PvP rating and kill count proposal - Cosmetic Vendor

PvP rating and kill count proposal - Cosmetic Vendor
This idea/suggestion is Open. You can respond to ask questions or discuss the idea and either vote it up or down if you believe it should or should not be implemented, respectively. Popular suggestions and ideas will be considered by the development team to become reality in-game.
Kazhar

Kazhar

Proposal
Add a new vendor with cosmetic items with different tier rewards for those competitive players with enough pvp rating or pvp kills.
Justification
It would just be some cosmetic rewards like some items from the TCG like cool vehicles, clothes or weapons or new houses or house decorations. Nothing than would grant you an advantage over the others.
Motivation
To encourage more participation in pvp other than having fun killing the enemy, people love rewards as we have seen with city invasions.
I have read this proposal and talked with some people about it and i think it would be a cool way to encourage more participation in pvp, the idea is simple just adding a new vendor with different rewards based on tiers, so for example:

-Tier 1: 200 pvp kills or 1500 pvp rating, gives you access to X rewards on the vendor
-Tier 2: 400 pvp kills or 1650 pvp rating, gives you access to Z rewards on top of the former

And so on for the higher lvl tiers up to some high milestone to keep people being competitive about pvp. Alternatively you could use the kill count to unlock some cool titles in game and use the pvp rating only for the vendor access since your rating is going to change everytime you kill or get killed by someone. Of course the items from the vendor would not be free and devs could add a new credit sink this way to buy those rewards.
 
Upvote 11 Downvote
Hmm, so PvP here is really mostly objective-based. I've always like the idea of rankings and boards for the chest-thumping value (I loved topping the boards in the Quake II days after all) but this can tend to break objective-based PvP if we attach real rewards for it.

What are your thoughts on the potential that people will just join for the kill streaks thereby actually losing the battle due to incomplete objectives? Or how about attaching along with the simple kill streaks completion of objectives?

Hope I'm making sense hehe

Love the idea by the way, just have some questions on implementation and making sure we don't break other aspects due to human behavior lol
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kazhar
This server has a long history of people pvping JUST long enough to get the rewards they want and then stopping. Something like this to keep people motivated over a longer timeframe would be great. The combination of kill count and pvp rating mitigates the potential for fight clubbing.

Giving pvp rating relevance will also lower the likelihood that people will have friends clear their bounty since it will affect their pvp rating negatively.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kazhar and EthavanCrowe
I agree whole heartedly that a vendor with unique items that are restricted to some pvp metric is a great idea.

Something that you accounted for by including pvp kills, but I want to highlight. I would be hesitant to use the pvp rating metric as it works today as a gate for anything if your goal is to give incentive to pvp.

Similar to decay being enabled in pvp, tying rewards to pvp rating will likely create some perverse incentive to pvp. Up until recently, there were no tangible rewards to pvp but only the risk of financial loss via decay. While people such as you and I will pvp regardless of it being a net cost, there are many people who will be turned away by that. In the case of pvp rating being a gate, people will be incentivized to show up only if they believe they will win, which is something we already see today. Think of the FRS system where jedi would run from a fight early or not show if they thought that dying was on the table. People would avoid fights and dodge bounties in order to inflate their pvp rating.

When battlefields release, maintaining a separate rating in that more standardized environment would work better, though cherry picking fights will still be an issue. But at least the rating would mean more as a competitive measurement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kazhar
EthavanCrowe said:
Hmm, so PvP here is really mostly objective-based. I've always like the idea of rankings and boards for the chest-thumping value (I loved topping the boards in the Quake II days after all) but this can tend to break objective-based PvP if we attach real rewards for it.

What are your thoughts on the potential that people will just join for the kill streaks thereby actually losing the battle due to incomplete objectives? Or how about attaching along with the simple kill streaks completion of objectives?

Hope I'm making sense hehe

Love the idea by the way, just have some questions on implementation and making sure we don't break other aspects due to human behavior lol
Click to expand...
This has already happened with city invasions because of how imbalanced they are for defenders atm so people would just come to the invasions for the pvp and ignore the npcs/general but that's just a by-product of a poor balance around the invasions. In other objective based pvp like battlegrounds you have to complete the objective if you want to win and its instanced so you cant really avoid it. Same with GCW static pvp bases you need to control all the terminals if you want to flip the base so its unlikely that people will ignore the objectives at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EthavanCrowe
jacksabib said:
I agree whole heartedly that a vendor with unique items that are restricted to some pvp metric is a great idea.

Something that you accounted for by including pvp kills, but I want to highlight. I would be hesitant to use the pvp rating metric as it works today as a gate for anything if your goal is to give incentive to pvp.

Similar to decay being enabled in pvp, tying rewards to pvp rating will likely create some perverse incentive to pvp. Up until recently, there were no tangible rewards to pvp but only the risk of financial loss via decay. While people such as you and I will pvp regardless of it being a net cost, there are many people who will be turned away by that. In the case of pvp rating being a gate, people will be incentivized to show up only if they believe they will win, which is something we already see today. Think of the FRS system where jedi would run from a fight early or not show if they thought that dying was on the table. People would avoid fights and dodge bounties in order to inflate their pvp rating.

When battlefields release, maintaining a separate rating in that more standardized environment would work better, though cherry picking fights will still be an issue. But at least the rating would mean more as a competitive measurement.
Click to expand...
Yea this is 100% true and indeed we have seen this happen already, so how do you suggest to make the pvp rating work like? or just use the kills count? Keeping a separate rating just in battlegrounds is not a bad idea but i really love the world pvp over instanced bgs.
 
Kazhar said:
Yea this is 100% true and indeed we have seen this happen already, so how do you suggest to make the pvp rating work like? or just use the kills count? Keeping a separate rating just in battlegrounds is not a bad idea but i really love the world pvp over instanced bgs.
Click to expand...
Making a metric that even remotely accurately reflects skill/contribution in pvp is going to be a challenge if it includes world pvp which is a constantly shifting environment. I don't like just using kill count for this idea either because that can be cheesed pretty easily. Though it does solve the problem of incentivizing dodging pvp.

Very roughly, I think it would reflect kill count, not be as harshly dropped by a death, and would decay slowly. Balanced right it would reward pvp activity, would not punish deaths as severely, and would punish inactivity in pvp. I also think the rewards/losses from kills/deaths should account for how many people took part in the killing. For example 1 player who is caught SF and ganked by 8 people wouldn't be punished as severely as losing a 1v1, but the gankers would split the reward of the one kill to make it less lucrative. I also think that GCW should affect the rating more than duels and maybe even bounties., but that could be my group pvp bias creeping in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orrarracova, gevdwyn, Kazhar and 1 other person
Let's make sure PVP kills can't be racked up on the same account. Would also be cool to take it a step further and make the cosmetics unequip upon dropping PVP ranking. Very cool idea, I support it as someone enjoys flexing on the enemy in style
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kazhar
reidski182 said:
Let's make sure PVP kills can't be racked up on the same account. Would also be cool to take it a step further and make the cosmetics unequip upon dropping PVP ranking. Very cool idea, I support it as someone enjoys flexing on the enemy in style
Click to expand...

Hahah! *gets killed, clones naked*
 
Ok im going to propose the following thresholds then, feel free to discuss or add anything you think that would make sense:

-Tier 1: 250 pvp kills AND 1500 pvp rating
-Tier 2: 500 pvp kills AND 1700 pvp rating
-Tier 3: 750 pvp kills AND 1850 pvp rating
-Tier 4: 1000 pvp kills AND 2000 pvp rating

Maybe more tiers above tier 4 but im keeping in mind server population and pvp activity on the server so i think that tier is already quite hard to achieve, could be modified if we get a huge increase in population with 1.0 tho. Also like jacksabib said above i want to see a refactor of how the pvp rating works before implementing this, i think he made a very solid points "I think it would reflect kill count, not be as harshly dropped by a death, and would decay slowly. Balanced right it would reward pvp activity, would not punish deaths as severely, and would punish inactivity in pvp. I also think the rewards/losses from kills/deaths should account for how many people took part in the killing. For example 1 player who is caught SF and ganked by 8 people wouldn't be punished as severely as losing a 1v1, but the gankers would split the reward of the one kill to make it less lucrative. I also think that GCW should affect the rating more than duels and maybe even bounties."

I would say to add a pvp rating decay if you havent taken part in pvp for 2 weeks straight. Let's say 50 rating decay per day after the 2 inactivity weeks.

Also the pvp kills count on top of the rating to avoid dodging pvp, and if devs find out people fight clubing for kills its a bannable offense. This could also set some basis for the FRS system in 2.0 since that is inherently a pvp system and also had decay etc...
 
  • Like
Reactions: sabz and Orrarracova
Kazhar said:
Ok im going to propose the following thresholds then, feel free to discuss or add anything you think that would make sense:

-Tier 1: 250 pvp kills AND 1500 pvp rating
-Tier 2: 500 pvp kills AND 1700 pvp rating
-Tier 3: 750 pvp kills AND 1850 pvp rating
-Tier 4: 1000 pvp kills AND 2000 pvp rating

Maybe more tiers above tier 4 but im keeping in mind server population and pvp activity on the server so i think that tier is already quite hard to achieve, could be modified if we get a huge increase in population with 1.0 tho. Also like jacksabib said above i want to see a refactor of how the pvp rating works before implementing this, i think he made a very solid points "I think it would reflect kill count, not be as harshly dropped by a death, and would decay slowly. Balanced right it would reward pvp activity, would not punish deaths as severely, and would punish inactivity in pvp. I also think the rewards/losses from kills/deaths should account for how many people took part in the killing. For example 1 player who is caught SF and ganked by 8 people wouldn't be punished as severely as losing a 1v1, but the gankers would split the reward of the one kill to make it less lucrative. I also think that GCW should affect the rating more than duels and maybe even bounties."

I would say to add a pvp rating decay if you havent taken part in pvp for 2 weeks straight. Let's say 50 rating decay per day after the 2 inactivity weeks.

Also the pvp kills count on top of the rating to avoid dodging pvp, and if devs find out people fight clubing for kills its a bannable offense. This could also set some basis for the FRS system in 2.0 since that is inherently a pvp system and also had decay etc...
Click to expand...
This is a good idea, and most MMO's have something like it, maybe to keep interest, do it like WoW, have a season, say 4 months then players are given some of the old excellent pvp titles on what their finishing score is. Then once the new season starts, everyone is reset to zero and we play again. As mentioned depending on your 'tier' you can buy gear, perhaps colours of armor, so for example in season 1, you can get the battle worn armor, then in season 2 you can buy black armor, season 3 different again, etc
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kazhar
You must log in or register to reply here.
SWG Restoration is a fan-made, non-profit, community-driven, project.
Not affiliated with nor endorsed by Daybreak Games, Lucasfilm Entertainment, Electronic Arts or The Walt Disney Company.
Star Wars ™ & © Lucasfilm Ltd. No marks or intellectual property are owned by or licensed to SWG Restoration.
Top Bottom