The 1hour farm experiment - Fixer vs Speeder!

There's one thing I was wondering about... does the system account for who is available to heal?

Thought experiment:

1 fixer, 1 shooter and 3 defenders play. The shooter does crazy amounts of damage, but stays far back and takes no damage from enemy shots. The 3 defenders are happily defendering around at the front, taking much damage but dealing virtually none. Somehow, this team manages to win. The fixer only got a chance to heal defenders that did no damage, while the shooter that wiped all the enemies got no healing. Furthermore, the fixer did no damage, no stuns and no frost. Does the system now:
1) give the fixer no contribution because he did not heal the only person that dealt significant damage
2) give the fixer some contribution because the defenders soaking up damage counts as useful
3) give the fixer a lot of contribution because it recognizes that the top contributor was not available for healing and therefore the fixer contributed the most he could

I have the feeling that it is currently 1 or 2, while it should be 3.

 

I think you are missing my point aswell as the point of a fixer. They heal teammates, that is their job. Of course they have to rely on others

 

If you deal only damage that is immediately healed up you won't get much. You may even get penalised for occupying a fixer alone while your team sort out the baddies.
I lost a duel to Bullsharki in a chill zone tunnel here while my team capitalised on the lack of opposition heals.

 

also replying to @CheekyDevilGod who really needs to either take a chill pill, or stop trying to find ridiculous "arguments". Seriously. @Kitterini was saying that for her, Speeders were less efficient than Fixers. Whether this is an outlying point compared to the general playerbase or not, is currently irrelevant when discussing the metrics in question.

Look. Let's put a bit more thought into all this, shall we?

If you don't want people to just run away to lengthen the match, don't reward them extra if they aren't getting stuff done. If they aren't actually fighting or healing, then why would they be rewarded? If they are losing and want to make it a draw due to a health disadvantage, then they don't care so much about the extra rewards, and will will weigh the Elo more heavily.

2nd, I highly suggest that you don't focus on game length for your metrics. What's important is how efficient games are for players. Remember the infamy droppers? Remember how that worked? The world runs on time, not game counts, so if I wanted to max resource efficiency I would use time as the standard.

I don't decide to play "5 games of Battle Bay". I decide that " I have 1 hour to game". If Battle Bay ran in an energy system with limited game count, then sure. Resources/game is more important than resources/time. Last I checked, Battlebay didn't have the stupid energy system.

With regards to he fixers, just reward them better for actual healing of other teammates. Nobody should be benefitting resource wise from bandages. Encourage fixers to actually heal their allies, but only count it if their allies actually regain health. Then the fixers can be rewarded for doing their jobs, with less dependence on their allies.

You are free to agree or disagree with this, but I can't be bothered to reply here again. I have to argue enough with other (usually stubborn) people as it is.

 

TL;DR?

 

Kitterini's point is that fixers don't get enough rewards compared to other ships, and I agree, all my responses were to other points discussed in the thread so if you believe my points are irrelevant to the topic kindly take it up to the one I responded to, not me. And please do enlighten me in how I'm trying to find ridiculous arguments.

However I did agree that using time as a factor in this discussion is wrong but as you yourself said, you, kitterini and a lot of players play the game with "time" in their minds so I guess it stands.

 

Would have spared you even more time if you hadn't writen a spam reply

 

Let me give you an example of why I think time is relevant; I'm closing in on lvl 39, which unlocks mk6. Playing 2 ships this means that I need to farm 8million gold. On the side I have been leveling my epic Blast Cannon from level 30 to 40, costing roughly 12million gold. So I needed 20million, which I was happy to farm in either of my two boats.
In my speeder thats 36 and a half hours, giving me roughly 800 stars in the process.
In my Fixer (at an unrealistic 70% winrate) thats 46 hours, giving roughly 650 stars despite 10hours longer playtime.

In practice my infamy would quickly jump to where I win 50% as Fixer, which would reduce gold and star gains making the different even larger. These numbers are a product of my playstyle and not nessesarily transferable to other players, but for me the choice between 36 and 46 hours was a nobrainer.
Imagine being offered two roughly identical jobs that pay the same; Job A has you work 36 hours pr week, Job B 46 hours. Which joboffer would you accept?

 

I was asking for an abbreviated version.

 

You are right and I agree with everything you say.

My argument is not that fixers are cool as they are now but that fixers should get more contribution per game.

I am only against giving fixers more rewards for "playing longer than other ships" as some of our friends have suggested. I am all for higher heal contribution, you'd know if you were reading everything I was typing.

 

Just ton confuse this topic a little more, here is a battle showing that u can earn stars (and 3 at that!) Just With good healing
Couldn't do much dmg since they hid in a spot I couldn't fire firebomb ahah can't wait for two slot for weapons

I'm honest to God confused as to how I got 3 stars as the person below did 15k dmg and that seems pretty significant , and 10k in heals is pretty low for me....but nevertheless 3 stars!

 

Is this still relevant? I find on my mini that if I heal the ships doing the damage, I get higher rewards.

 

From the very first moment I started playing Battle Bay I've felt that fixers weren't getting enough credit. In the past I've wanted a "Donate stars" button so I could donate some of my stars to a team mate I thought deserved them more. Nearly always that is a fixer. I agree that somehow fixers are not getting fair rewards.

 

@The Otherguy We've all seen it. There I am with top damage and I have 3 stars and awesomeness all the way around and I know perfectly well that it was the awesome play of the fixer that had made that possible. That happens with every boat. As a speeder, often times I score low damage numbers but my utility for the team was high. But I think it happens with depressing regularity to fixers.

Even discounting that. I often times find myself looking at the closing match screens and the fixer's output thinking, 'Wait... he rocked both damage and fixing. Why's he down there?"

 

I got more three stars as fixer than speeder. Then again my tapes menat I lived longer so I did more damage wth fixer

 

I play around 4K infarmy, and I’m nightmare player for a half of year. My main a fixer but sometimes I use different ships for daily quests. Average income for fixer it’s 33-35 k gold 18-20 k sugar and 2 stars in winned game. Average income for shooter 39-41 k gold and 22-23 sugar with same condition...
it’s my experience...