I came to the conclusion that the game’s automated systems which handle “inactivity” of players - punish quite many good players for what the system mindlessly considers “inactivity”

[RunaDacino]

It kinda makes me wish we had a community who wouldn’t vandalize stuff, otherwise we could come together on one mutually edited google sheet and keep adding ARB/GRB/etc data going

“In a single vehicle I lived for X seconds and earn Y score and post-battle itemized vehicle breakdown said I had Activity%”

Would make it much, much easier to get quantitative & predictive functions for modes other than sim. In sim it’s a bit easier due to the maxcap of 15 minutes removing a variable, so all we needed was one very angry person to collect hundreds of examples to complain to gaijin that activity maxes out at 92% per cycle no matter how much score you earn (gaijin said “working as intended.”)

[Normandy_Corsair]

I was with you until you started saying “good and skillful” players are the ones purely doing PvE (who coincidentally also have penta-negative levels of K/D)

You seem to think that being “good” at the game is manipulating the systems to give you the most RP/SL, but that simply isn’t the case.

[Normandy_Corsair]

@Fins_FinsT

And why you want the round over? What good do you get from ending it?

Going to the next round and not being subjected to mind numbing gameplay of flying around pointlessly waiting for your team to catch the last guy who is playing passive presumably

@Fins_FinsT

And the win - is either certain, in which case you can just quit and go next round yourself,

The win becomes less certain when you start making the numbers more fair for the enemy… leaving matches also immediately cuts off your RP/SL gain as you are very much aware.

@Fins_FinsT

and then it’s fair game and sound tactic on the last guy’s part, which you should respect.

It depends what exact tactics you are referring to.

@Fins_FinsT

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.

Only if they are able to quickly manipulate situation to be in their favor regarding grinding, such as bombing or hitting ground targets. This is something that a lot of aircraft simply can not do.

@Fins_FinsT

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.

SL repair costs are not a valid enough reason to intentionally drag out games.

@Fins_FinsT

“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.

So your strategy here is to break game ToS by playing 100% passively, avoiding all conflict OR trying to land on airfield to J out if you think there is a chance you will die doing so, just because you might have to pay 6000SL? With all this math you are throwing around, have you ever considered that wasting 10-15 minutes of time running from losing 6000SL removes your ability (and therefore creates an opportunity cost) to go to ANOTHER GAME and earn many magnitudes of SL above that 6k figure? Even if you end up dying in both games?

@Fins_FinsT

And yes, the other team can and should keep hitting bases, ground units and NPC planes when that last guy is running away.

MANY planes cannot do this and are effectively useless/pointless once the enemy opposition runs out.

@Fins_FinsT

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.

Again, and what you clearly do not get, 1. this does not matter if said user does not care about maximizing RP/SL reward in exchange for them having less fun and 2. This doesn’t matter if said users are not CAPABLE of doing the actions you presented.

@Mordillo66

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.

Yes.

@Mordillo66

The primary goal of ARB is to win a battle. And the reward system has to follow this goal. Actually it doesn’t.

I agree.

@Fins_FinsT

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.

Here’s an example of what you say here being true. The system USED to reward you for “passive participation” meaning things like flying near enemy planes would trickle activity time/rp/sl to you invisibly because the game assumed you were baiting, defensive flying, etc and therefore participating and therefore would reward you. Nowadays you can go 15 minutes doing the craziest defensive flying of your life and earn literally and exactly 0 RP because you never got to get your own guns on something. It’s ridiculous.

[iboopy]

I think being fired at, or within the vicinity of other planes should count as activity.
However, as to the rest of this thread, landing timer is great, it stops camping (most of the time) and the slashed RP rewards of playing giga passively can hurt strike aircraft, but prevents people being dicks all game who sideclimb to space.