-Valor is too rare on siege compared to battle; respawns mean everyone is alive and earning points the whole round, so the factor required for valor should be reduced
etc...
This has been a long standing issue that should have been addressed a long while ago, imo. In siege if your team loses, well, odds are that you lost your multi. Unless while on defense you were rushing the attacker spawn and slaughtering all the peasants left and right while 1 ninja capped your flag, thus ending the round in less than a minute, chances are you didn't get valor. The more people that lose their multi, the more people leave the game. Multis are as addicting as crack, and very few people will leave willingly on a high one. But in siege you currently have 50% of the server losing their multi after each and every round, which means up to 50% of the players will quit since they have just lost their long-standing multiplier. In the current state of the "siege" server, the most common cause of multi-losing is some awful imbalanced map, whether due to conquest spawn timers on a siege map or something else entirely (like the map where attackers can walk right in since the two doors both open from the outside). I don't know about everyone, but there is nothing more demoralizing for me than to lose due to some bullshit like that. Nothing kills the fun of siege faster than a map where one team has no chance of winning, and yet are stuck on the losing side each and every round.
Since conquest maps now have a slightly different xp system, where the minimum multiplier is x2, I don't see why the valor system can't also be tweaked for all of siege compared to battle. Honestly the valor requirement could practically be halved and we would only then get to see valor happen as often as it does in battle. The last time I saw valor pop up after a full round was when I went 124-28 or something crazy in a conquest round due to being on the clearly-overpowered team... which brings me to another point: team balance in conquest.
While it is now a widely-accepted fact that the balancer sucks in crpg, it seems to "shine" in conquest even more. The reason for this is with such long rounds people tend to drop in and out mid-round. There are few things more demoralizing than being on the attackers against a clan-stacked defensive team in conquest for a full 30 minutes straight. Communication is key in conquest, and for obvious reasons clans excel at that. I got that absurd KDR recently when I was on the defending team with much of my clan present, and our coordination/communication gave us a huge edge over the unorganized "pubs" that were attacking us. The attackers had many skilled players, but without any coordination it took them 28 out of 30 minutes to take the first capture point... the first of 6 on that map. I would recommend that the team balancer go into effect after each flag is captured, but in situations like this, that doesn't seem to be good enough. Maybe every 10 minutes, at least, the teams should be re-arranged. While this will undoubtedly prove a nuisance to many, it is unfortunately a must with the current 30 minute rounds of conquest. During the time spent on defense with my clan the attackers were generally down 3, maybe 4 or so players on a 15 v 15 server. That is significant, and bound to happen as people join the server and throw 5 or so lives at an impenetrable defense, an say "screw this, I'm off to battle."
Tl;dr: Basically, conquest is fun but simply can't work with the current server population until it has some serious balance/rewards overhauling. Maybe a system similar to strat where every 3 minutes you are given a set amount of xp and gold based off of your performance, and yours alone, would be the best way to approach the situation. A bonus for flag captures (or recaptures for defense) could also be included to add incentive to attack/defend the objectives.
