Shouldn't the daily be to PLAY three games a day, not WIN three?

Insomnist

I enjoy tribute a lot, but if I was playing to win I'd be depressed as hell. I don't know what my win rate is but it's waaayyyyyy less than 50/50, and even assuming straight wins the time investment of three games is already 40-60 minutes at least.

I'm obviously just not that good yet, but this is after I've been playing steadily for three months and I haven't found many resources outside the game to help improve. So if the answer is just to play until it clicks, an incentive for casual participation would be a benefit.

The legendary victor's purse could still be rewarded for 3 wins from the activity finder page.

I know I'm just yodeling into the void but w/e.

Enjoy your games!

fizl101

If it was play 3 people would just join and concede

Dagoth_Rac

There is something similar for Battlegrounds. You don't get the daily reward if your team comes in last. I guess they are worried about players queuing in, then going afk to make a sandwich because they just want rewards and not to actually play a BG. I guess same applies to ToT. They want everyone to at least try to win. Otherwise, it is bad to reward players who don't try and bad for players who want a willing and engaged opponent.

It would be nice if there was some kind of algorithm that could detect the difference between, "Lost because they didn't even try to win," and, "Tried to win, but lost because they are not good enough yet or had a string of bad luck or whatever".

wilykcat

My answer to your question is yes.

It should be play 3 battlegrounds instead of win 3 battlegrounds for one of the daily endeavors. This will make it less of a struggle and more fun for any player of any skill level.

Or they can have another option for completing the same daily endeavor. Example: something like-- win 3 battlegrounds or play 5 battlegrounds to complete this daily endeavor.

In league of legends they sometimes will have quests (called event missions). There (in league of legends) is a main way of completing it and an 2nd optional way of doing the same quest. Doing either option will grant the same reward on completion.

wilykcat

I thought this was about battlegrounds and I did not notice what category this was posted in until now.

tsaescishoeshiner

I treat the Tribute daily as "win 1 game a day" and I turn it in after 3 days for a nice gold boxie. If you had a 50% winrate, winning 3 every day could take 90 minutes.

Changing it to "play 3" would cause people to play in a way to grind, instead of playing to win. It COULD be "Win 1 game, or lose with at least 30 prestige without conceding" to soften the grind while incentivizing actual play.

But I don't expect we'll see any changes to the daily.

Treeshka

Should be play three games and conceded games should not count towards quest.

Nestor

If you focus on patrons, you used to be able to win a game in less than 10 minutes.

Might still be possible with Experts, which you can challenge for dailies.

MidniteOwl1913

Nestor wrote: »

If you focus on patrons, you used to be able to win a game in less than 10 minutes.

Might still be possible with Experts, which you can challenge for dailies.

But I don't want to just click patrons. I would like an enjoyable game daily that doesn't take 45 minutes to finish. I like playing the game, but I find the patron race annoying (novice mode seems fixated on patrons now).

I don't understand why this was changed.

Necrotech_Master

i just try to win 1 game and turn it in, when i actually was doing some pvp tribute to get card upgrades lol

i dont care about getting all 3 wins against players, ill just take the achievement credit for finishing the daily after 1 win lol

AnduinTryggva

I really think it is utter crab to have to WIN three matches against players to get the golden box. I often have to play 10 matches to achieve this. No other game mode requires this. It is just utter trolling towards the player base (just like the time penalty on concede).

merpins

Complete 3 games of ToT. If it was just play, people would concede. But if you just have to complete 3 games, regardless of winning or losing, that's what you're asking for.

AnduinTryggva

I'd be fine with that.

I also would be fine to need to complete 3 matches minimum with 2 wins minimum. But 3 wins is far too much.