Mission failure needs to be rewarding, or people will leave the moment it looks shaky.

[Orrion_the_Kitsune]

5 hours ago, Orrion_the_Kitsune said:

This is actually the idea behind rewarding people more for completing missions, success or failure, instead of leaving them midway through because everything's going terribly and it's more efficient if you just drop out. If DE frowns upon the attitude, then the only way they can reasonably fix it without causing problems for the people who need to leave because work suddenly called in is simple: they make failure more rewarding than abandoning the mission, and success more rewarding than failure. This will have a side-effect of encouraging people to experiment instead of take Limbo to every difficult defense mission.

Yes. DE dislikes people fleeing missions to avoid failure and/or make farming more efficient. Why then is leaving the only option if things look hairy? I don't think this needs to be said, but if you lose all of your loot for sticking with a mission until the end BUT you lose it all for abandoning the mission regardless, people are going to choose the latter option anyway. You need to encourage people to try and fail, after all. It'd also encourage a better attitude and more variety, as if you're not arbitrarily punished for failing a mission people will be more likely to take risks (and by extent, fail more) instead of sticking with the safest option possible.

[(NSW)Greybones]

The idea behind this is to make failure less punishing because otherwise players are leaving and restarting the moment things get hairy?

edit: Wait, reading through again… 

double edit: Okay, what I’m getting is:

-Players will avoid failure wherever possible

-There’s little incentive for failure

-Some players will abort very rapidly if things look even slightly like they’re approaching failure, even if for the most part things look winnable

[(PSN)jaggerwanderer]

Public matchmaking for Spy Sortie. Mission fail after two minutes pass by.

Public matchmaking for Mobile Defense Radiation Hazards. Two minutes goes by, Mission Fail

Public matchmaking for Disruption Sortie. First round 3 conduits destroy, one successfully defended. Second round: one conduit successfully defended, three are blown. Conclusion 6 more rounds to go.

If it's a fail group, it's a fail group. It doesn't take 2 minutes or 2 hours within the mission to figure that out. It isn't like Arbitration where we still get some rewards for failing but no resources. If a system is introduce that gave partial reward from fail mission, people are going to take advantage of it somehow. "Oh I max rank my gear on 11 wave in Hydron. Time to abort with all the stuff I have. Screw my team mates." Host Migration. Error connecting to host. You will be return to the Orbiter (with all progress lost).

[Orrion_the_Kitsune]

1 hour ago, (PSN)jaggerwanderer said:

Public matchmaking for Spy Sortie. Mission fail after two minutes pass by.

Public matchmaking for Mobile Defense Radiation Hazards. Two minutes goes by, Mission Fail

Public matchmaking for Disruption Sortie. First round 3 conduits destroy, one successfully defended. Second round: one conduit successfully defended, three are blown. Conclusion 6 more rounds to go.

If it's a fail group, it's a fail group. It doesn't take 2 minutes or 2 hours within the mission to figure that out. It isn't like Arbitration where we still get some rewards for failing but no resources. If a system is introduce that gave partial reward from fail mission, people are going to take advantage of it somehow. "Oh I max rank my gear on 11 wave in Hydron. Time to abort with all the stuff I have. Screw my team mates." Host Migration. Error connecting to host. You will be return to the Orbiter (with all progress lost).

You get partial rewards if you abandon the mission already. even if the mission is 100% guaranteed a fail. So long as the defense objective is at 1 health or more, or the capture target is a pixel from their escape area, abandoning the mission will always get you more than allowing yourself to fail the mission. Abuse is impossible when the difference between failing a mission for zero rewards and quitting a mission for reward of whatever you got up to that point is an amount of time so minor it can't be measured on a watch. You were unable to name a way it could be abused for this reason.

DE wants to increase the number of missions people fail. I'm not sure why they want to do that in a power fantasy, but that's their problem. DE will not manage to do this by creating OHKable defense objectives, because no-one will do those missions, they will complain (for good reason) if forced to do them, or they'll bring Limbo to cheese it effortlessly and render the idea of failing the mission an afterthought. If DE was to punish people harder for quitting, most quits are not because the mission's about to fail and people want out, so they'd harm a large number of people for no reason. The only solution they have is to make failing missions less punishing so people aren't inclined to book it the moment things look bad or worse. This would in effect create less of an incentive for people to avoid risk and stick with the safest option.

[(NSW)Greybones]

15 minutes ago, Orrion_the_Kitsune said:

You get partial rewards if you abandon the mission already. even if the mission is 100% guaranteed a fail. So long as the defense objective is at 1 health or more, or the capture target is a pixel from their escape area, abandoning the mission will always get you more than allowing yourself to fail the mission. Abuse is literally impossible when the difference between failing a mission for zero rewards and quitting a mission for reward of whatever you got up to that point is literally an amount of time so minor it can't be measured on a watch. You were unable to name a way it could be abused for this reason.

Wait, seriously? I thought if you chose to abandon partway through, you got the same as a fail, which is why I read “make failure mirror the abandon rewards” and was thinking “…er, doesn’t it already do that?”

[Orrion_the_Kitsune]

4 minutes ago, (NSW)Greybones said:

Wait, seriously? I thought if you chose to abandon partway through, you got the same as a fail, which is why I read “make failure mirror the abandon rewards” and was thinking “…er, doesn’t it already do that?”

Not even close. If you book it right before the defense objective explodes, you get normal quit rewards. The mission screen tells you it's a fail but it's counted as a quit on the stats page and the rewards are exactly equivalent to those from quitting the mission. Any "if defense objective is below 25% and if they quit then count it as a fail" mechanic would result in people leaving before the threshold and it'd be like all defense objectives had that much less health. This'd be if it worked perfectly. It won't.

[(NSW)Greybones]

4 minutes ago, Orrion_the_Kitsune said:

Not even close. If you book it right before the defense objective explodes, you get normal quit rewards.

Whaaaat, weird. I don’t think this info will change how I approach fights (I tend to push through to the bitter end), but this is casting a new light on the difference between abandoning and failure, and makes your OP easier to understand now while giving me food for thought.

[Orrion_the_Kitsune]

Just now, (NSW)Greybones said:

Whaaaat, weird. I don’t think this info will change how I approach fights (I push through to the bitter end), but this is casting a new light on the difference between abandoning and failure, and makes your OP easier to understand now while giving me food for thought.

I admire people who will push through to failure, I just want a better incentive for people to do that because it promotes a healthier attitude and better design.

[(NSW)Greybones]

Just now, Orrion_the_Kitsune said:

I admire people who will push through to failure, I just want a better incentive for people to do that because it promotes a healthier attitude and better design.

Yeah, I can get behind that. Might make people a little more willing to take weird builds to a fight.

Personally the idea of “Oh god I’m about to lose everything” creates some amazing emotional rollercoasters, but I’m not so married to the idea of hefty consequences for failure that I’d be against making it a little less scary

[Orrion_the_Kitsune]

3 minutes ago, (NSW)Greybones said:

Yeah, I can get behind that. Might make people a little more willing to take weird builds to a fight.

Personally the idea of “Oh god I’m about to lose everything” creates some amazing emotional rollercoasters, but I’m not so married to the idea of hefty consequences for failure that I’d be against making it a little less scary

You might enjoy that feeling because you have the attitude necessary to achieve it, though few others may try a long-term survival mission where they die in a single hit simply because failing a mission is so punishing. While it may be them that misses out on the feeling, they do not place such value in the emotional impact of such a circumstance: they place the value in loot and what is lost, and such an emotional response would only be secondary if they were ever to come across that situation somehow.

[(NSW)Greybones]

3 minutes ago, Orrion_the_Kitsune said:

You might enjoy that feeling because you have the attitude necessary to achieve it, though few others may try a long-term survival mission where they die in a single hit simply because failing a mission is so punishing. While it may be them that misses out on the feeling, they do not place such value in the emotional impact of such a circumstance: they place the value in loot and what is lost, and such an emotional response would only be secondary if they were ever to come across that situation somehow.

You got my support 👍 (dying in a single hit is a bit much for me, though, and I greatly appreciated when they introduced shield gating). I’d love to see more players toeing the line between success and failure. Can get some good stories from that

[KIREEK]

I believe when you quit, it adds a quit to your profile if you don't rejoin the squad when you log back in.

When you fail or quit, that time you spent is worthless, so a 5 min mission will now have to be a 10 min one, your efficiency drops because you needed 2 or more runs to achieve the same result as other players.

Failing is part of the experience, but i am wary of players that have a low completion rate or high quit rates, it's one of the reasons why i always force myself as the host in squads, because in the few opportunities i join games, i end up meeting the host migration screen because someone in squad got upset at something, or their friend left so they need to leave aswell.

[Voltage]

47 minutes ago, KIREEK said:

I believe when you quit, it adds a quit to your profile if you don't rejoin the squad when you log back in.

When you fail or quit, that time you spent is worthless, so a 5 min mission will now have to be a 10 min one, your efficiency drops because you needed 2 or more runs to achieve the same result as other players.

Failing is part of the experience, but i am wary of players that have a low completion rate or high quit rates, it's one of the reasons why i always force myself as the host in squads, because in the few opportunities i join games, i end up meeting the host migration screen because someone in squad got upset at something, or their friend left so they need to leave aswell.

I'm pretty sure you're the only one who cares about the quit/abort stats.

Many farms in the game are in fact more efficient if you abort. See: Larvlings, old Acolyte Farming, Nightwave/Riven tasks, Operations for high scores, people who want to speedrun mission types, tileset cycling, etc. 

Time spent quitting is often not worthless as the whole point is to save your time. If you force yourself to never abort a mission such as larvling cycling or Nightwave tasks, you're the one wasting your time.

I could argue high mission completions with low quit rates imply the player in question has little regard for efficiency. 

With that said, aborting should not be the most efficient method in farms, but it is and that's what we need to live with until DE goes back to multiple modes and changes that.

[Birdframe_Prime]

16 minutes ago, Voltage said:

Many farms in the game are in fact more efficient if you abort.

This attitude has been consistently frowned upon by DE. This is why you never see what rewards you get from Spy vaults, what arcanes drop from Acolytes or Eidolons, what corrupted mod you got from a Vault. Because people were aborting when they didn't see the right reward.

It's why the Umbral Forma was taken out of rotation on the original Murex alerts, because players would group in voice, go into the mission solo, go to find the Murex and look for the rare case, and if one of them found it they would all abort and join on that player to get the reward.

DE absolutely does not condone the method of aborting missions to make farming or anything else more efficient, and have been outspoken against it multiple times.

Efficiency of farming doesn't come into it, because the intention of the devs is to get you to play missions, not to abort them half way, regardless of how efficient that is.

Do note, this thread is from the player that thinks that because they can taxi to the Steel Path without unlocking it like everyone else had to, they deserve access to the Steel Path Shop rewards for it too. The more threads this person starts, the more I think they're deliberately trolling with the topics they choose.

[(PSN)haphazardlynamed]

why does this thread exist?

I am not seeing a problem that needs any fixing.

[(NSW)Greybones]

5 minutes ago, (PSN)haphazardlynamed said:

why does this thread exist?

I am not seeing a problem that needs any fixing.

Not to put words in the OP’s mouth, but I think part of the point is that people are extremely afraid of failing. Which can cause problems, like being unwilling to stick through a tough fight and instead aborting (which may cause additional problems like host migrations)

[(PSN)haphazardlynamed]

1 minute ago, (NSW)Greybones said:

Not to put words in the OP’s mouth, but I think part of the point is that people are extremely afraid of failing. Which can cause problems, like being unwilling to stick through a tough fight and instead aborting (which may cause additional problems like host migrations)

I don't see the logic in that

Aborting gives no rewards, the end result of doing so is no different from Failure.

Thus I don't see any particular motivation for people to do so.

 

Unless they know they are Incapable of Succeeding Regardless and are just Speed Fishing for another public match Free Carry. But that's its own problem and making Natural Failure more rewarding won't change that.

[(NSW)Greybones]

12 minutes ago, (PSN)haphazardlynamed said:

I don't see the logic in that

Aborting gives no rewards, the end result of doing so is no different from Failure.

Thus I don't see any particular motivation for people to do so.

According to OP the rules for aborting can work a little differently. I haven’t had the chance to test it myself.

edit: (even if it didn’t, I’m personally kind of hoping that making failure a little less scary would incentivise some players to be a little less inclined towards overpowering everything, and a little more willing to walk the edge)

[(NSW)BalticBarbarian]

7 minutes ago, (NSW)Greybones said:

Not to put words in the OP’s mouth, but I think part of the point is that people are extremely afraid of failing. Which can cause problems, like being unwilling to stick through a tough fight and instead aborting (which may cause additional problems like host migrations)

How often do people actually fail missions? Actually fail, not "I am farming X and quitting the mission as a speed-farming strategy"?

Sure, there are the "don't do it in a public squad" mission types like sortie spy or rad. hazard mobile defence - but do people really fail missions aside from those? If not - why is any of this a problem?

I could understand the justification of making sure quitting the mission early removes any earned rewards (making people stay and fight if they want to keep the rewards) - but rewarding failure? Rewards should come from succeeding in a mission, not from failing it!

[(NSW)Greybones]

7 minutes ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

How often do people actually fail missions? Actually fail, not "I am farming X and quitting the mission as a speed-farming strategy"?

Sure, there are the "don't do it in a public squad" mission types like sortie spy or rad. hazard mobile defence - but do people really fail missions aside from those? If not - why is any of this a problem?

I could understand the justification of making sure quitting the mission early removes any earned rewards (making people stay and fight if they want to keep the rewards) - but rewarding failure? Rewards should come from succeeding in a mission, not from failing it!

I think you’d have to ask @Orrion_the_Kitsune what their thinking is.

Personally I expect players don’t fail very often at all, and even though I sometimes do, I’m fine with the fire of “Gonna lose everything” nipping at my heels, since I build for it.

Ultimately my personal hat in the ring is the desire to see some people a little less afraid to fail. May make for some interesting stories to share

[Keiyadan]

failure hmm rarely seen people do that hmm most of the time the objecktiv gets destroyed noone leaves bevor it realy is most people that i encounter leaveing would be people that say oh no not that frame or something

[KIREEK]

1 hour ago, Voltage said:

Time spent quitting is often not worthless as the whole point is to save your time. If you force yourself to never abort a mission such as larvling cycling or Nightwave tasks, you're the one wasting your time.

But as a host i can push the mission into completion, i work so that the missions are profitable, quick and reliable for me AND other players, i will even override certain tasks of other players so that the team can actually succeed for example 3 players when given the chance to move the vehicle in hijack, all 3 fail to do so, so i take it they can't do it and i'll do it myself at the cost of a litle less loot during the mission.

I can always take your aproach, the vehicle isn't moving fast enough so a player leaves and then the host leaves aswell because "the friend left and the mission isn't going anywhere".

Playes also play for fun, we don't grind things with absurd efficiency all the time, every single day.

For some players, reliability matters, i can make the claim that i can indeed provide that reliability, regardless how difficult or impossible it may seem and yes i have wasted time to overcome bugs and issues during missions that make them just impossible to beat (like certain doors not opening), however at the end of the day i can say that in that random unique capture alert my success rate was 100%, while others will say 50% or less

[Voltage]

4 hours ago, Birdframe_Prime said:

This attitude has been consistently frowned upon by DE. This is why you never see what rewards you get from Spy vaults, what arcanes drop from Acolytes or Eidolons, what corrupted mod you got from a Vault. Because people were aborting when they didn't see the right reward.

It's why the Umbral Forma was taken out of rotation on the original Murex alerts, because players would group in voice, go into the mission solo, go to find the Murex and look for the rare case, and if one of them found it they would all abort and join on that player to get the reward.

DE absolutely does not condone the method of aborting missions to make farming or anything else more efficient, and have been outspoken against it multiple times.

Efficiency of farming doesn't come into it, because the intention of the devs is to get you to play missions, not to abort them half way, regardless of how efficient that is.

Larvlings have existed in the current state for over a year. Riven challenges and Nightwave even longer. DE's intention is definitely for you to play an entire mission, but I'm just stating the fact that efficiency does involve aborting for various farms. Umbra Forma was likely removed from the rotating Murex because you can see rare containers in your logs (as we saw on a stream with Rebecca once).

If DE doesn't like this, then they should go back to some of this content and make it inefficient to quit and restart. The importance of tileset for events has been a thing forever at this point as well.

[Orrion_the_Kitsune]

46 minutes ago, Voltage said:

Larvlings have existed in the current state for over a year. Riven challenges and Nightwave even longer. DE's intention is definitely for you to play an entire mission, but I'm just stating the fact that efficiency does involve aborting for various farms. Umbra Forma was likely removed from the rotating Murex because you can see rare containers in your logs (as we saw on a stream with Rebecca once).

If DE doesn't like this, then they should go back to some of this content and make it inefficient to quit and restart. The importance of tileset for events has been a thing forever at this point as well.

This is actually the idea behind rewarding people more for completing missions, success or failure, instead of leaving them midway through because everything's going terribly and it's more efficient if you just drop out. If DE frowns upon the attitude, then the only way they can reasonably fix it without causing problems for the people who need to leave because work suddenly called in is simple: they make failure more rewarding than abandoning the mission, and success more rewarding than failure. This will have a side-effect of encouraging people to experiment instead of take Limbo to every difficult defense mission.

5 hours ago, Birdframe_Prime said:

This attitude has been consistently frowned upon by DE. This is why you never see what rewards you get from Spy vaults, what arcanes drop from Acolytes or Eidolons, what corrupted mod you got from a Vault. Because people were aborting when they didn't see the right reward.

It's why the Umbral Forma was taken out of rotation on the original Murex alerts, because players would group in voice, go into the mission solo, go to find the Murex and look for the rare case, and if one of them found it they would all abort and join on that player to get the reward.

DE absolutely does not condone the method of aborting missions to make farming or anything else more efficient, and have been outspoken against it multiple times.

Efficiency of farming doesn't come into it, because the intention of the devs is to get you to play missions, not to abort them half way, regardless of how efficient that is.

Do note, this thread is from the player that thinks that because they can taxi to the Steel Path without unlocking it like everyone else had to, they deserve access to the Steel Path Shop rewards for it too. The more threads this person starts, the more I think they're deliberately trolling with the topics they choose.

The salty characterization of my argument in that post. From the player who accused me of lying and was proven dead wrong right after screaming about how they're not afraid to call a kettle black and call a liar a liar when they were lying themselves. Regardless of your salt, I'll address you with a fair response.

Yes. DE dislikes people fleeing missions to avoid failure and/or make farming more efficient. Why then is leaving the only option if things look hairy? I don't think this needs to be said, but if you lose all of your loot for sticking with a mission until the end BUT you keep it if you abandon the mission partway through, people are going to choose the latter option because it's more efficient. If you make completing the mission, success or failure, more efficient than outright quitting you'll have fewer people leaving because they got the argon they wanted... which, judging by your response, is something you want. It'd also encourage a better attitude and more variety, as if you're not arbitrarily punished for failing a mission people will be more likely to take risks (and by extent, fail more) instead of sticking with the safest option at any one time.

[Orrion_the_Kitsune]

4 hours ago, (PSN)haphazardlynamed said:

I don't see the logic in that

Aborting gives no rewards, the end result of doing so is no different from Failure.

Thus I don't see any particular motivation for people to do so.

 

Unless they know they are Incapable of Succeeding Regardless and are just Speed Fishing for another public match Free Carry. But that's its own problem and making Natural Failure more rewarding won't change that.

This is where you (and a number of people) are wrong, maybe because you've never paid much attention to your loot count before and after aborting a mission. You keep the stuff you pick up during the mission, even if the UI glitches out (as it does on mission success sometimes too) and shows that you've gained nothing. If you fail the mission, however, that's when all of your loot is erased. If you don't believe me, you can test it out yourself. I'm not sure a 3 minute clip of me doing it for you will be of use to you, and I want to keep myself at 0 mission failures for purpose of shoving in peoples' faces if they think I don't like a challenge.

 

6 hours ago, (XBOX)TyeGoo said:

Yh totally, when a mission fails, people should get rewards from a pool, like umbra formas, legendary cores etc. 

Nice meme but I'm going to have to report you for posting nothing but an overused meme.