and desired, and will stay. It may get weakened a bit, perhaps, but never dramatically.
That’s why the only imaginable way to deal with that side-effect of “avoiding combat = inactivity = punishable” current state of game’s treatment of running-away / base camping players - is to do something specifically about how inactivity is treated and handled by the game. Can’t change (much) reward system, per above.
If that’s too long, here’s WTLDR: game’s reward system makes it beneficial for everybody to avoid PvP combat when they are “last guy in the team”, and even more so, against enemy’s “last guy in the team”.
I don’t have much to say on your opinions in general here, but i do want to point out some details.
Players shouldn’t be playing for SL/RP as a primary goal, they should be playing to have fun. I can almost with certainty say that a vast majority of players won’t find flying aimlessly around the map fun, nor chasing the player that does.
The systems in place AND the rules all discourage such behaviour:
In the end it isn’t about maximising the grind, it’s about having fun playing the game. You are fully within your right to try to maximize your own RP gain as long as it doesn’t break the rules of fair play and effect other players experience with the game negatively.
Sidenote:
Avoiding combat may increase your reward, but i’m not entirely sure it does though as RP gain from time played is a function of a multiplier with activity percentage gained from your score.
I’m not sure about this next source as i have no way of confirming the data but my gut feeling tells me it leans towards being correct. Section 4.3 of this player made RP calculation explanation shows that if you play longer without gaining more score you loose activity percentage and i wonder if that loss is offset by the RP gain from time played over the same period for some of the score ranges. ( WT score, SL and RP reward calculation method revised edition - Google Documenten )
You ARE getting a bigger reward. Check the numbers in 1st post. See how far over half of base RP - was for “time played”. Now, you can see i didn’t make a gazillion of kills in it - often, you can do that all in 12 mins. And that match lasted 24 mins. Means, you do that much, or similar, in 12 mins, then you for “doing nothing” 2nd half - another 12 mins - you get half of that “time played” RP, multiplied by vehicle research bonus and skill bonus (+150% combined, in that particular match).
In that particular game, it’d be this: 250% of (6445 / 2) = 8056 RP for “doing nothing” for 2nd half of the game, which would end up being 8056 / 236.97 = 34% of all RP earned. With 1st half being other 66%.
So roughly, when you prolong a match, you’re getting RP at about half rate for just being in a match - chilling out however you like. As long as you’re alive.
And if this sounds “half as good as it could be” - nope, it’s about just as good, at least. Because while you’re in a match, you have zero time losses for waiting - 1st some seconds waiting for the game to conclude a match, then varying amount of time waiting until the game’s matchmaker puts you into another, then waiting more for the map to load and starting count to end. All that waiting times, you get zero rewards.
And even more, at least occasionally, you play a match where someone gets you before you can do any “activity”. You lose a head-on, or get some radar missile from nowhere killing you after you spent some minutes climbing, etc. All those games? Also almost zero rewards.
Compare it to pretty safe and guaranteed RP gain when the enemy team’s last guy is prolonging your winning game, add winning bonus on top (if you average all your games, you’re definitely not getting winning bonus from all games - but in games vs “last guy running”, almost always you know you’ll have your winning bonus) - and it’s clear picture here: whether you realize it or not, you do get overall better rewards letting “last enemy guy” live.
I am not asking you to do it, mind you. I am just stating how reward system works. You play however you like. If you like to play in ways which generate less rewards because it’s, for any kind of reason, more fun for you - sure thing, i won’t try to stop you anyhow.
But there is certain rationality in discussing how reward system and inactivity penalties work, you know. Lots of people do it. I am far not the 1st guy who does it.
1st, i know for a fact lots of players see RP grind as their primary goal. Arguably, more than half of all. Source: countless discussions over more than 10 years about it that i’ve read, and countless talks about it i had with others. Also, it’s pretty clear by the way Gaijin designed RP grind - it is a grind. And it’s much in human nature to prioritize the grind in grindy games. Very normal.
2nd, those things are not mutually exclusive. You can much care about your RP and (to lesser extent) SL rewards - and have fun, in the same time. And fun in more than one way.
I respectfully (no sarcasm!) disagree; i think you misinterpret this rule, much.
1st: nothing in this topic is about being AFK.
2nd: nothing i posted anyhow advocates taking any deliberate action that leads to a loss.
clarification: avoiding combat does not always lead to a loss. Because it is possible multiple enemies will die themselves while you’re avoiding combat, after which you can resume PvP action if needed. Practical example: https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/1monujo/antivulture_nesher_1_vs_7_heres_how_you_win_if/ . In this video, i was the last guy vs 7 enemies, and at some point i actively avoid combat by flying back to my AA airfield and patrolling it, then using its AA systems as cover. Result: out of 7 enemies, 4 enemies die without me even trying to fight them, themselves. 5th dies by AA trying to attack me. I actively defeated only two our of seven. Therefore, avoiding combat, however unlikely, can still lead to a win - and therefore can not ever be a proven way of deliberately losing a match. Fact.
3rd: “wandering around the map without completing objectives” - to me, this clearly describes cases when players do it for entirety of a match. Which this topic is not about, at all. This topic is about doing some objectives - be it PvE or PvP - 1st, and then, depending on situation in a match, possibly and optionally, for a part of a match, wandering around the map and/or avoiding combat, while knowing with certainty that doing so will benefit every person who remains alive in the match - both teams, - via provoding better rewards.
4th, even if any of previous 3 points are anyhow objectionale - there is yet another layer to it: yes, there is this Code of Conduct, and it has this rule - and it is exactly part of this topic’s 1st post revelation that this particular rule of this Code of Conduct needs a revision. Exactly in light of particular specific feature of game’s reward system which i described in full detail in 1st post.
For most players, i believe - and i’m pretty certain - it’s about both those things. Similarly important, each.
“Rules of fair play”: how exactly avoiding combat is unfair? Did you not ever do it yourself, even if for a brief moment?
How about playing a tank, making a shot and then driving back a few feet to hide behind a corner until your gun reloads? Here you go - you just avoided combat!
How about some fighter diving into your bomber, and you dive further down and away, trying to reach bombing position? Here you go - you just avoided combat, you didn’t try to hit that fighter with your turrets, but dove down!
How about your stock destroyer steaming full ahead away from that big scary cruiser, which got twice bigger guns with twice higher effective range, but half your speed? You ever do that - you “avoid combat”, too.
So, then, if you consider those and similar cases “acceptable” and “fair play”, then you gotta agree: there are situations when avoiding combat, for some shorter or longer part of a match - is perfectly fair, legit and respectable.
This topic is about discovering and explaining just one more such reason. One of many.
And i fail to see how it should be treated any different. It should be seen, in my opinion, as perfectly fair, legit and respectable, as well.
And so far, none of the responses i see in this topic convinced me otherwise.
That’s your opinion.
You think it backwards.
The reward system has to be a consequence of the game goal, but most rewards, especially for beginners, could be earned by base bombing, with no effect to the battle. In some sense, many of these players are playing more passive than the ones who want save a ticket advantage by holding enemies away from ground targets by baiting.
That’s why I say, if GJN won’t lower the rewards for bombing, they should increase the ticket bleed. Imo there has to be correlation between axction in battle and the rewards.
It’s the same with mission points for events. There is no logic behind it, why I get more mission points for destroying 3 studebakers than for a player kill. So even this system could force me to a passive play.
True.
And that’s why i will never understand this grinding thing. There is no fun in it at all.
I’m a player having fun at all tiers, but when I play lowtier every second battle I get a comment, why a lvl 100 player is playing so low. It’s farming, seal clubbing, blablabla…
In my beginners time I had to play many battles in a row against squads of Ceres, JG3, Olyst and so on. I never complained about it. I took it as a challenge and had fun.
Nowadays everyone you intercept before he can drop bombs is whining…
