currently, the survival XP in ww is 5 xp / minute. in contrast, a kill awards you 125 and a win awards you 60/P. negligent, right?
as with any debate involving survival rewards, there will be those that suggest increased rewards would encourage camping: however I disagree. to camp effectively in WW takes a certain degree of skill most dont have, and while running most players are certain to make mistakes that allow for whoever chases them to catch up. and any player that can run for 10 minutes can win in 3.
this is the rates i would like to see added to the system. as you can see the rewards increase the longer you survive, but seeing as the average woolwars game is 4 minutes, the XP gain drops off after the fourth minute. the dropoff certainly could be even be steeper, with 20XP for each ensuing minute.
feel free to voice your thoughts if you agree or disagree, and i hope to see an implementation of this sort soon @BFI01@Fumaz@IceBreaker420
For anybody who cares here are the formulas
Kills = 125 xp
Win = 60P (P = Players)
My only issue with this idea is of course the dreaded camel kit. I feel like camel needs to be heavily balanced before we can start talking about higher time played rewards. I also think winning xp needs to be balanced better.
My personal opinion is this: XP for playing the game should be buffed yes, HOWEVER, it should never be a point where running in games is meta. It should simply be a reward for having longer games and stuff. Games can last up to 15 minutes (intended max length)
Why are kills worth more than wins? Winning certainly takes more effort, yet the xp rewards are less than half of what kills give you. I’d love to see them switched.
(If there’s an actual reason for the xp amounts, I’d love to hear it, I just haven’t heard one yet)
wins used to be much more than kills but someone got it in their head that 5 player games are nearly 5 times easier to win than 24 player games (they aren’t, the player amount is not directly related to difficulty)
