Options
BG Points farming is the new Sandbagging
G-Hun-Gear
Posts: 1,447 ★★★★
We‘ve had his discussion a while ago, haven‘t we?
Like with sandbagging then, the community is now split on the points farming thing… Some say it should be a bannable offense, some say it’s unsportsmanlike, some have no issues with it.
Personally, I am in camp 3: I have no issue with points farming. If Inhad elders marks left, I would consider it myself… everybody should do it… Farmers lose an equal amount of matches as they win, so I see no harm to other players. If you encounter a farmer that intentionally loses a match, guess what: Easy win for you…
There is one thing different from the sandbagging situation: Kabam have actually stated in the forums that points farming is an offense…
BUT: It was Kabam that have implemented a system that incentivizes points farming, by introducing elders marks that get more points than energy… and why was that again? In order to get people to buy elders marks… yeah right…
How about players that are not in the forums? They see the way the game mode is implemented, and make their own conclusions… Heck, I even remember Brian Grant’s stream where he initially looked into the game mode. Reading about the points-system his initial reaction was something along the lines of “Hm, seems like the best course of action is to lose the fights with energy and win the fights with elders marks” because this is the natural reaction of the players if you introduce such a system…
So Kabam: If you are against points farming, then just remove the discrepancy of points between fights with elders marks and fights with energy.
As long as that’s not the case, I see no issue with people that do it… And it definitely should not be a bannable offense…
Like with sandbagging then, the community is now split on the points farming thing… Some say it should be a bannable offense, some say it’s unsportsmanlike, some have no issues with it.
Personally, I am in camp 3: I have no issue with points farming. If Inhad elders marks left, I would consider it myself… everybody should do it… Farmers lose an equal amount of matches as they win, so I see no harm to other players. If you encounter a farmer that intentionally loses a match, guess what: Easy win for you…
There is one thing different from the sandbagging situation: Kabam have actually stated in the forums that points farming is an offense…
BUT: It was Kabam that have implemented a system that incentivizes points farming, by introducing elders marks that get more points than energy… and why was that again? In order to get people to buy elders marks… yeah right…
How about players that are not in the forums? They see the way the game mode is implemented, and make their own conclusions… Heck, I even remember Brian Grant’s stream where he initially looked into the game mode. Reading about the points-system his initial reaction was something along the lines of “Hm, seems like the best course of action is to lose the fights with energy and win the fights with elders marks” because this is the natural reaction of the players if you introduce such a system…
So Kabam: If you are against points farming, then just remove the discrepancy of points between fights with elders marks and fights with energy.
As long as that’s not the case, I see no issue with people that do it… And it definitely should not be a bannable offense…
21
Comments
I personally see no difference between intentionally losing an entire match vs intentionally losing a round to eventually win the match. Both are valid strategies that involve losing in the short term to gain in the long run. Surely, you want to win every round and every match, but you also have to assess the situation to meet your needs.
Rather than punish players for trying to optimize their time vs reward in a game that already requires a monumental amount of time investment, find a way to make win farming an obsolete way to reach these rewards.
There's been a lot of good suggestions on the forums, from awarding more solo event score for wins higher in the VT and in GC, to changing the point scoring to make losing less punishing.
I understand this as a bandaid solution until a more permanent one can be found, but I don't agree with punishing players for playing within the rules of the game they set.
You can't fix the problem of point farming by eliminating the need to earn as many points because the design intent is for players to have to earn that many points with as much activity as currently required. If players don't want to put in that much effort they can earn fewer rewards or they can try to get around the requirements and maybe get permanently banned.
All cheating can be described as "optimizing time vs reward." Some things you just aren't allowed to optimize. This is true in every game, sport, and competition that exists.
It's not manipulating the system or the matchmaking (like sandbagging). It's a strategy that could work or not. If the other player sees the bluff or is just too good, it ain't gonna work. It's a player player interaction. The more experienced player wins.
I was just equating throwing a round to throwing a match. In my opinion, they are both smart, calculated plays to gain a desired outcome, and they both should be allowed.
Yes, the game mode may have been developed with the goal in mind to (A) make the players spend more time in the game and (B) make the players purchase Elders Marks… But apparently it wasn’t thought through thoroughly, because the way it was implemented allowed for points farming…
Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
2. unsportsmanlike
3. strategic advantage
it falls into category #3.
there are degrees of strategic advantage that go from acceptable (nick fury second life trick) to bad (aw shelling, declining in bgs) to really bad (win trading, modding, botting).
farming is lame but it's within the "normal" range of strategy. you can farm sidequest objectives in RTL, potions, revives, energy refills, and in other games farm extra lives and other things.
of course it's kabam's game and they can set whatever rules they like but this intrudes on player strategy a little too much.
Right now it makes little sense to go into GC early if you have a ton of milestones to aim for especially if you start high up in the Victory trck due to seeding. The seeding doesnt give you any milestones and you therefore have it twice a shard as unseeded players in achieving them. I didn't farm but I reached GC with only half of the points I have now (250k at the time) - that was almost half as many points as I needed for milestones.
If you decide to throw a match I dont see aproblem unless people are betting on you. It's between you and your opponent in this mode. Some people hate this mode and like AW or AQ only play it for the rewards that are locked behind it. Not everyone plays a sport with an absolute need to win every match in mind either. I dont consider throwing a round different from throwing a match - it's a different level of the same strategy to win (a match or points).
If Kabam wants it to change they need to incentivise change - carrot not stick. Give more points for winning with any currency in what is supposed to be the pinnacle arena in the mode - Gladiator circuit.
When you play in the NBA you earn more in basic wages than playing in the CBA (PL vs EFL for the British lads).*
*I love sports analogies
I suspect that the vast vast majority of BG players have no idea what point farming even is and just play the game.
The problem is that you have two "competitions":
1) ascending as high as you can in Gladiator's circuit
2) accumulating as many points as you can for milestones and rank rewards
There is no strategy in GC where losing matches (not rounds) benefits you. But there is for accumulating points for milestones and rank rewards. This is why there are divergent opinions, because some players view those competitions holistically and others view them independently i.e., it doesn't matter my W/L ratio or placement in GC if I just get a ton of points for rank rewards.
the solution is carrot, not stick. change the rules, seeding, and point structure to incentivize pushing in GC. it's their game of course, but banning for common sense optimization is overkill. this is not like win-trading (literally playing against yourself) or shelling in AW (although some will argue it's similar).
players, especially those seeded right before the gladiator circuit are having to decide between solo milestones and their rank in the GC and farming is the most common sense strategy to achieve the best of both worlds.
the incentives needs to change, and i don't think punishment is the best choice. maybe it's just me, but gaining a competitive edge in a competitive mode with a common sense strategy shouldn't be ban-worthy. it's not like modding, arena botting, or win trading. but that's just me and you're free to disagree.
However, a reasonably strong player can dramatically increase their probability of winning by seeking out a VT tier in which they happen to be much stronger than the average players in that tier. If they only play there, they can increase their win percentage by a lot. The problem is if they win a lot, they will promote to a higher tier where their win percentage might be lower.
So the trick is to win a few with marks, then deliberately lose a few to stay in that VT tier. When you decide to deliberately lose, you don't waste marks on those matches, you use energy. So you end up losing with energy, then winning with marks (most or all of the time) while hovering in a VT tier. This can significantly increase the amount of points you earn per match on average.
The problem is that because you aren't really competing normally anymore, you are behaving almost like a bot that is winning and losing at about a 50% rate, almost randomly. This can have side effects: two in particular. Firstly, you are distorting the competition and promotion ladder. By handing out wins and losses at about a 50% rate, you are obviously reducing the win rate of stronger than average players in that tier, while increasing the win rate of weaker players in that tier. A player who would ordinarily have a 65% win rate against the competition that would normally be in that tier will have a 50/50 win rate when they randomly run into the farmer. Meanwhile a player stuck in that tier with a 30% win rate will also have a 50% win rate when they run into the farmer. The presence of farmers thus distorts the competition by causing more weaker players to promote than if they didn't exist, while slowing down the promotion rate of the stronger players in that tier (unless they are stronger than the farmer).
And secondly, the farmer creates a psychological perception problem. Strong players are supposed to promote, which means over time they leave lower VT tiers and enter higher ones, and eventually (if they are strong enough) they promote into GC. Weaker players should see VT tiers slowly deplete themselves of stronger players, giving them an easier time to promote over time. That's intentional. But farmers linger in lower tiers longer than they should, and as a result that tier appears to contain much stronger players than it should. This can increase the perception that progress is hopeless, or severely blocked, when players run into the farmers, even if they happen to get lucky and win (because the farmer is currently trying to lose). Their mere presence reinforces a narrative that BG is dominated by mega accounts at all tiers, reducing the incentive to participate.
For those reasons among others, farming by deliberately losing to maintain a VT tier and gain points by match/cost manipulation is considered anti-competitive behavior, and thus a bannable offense.