Mordhau

XP/Gold Progression

Knight 138 303
  • 3 May
 Sir Boring

As I and many others have noticed, the progression system is based on the length of the match, not how well you do during those matches. With this in mind, it's completely possible for players to simply idle in the game and rack up gold and experience. Obviously players should be rewarded for playing even if they don't do good, so that way they progress and want to keep playing. However, I find it odd that the MVPs sometimes get less gold and experience than those players simply because they joined the match later.

Basically what I'm saying is that, yes, it's totally possible for the highest ranked player in the game to do nothing but play the lute longer than other people play the game normally.

Empress 359 850

Yeah I noticed this

One guy had 8k score, and idk like 60 kills or something, he reckoned he got 500-600 gold

I was farting around as a pan man with like 2200 score, and I got 470 gold

lol

3 2
  • 4 May
 Smo

I agree, performing better should be more rewarding.
Objectives should give more score so people actually would rush to do them.
Now there is no point to do anything else than than end game slower if you are grinding for gold and levels.
Would be very easy to "afk" whole game and gain same gold and exprience than players who have done their best to win enemies.

Empress 359 850

@Smo said:
I agree, performing better should be more rewarding.
Objectives should give more score so people actually would rush to do them.
Now there is no point to do anything else than than end game slower if you are grinding for gold and levels.
Would be very easy to "afk" whole game and gain same gold and exprience than players who have done their best to win enemies.

Ya, not really any incentive to be a thirsty alpha nerd, just fart around, get equal gold and xp as the enemy teams top player.

Give or take 50 gold

Baron 2 1

This exactly, doing 3 times better then the next best person in the lobby, i got like 800 gold, someone near the bottom of the leaderboard got 670. no reward for being good

5 1
  • 4 May
 TenTonTube

I agree that it should be performance based to some extent, but match length makes sense when you consider a bad player who plays a drawn out Skirmish match. They die quickly and perform poorly, so they don't get many rewards. By basing it on match length, it essentially creates a minimum reward amount. This could then be supplemented with performance based rewards.

As for worrying about players going AFK and reaping rewards, simply vote kick them.