Minimum players in CW games

[5alood]

TBH although 2v2 would be best, it would kill literally any chance for the minigame to be played throughout the week. It literally takes (me) hours of waiting and asking to have atleast 1 person join, let alone 3 more... Which is why adding a minimum amount of players may not be the best change to start with, perhaps once we get the minigame to start goin’ a bit and have people actually play it we could add a limit. But then again I could be wrong, not allowing “boosting” could be the incentive needed for people to join after all.

[Skiller]

Just had a possible thought for how you could handle the rewards to reduce the abuse, building off your idea of reducing rewards for losers. Doesn't solve the agreement if you cooperate and trade wins, but would inspire people to try their hardest in that situation anyway!

What if we had it so that the player who participated the most, like did the most for their team, received an additional award?

That way, if you've got a player stuck on a garbage team, they're still rewarded for trying, even though they get screwed out of a win.
Give the best player on the losing team like 50% of the reward number of tickets given to the winners. Being the best player would consist of some collection of the following:

Spoiler: show

• Capping
• Dealing Damage
• Placing Barricades
• Fixing doors
• Roping their wall
• Destroying their barricades/doors/catapult
• mining/collapsing basement walls

You could also then add a reward to the shop that shows you've been MVP a certain number of times, and have it be tiered, such that if you're MVP once you can earn the base reward, 10 times you get an improved version, 50 is another tier, 100, 250, etc.

Cost of the reward should be minimum, like 10 tickets, so its just about the time dedicated to playing. Would be a nice way to provide a benefit to players that have already earned the top-tier rewards.

Thoughts all?

Have added these ideas to post here: viewtopic.php?f=73&t=70125

[5alood]

Just had a possible thought for how you could handle the rewards to reduce the abuse, building off your idea of reducing rewards for losers. Doesn't solve the agreement if you cooperate and trade wins, but would inspire people to try their hardest in that situation anyway!

What if we had it so that the player who participated the most, like did the most for their team, received an additional award?

That way, if you've got a player stuck on a garbage team, they're still rewarded for trying, even though they get screwed out of a win.
Give the best player on the losing team like 50% of the reward number of tickets given to the winners. Being the best player would consist of some collection of the following:

Spoiler: show

• Capping
• Dealing Damage
• Placing Barricades
• Fixing doors
• Roping their wall
• Destroying their barricades/doors/catapult
• mining/collapsing basement walls

You could also then add a reward to the shop that shows you've been MVP a certain number of times, and have it be tiered, such that if you're MVP once you can earn the base reward, 10 times you get an improved version, 50 is another tier, 100, 250, etc.

Cost of the reward should be minimum, like 10 tickets, so its just about the time dedicated to playing. Would be a nice way to provide a benefit to players that have already earned the top-tier rewards.

Thoughts all?

Tbh i really like the idea of the MVP points thing In the shop or w.e

However giving the player that did the most on a losing team additional rewards I personally dont see how that would in any way impact the idea of boosting? Could be because I just woke up and I ain’t thinking straight. Sure could be a nice little thing to add but still dont see that as the change needed to stop people from boosting. It sure could help in legit games though, people wouldnt just give up after the enemy team caps a few and are ahead. However people would still rather agree on a tie/win. Yeah i feel like im saying a lot of different bullshit all at once... My apologies if it doesnt make sense

When you’re way ahead in tickets you get less and less tickets and then eventually you stop getting tickets so for example if you get an account to afk in there while you cap flags, after a few caps you would stop getting any tickets. Personally that made me not even think of having someone afk in there and for me to boost because Ik the amount of tickets I’ll get wont be worth the time.

[Skiller]

It would be most effective in conjunction with the removal of rewards from losing, as Rapsey had mentioned earlier. People on the thread I linked though seemed against the idea of doing that, despite it helping with boosters. If they were to be removed, the rewards for winning should be increased, so the total points distributed per game isn’t decreased.

[Empty]

no limits plez

[Will be ok2]

Change it back to 1v1 pls

[Lykos]

no..