Extra Rewards for Team/League Leads?

[Gravitus]

I think we can all agree that forming and leading a team IS extra work. That being the case. Should team leads be rewarded with extra merits or drops? 

Not only would this be more fair imo, but I think to a degree it would incentivize folks to initiate activities more often which is good for everyone. Obviously, Leagues would offer higher tier rewards vs running a TF. This is just a rough draft idea. 

 

I'm not sure how to quantify such rewards, but I wanted to at least get a conversation going and not put the cart before the horse. 

Edited October 3 by Gravitus

[ZacKing]

I think the idea of showing some appreciation toward people who lead teams is a nice idea, but I don't see this as necessary for a couple of reasons. 

1. First, it's sort of assuming that everyone who forms and leads a team does so competently and in a friendly, sociable way.  I don't think people who don't know how to lead teams  or leagues should get rewarded for incompetence.  I'd also hate to see this lead to people fighting over who's team they should join because others are looking for more rewards for themselves by sticking it to others trying to lead teams. 
2. Second, there's already badges anyone can earn by side kicking lower level people, so there's already some incentives there for leading teams. 
3. Lastly, if people really want to thank their team leader, they can always gift them some inf or recipe drop or whatever if they really feel the need to.  Beyond that, a simple "thank you!" goes a long way.

 

 

[mistagoat]

We recently had a very similar thread and mostly the consensus was that it becomes too easy to game the system and there isn't really a strong reason for extra rewards for the leader.

 

I think Ms Laucianna made a very strong point in that thread.

"The incentive already exists in the fact I can run whatever I want to as a leader, whether that be a Trial, TF, Missions, RP hang out sessions in Pocket D etc. It's not a burden I am forced with and need to be compensated for with temporary powers or extra rewards and I feel if that is the incentive to run a team you will get some people who don't want to lead doing it for the better rewards and Snarky will have a lot more Pug stories to tell about leaders 😄"

 

 

[Psyonico]

I said it in the other thread, and I'll say it here.

 

No

[Excraft]

Can we assume that a team leader who kicks another player for not turning off Group Fly wouldn't be eligible to get any extra special rewards? 

[Gravitus]

1 hour ago, Excraft said:

Can we assume that a team leader who kicks another player for not turning off Group Fly wouldn't be eligible to get any extra special rewards? 

Some people just don't know how to let go. 

[Glacier Peak]

I think leading is it's own reward, I don't want more rewards for that. 

[Excraft]

6 minutes ago, Gravitus said:

Some people just don't know how to let go. 

 

It's an honest question.  You're suggesting people who lead teams or leagues should get some sort of special rewards for their effort.  As @ZacKing correctly pointed out, not everyone leading a team is good at it and not everyone is a good leader.  You've shared some of your bad experiences with team leads.  I'm sure we've all come across team leads who proved to be woefully inadequate for any number of reasons.  Should they get rewarded for badly leading a team? 

[Greycat]

So. I join an MSR on a 50.

I'm early, so I'm slotted in as one of the team leads, so there's a 50 at the head.

People get added/removed without my input. I can be AFK or concentrating on trick or treating.

I can do... essentially nothing leading-related (since we have a league leader.)

 

How is that worth an extra reward? I just got lucky to get slotted into slot 1.  That's just one way to game that.

 

Or, I - as a level, say, 25 - see Jack and Eochai in Croatoa. I spend several minutes getting a team together, and just before we attack, I give the star to FiftyDude, who's a 50. They would get those rewards, not me. How would that be fair?  (And yes, *I* know I can just pick one of their missions at 50 as active to bump up the rest of the team - but quite a number of people don't know that.)

 

So... no. Let leading the team be its own reward. Do it enough, do it well, you'll be recognized and have people waiting to join whatever you run.

[lemming]

Did we need another thread so soon after the other one?

 

I think a lot of people have pointed out in both threads why this could be easily gamed.  The best thing about leading a team is, you get to decide the overall goal and what the content is to be run.

 

There are some badges for running teams, and if you didn't already spend 1m on it, you get ATT for leading teams for 12 hours.  (Of course, that can be gotten just by sitting in a base with an alt on your team)

[Gravitus]

5 hours ago, ZacKing said:

I think the idea of showing some appreciation toward people who lead teams is a nice idea, but I don't see this as necessary for a couple of reasons. 

1. First, it's sort of assuming that everyone who forms and leads a team does so competently and in a friendly, sociable way.  I don't think people who don't know how to lead teams  or leagues should get rewarded for incompetence.  I'd also hate to see this lead to people fighting over who's team they should join because others are looking for more rewards for themselves by sticking it to others trying to lead teams.

 

 

So if you’re worried about bad players being rewarded, maybe at the end of the TF a pop up box could appear (similar to AE when you finish player created content) where you can rate 1-5 stars. And perhaps the reward could be scaled based on the average score given by the team?

 

38 minutes ago, lemming said:

Did we need another thread so soon after the other one?

I don’t think it’s practical to research pages of topics to see if I’m repeating a month old topic.

38 minutes ago, lemming said:

 

I think a lot of people have pointed out in both threads why this could be easily gamed.  

Perhaps programming could be implemented where only the person who starts the tf as leader and ends as leader is eligible to receive the extra reward?

[lemming]

40 minutes ago, Gravitus said:

1 hour ago, lemming said:

Did we need another thread so soon after the other one?

I don’t think it’s practical to research pages of topics to see if I’m repeating a month old topic.

Um, it was an active topic last week.  I mean at least you didn't take part in it and then start the topic again.  In suggestions and bug reports, it's always helpful to see if someone else has brought it up.   Helps keeping rehash down a bit.

 

45 minutes ago, Gravitus said:

1 hour ago, lemming said:

 

I think a lot of people have pointed out in both threads why this could be easily gamed.  

Perhaps programming could be implemented where only the person who starts the tf as leader and ends as leader is eligible to receive the extra reward?

That can still be gamed even if it is feasible from the code.

[ZacKing]

2 hours ago, Gravitus said:

So if you’re worried about bad players being rewarded, maybe at the end of the TF a pop up box could appear (similar to AE when you finish player created content) where you can rate 1-5 stars. And perhaps the reward could be scaled based on the average score given by the team?

 

What happens when a player successfully leads a team through a TF and the rest of the team decides to be jerks and 1 star the leader just because they can?  Like others have already and continue to point out in these threads, this stuff is easily gamed and can easily be used to grief others.

[Gravitus]

12 hours ago, ZacKing said:

 

What happens when a player successfully leads a team through a TF and the rest of the team decides to be jerks and 1 star the leader just because they can?  

It’s all subjective and unless you can read minds, you’ll never actually always know why someone got 1 star. But is it possible someone could grief someone to be an ass? Sure, but then you’re left with the system we got now. Worst case, a good team lead gets unfairly rated and they get what they currently get….. nothing. So where is the downside from what we got now?
 

AE awards tickets for player rated content. What if someone writes a good story and someone else gives a bad review just to be a dick? I’m sure it’s happened but I think most people tend to rate things fairly. The system I’m proposing would take all the reviews given by each team member , not just 1. So unless you think the worst of the CoX community and think the other 7+ team members would rate a good lead low just to be a dick…that’s a hard sell.
 

But even if you didn’t subscribe to that, with the logic you’re presenting, we should take the AE award rating system away as well. 

Edited October 4 by Gravitus

[Shin Magmus]

This post, on this very forum, already covered the topic succinctly, from September 5th so not even fully 1 month ago.

 

   My main point about adding a tangible reward/incentive like this is that you can never hit the sweet spot where it's big enough to matter to people but small enough that it doesn't cause infighting, team-sniping, and forum drama.  Remember that the teensy tiny reward for the "use lots of different ATs" Diveristy Bonus was 1 extra Prismatic Aether, and that got obliterated in favor of a one-time badge: Variety Act.  That's exactly what fate would befall rewards for leading teams.  My exact words were thus: 

 

     "However, the immediate result of that would be people fighting over who gets to lead the TF/SF now that there's a good enough reward, and a sociological inevitability of this would be a team splitting in half because 2 people both demanded the "leader reward".  These 2 teams would then be competing for the same player pool and poaching players from each other.  I can literally see 5 moves ahead and see exactly where this leads."

[Gravitus]

20 minutes ago, Shin Magmus said:

This post, on this very forum, already covered the topic succinctly, from September 5th so not even fully 1 month ago.

 

   My main point about adding a tangible reward/incentive like this is that you can never hit the sweet spot where it's big enough to matter to people but small enough that it doesn't cause infighting, team-sniping, and forum drama.  Remember that the teensy tiny reward for the "use lots of different ATs" Diveristy Bonus was 1 extra Prismatic Aether, and that got obliterated in favor of a one-time badge: Variety Act.  That's exactly what fate would befall rewards for leading teams.  My exact words were thus: 

 

     "However, the immediate result of that would be people fighting over who gets to lead the TF/SF now that there's a good enough reward, and a sociological inevitability of this would be a team splitting in half because 2 people both demanded the "leader reward".  These 2 teams would then be competing for the same player pool and poaching players from each other.  I can literally see 5 moves ahead and see exactly where this leads."

Logic would dictate that whoever took the initiative to recruit and form the team would lead it. I couldn't possibly imagine some rando joining and demanding to lead for the "reward" when the other person took the initiative to recruit. But even if that did happen. if you programmed the game to where the one who started the TF is the only one eligible to receive the finished TF reward, it would negate arguing over the star moving aorund.  

[Shin Magmus]

5 minutes ago, Gravitus said:

Logic would dictate that whoever took the initiative to recruit and form the team would lead it. I couldn't possibly imagine some rando joining and demanding to lead for the "reward" when the other person took the initiative to recruit. But even if that did happen. if you programmed the game to where the one who started the TF is the only one eligible to receive the finished TF reward, it would negate arguing over the star moving aorund.  

...the scenario was that at least one person would start their own team and then you'd be competing for the same pool of joining players actually: as in, fighting over a limited resource.  I don't need to "imagine" what 2 team leaders trying to form the same thing at the same time looks like in LFG, because I've seen it.

[ZacKing]

1 hour ago, Gravitus said:

It’s all subjective and unless you can read minds, you’ll never actually always know why someone got 1 star.

 

Correct.  You don't know and you'll never know.  There can be any number of reasons why someone would give a 1 star rating. 

 

1 hour ago, Gravitus said:

But is it possible someone could grief someone to be an ass? Sure, but then you’re left with the system we got now.

 

You're assuming the current system is somehow broken or inadequate.  It isn't.  There's nothing wrong with the system we have now.  Forming and leading teams already have tangible rewards that many have already addressed in the threads on this topic.  People who like leading teams can do so and get the rewards for leading them.  They're awarded XP, inf, merits and/or special salvage from completing the content, not to mention badges.  As many have already explained in these threads, the reward is getting to run the content you want when you want and not having to wait around for someone else to start it.

 

1 hour ago, Gravitus said:

Worst case, a good team lead gets unfairly rated and they get what they currently get….. nothing. So where is the downside from what we got now?

 

Team leads currently do get something though.  You don't seem to want to acknowledge that.  Since what you're suggesting could be easily gamed and/or used to grief others, a major downside is that it's wasted a lot of volunteer development time on an overly complicated system.

 

1 hour ago, Gravitus said:

The system I’m proposing would take all the reviews given by each team member , not just 1. So unless you think the worst of the CoX community and think the other 7+ team members would rate a good lead low just to be a dick…that’s a hard sell.

 

Rating systems are highly subjective.  As you yourself pointed out earlier, you don't know what other people are thinking.  Maybe someone didn't like the way the team lead played or led the TF.  Maybe they didn't like the team leads color scheme on their costume.  Maybe someone didn't like something a team lead said or didn't say.   Or yes, people can just be complete dicks and 1 star everyone because they can. 

 

1 hour ago, Gravitus said:

But even if you didn’t subscribe to that, with the logic you’re presenting, we should take the AE award rating system away as well. 

 

No we shouldn't. 

[Shin Magmus]

You guys can 1-star reviewbomb me as a Team Leader to make yourselves feel better if you want.

[Gravitus]

7 minutes ago, Shin Magmus said:

...the scenario was that at least one person would start their own team and then you'd be competing for the same pool of joining players actually: as in, fighting over a limited resource.  I don't need to "imagine" what 2 team leaders trying to form the same thing at the same time looks like in LFG, because I've seen it.

I mean, that happens now. I believe you said in the other thread that it wasn't a big enough "carrot on a stick" to incentivize more TFs or groups being started. Did you change your position? 

[Ghost]

Ever been on a TF where the leader suddenly disco’d and then came back a few seconds later, to find they are no longer the leader??

 

 

[Shin Magmus]

     I am specifically describing what will happen if the devs add an actual "carrot on a stick", a big delicious one worth a significant amount of inf, to leading content.  I mentioned the reasons why that won't work, and the exact events that would happen right here on the forums if they rolled something out in Open Beta.  It would get rolled back and/or turned into a pointless badge to preemptively prevent the situation I'm describing from becoming commonplace.

[Gravitus]

22 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

You're assuming the current system is somehow broken or inadequate.  It isn't.  There's nothing wrong with the system we have now. 

Suggesting an improvment doesn't necessarily indicate I think there is something wrong with it now. Think of it as a QOL element. 

22 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

Forming and leading teams already have tangible rewards that many have already addressed in the threads on this topic.  People who like leading teams can do so and get the rewards for leading them.  They're awarded XP, inf, merits and/or special salvage from completing the content, not to mention badges. 

You mean the exact same thing everyone else gets for putting in less effort?

22 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

As many have already explained in these threads, the reward is getting to run the content you want when you want and not having to wait around for someone else to start it.

I would categorize that more as a philosophical reward than a tangible one. You're not getting anything beyond what your teammates are getting...in fact, there are many cases because of RNG you get rewarded less than someone who just asked to join because the RNG gods smiled on them on not you.  

22 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

Team leads currently do get something though.  You don't seem to want to acknowledge that.

Ah but I have...

22 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

Since what you're suggesting could be easily gamed and/or used to grief others,

Not anymore than the AE system could be gamed. No system in this game is "air tight" there will always be cons. I read through the last thread and saw the 2 biggest concerns were people fighting to be leader and the system being manipulated by passing the star around. Taking those into consideration, I further suggested systems that would mitigate those 2 chief concerns and all I seem to get back is..."it can still be gamed" without anyone actually explaining anything.  

22 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

a major downside is that it's wasted a lot of volunteer development time on an overly complicated system.

I'll let the devs make that choice. I'm not a dev and I'll wager you aren't either. I have no idea how easy or hard that would be to implement. And I think we can both agree you don't have to be a dev to qualify to post something in this forum. 

 

22 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

 

 

Rating systems are highly subjective.  As you yourself pointed out earlier, you don't know what other people are thinking.  Maybe someone didn't like the way the team lead played or led the TF.  Maybe they didn't like the team leads color scheme on their costume.  Maybe someone didn't like something a team lead said or didn't say.   Or yes, people can just be complete dicks and 1 star everyone because they can.

And what's the worst that can happen? You don't get something extra, sorta like now. 

22 minutes ago, ZacKing said:

 

 

Edited October 4 by Gravitus

[Gravitus]

12 minutes ago, Ghost said:

Ever been on a TF where the leader suddenly disco’d and then came back a few seconds later, to find they are no longer the leader??

 

 

I've already addressed that.

[Laucianna]

I personally don't believe it's a lack of incentives that is causing people not to form teams, personally I would say it is a mixture of not wanting the responsibility or stress of leading one as I believe most people want to log onto the game and beat stuff up as their own super powered character, not micromanage 7-47 other people.

What I believe is the better way to encourage more people to lead is by helping others who ask questions about it when you as a person lead, I've had numerous people ask me how I run things to the point I am even making a guide for all the things I run and can be run in game as a way for those people interested to look up all they need to know and have a pop menu ready to go to run it ❤️