Objectives

Lightcell

Why are the harder objectives worth less points than the easier ones?

LoVe1AnGe

Just to break the ties easier.

Lightcell

It is just doesn't seem right to me I guess. Harder work should have a bigger reward

Steeme

Harder work does have a bigger reward. Since there are limited spots at the top of the leaderboard, you must make all objectives to compete. Miss some objectives, you lose the prize. Only those that put in the effort can compete. The players that don't have the time to invest, or don't care, skip the harder objectives.

AettThorn

LoVe1AnGe wrote:

Just to break the ties easier.

That makes no sense. Missing two points would mean even fewer ties than missing one point.

hawkyh1

so that more casual players can meet progression.
(any missed ribbons will break ties)

HH

Ohboy

AettThorn wrote:

LoVe1AnGe wrote:

Just to break the ties easier.

That makes no sense. Missing two points would mean even fewer ties than missing one point.

Technically, 2 points have no advantage or disadvantage over 1 points for bonus objectives when it comes to tie breaking.

AettThorn

Ohboy wrote:

AettThorn wrote:

LoVe1AnGe wrote:

Just to break the ties easier.

That makes no sense. Missing two points would mean even fewer ties than missing one point.

Technically, 2 points have no advantage or disadvantage over 1 points for bonus objectives when it comes to tie breaking.

Well, true. It's the same because people will either get the objective or not, leading to the same scores. But it's certainly not leading to less ties by having the 1-point objective be the harder one than if it was the other way around.

octal9

hawkyh1 wrote:

so that more casual players can meet progression.

This is why.

Ohboy

octal9 wrote:

hawkyh1 wrote:

so that more casual players can meet progression.

This is why.

We'll be going around in circles. Casual players easily hitting progression means the more hard core players hit it really early.

Sound familiar?

That's the system we just moved away from to the current one.

hawkyh1

Ohboy wrote:

octal9 wrote:

hawkyh1 wrote:

so that more casual players can meet progression.

This is why.

We'll be going around in circles. Casual players easily hitting progression means the more hard core players hit it really early.

Sound familiar?

That's the system we just moved away from to the current one.

I mean the reasoning for the harder 2nd objectives to be only
worth 1 ribbon but the easier 1st objective to be worth 2
ribbons is so that there is no big change in the difficulty
for non tie breaker players. (which usually make up the bulk
of an event)

HH

octal9

Ohboy wrote:

We'll be going around in circles. Casual players easily hitting progression means the more hard core players hit it really early.

Sound familiar?

That's the system we just moved away from to the current one.

I'm neither here to start nor partake in off topic discussion. This is the OP:

Why are the harder objectives worth less points than the easier ones?

This is the answer:

hawkyh1 wrote:

so that more casual players can meet progression.

</thread>

SeditiousCanary

Ohboy wrote:

AettThorn wrote:

LoVe1AnGe wrote:

Just to break the ties easier.

That makes no sense. Missing two points would mean even fewer ties than missing one point.

Technically, 2 points have no advantage or disadvantage over 1 points for bonus objectives when it comes to tie breaking.

Yeah, I agree. It comes down to hitting all the objectives. In more progressive events, like Nodes of Power, you cannot get the 3rd one without getting the 2nd one. The total value of the goal is less important than the goal itself. In the end, it really only matters if you win each game in an event, and hit as many goals as you can.

bk1234

So that newer players who cannot complete both objectives can still make progression.

You get a bonus for completing one objective and a little more for completing two.