The 166 Wall, and What Can be Done to Fix It.

Magic

I am in transition now and it is pain in the tinykitty. For couple of weeks I was able to reach 600 points for reward (and would be hit for 100-150 before the end of event). Now i struggle as the maxed out 3* teams are waiting for me around 400 points. I can't fight them.

Tanking? I have tried to ask people how they do it and I did not get satisfactory advice. I don't understand the concept (at some levels I detest the concept of tanking - Devs should try to eliminate it by rendering it useless).

Maybe there should be a limit of points you can lose in 24hours (or 8 hours from the last time you've played)?

I am trying to use shields but it's not doing anything for me. The end time of events requires me to go for 8h shield and the HP loss is not compensated (I am not in top 100 alliance... but they require 600+ points and the circle is complete).

It's real pain to progress in this game at this stage. As a player with no 3* above lvl 89 (and most around 40-50) I should not see any 160 lvl teams unless I am in top 10 for the event. But it's not the case

Trisul

metallicajake01 wrote:

Wow! Its really easy for all the people that have awesome 166 rosters to say "screw the 94 guys" because you're well beyond it and had to go through it.

Nobody is saying "screw the 94 guys". The veterans on this board have overwhelmingly been super helpful and friendly to newer players. They acknowledge the difficulty of transitioning to 3*, so I'm not sure why you're resorting to soapboxing and namecalling.

I'm on day 143, have 9 covers on my highest 3*, and still enjoy this game. The rate of progression is slow in MPQ, so if you don't enjoy the journey, you're better off playing something else.

Unknown

LordMojo wrote:

Ahhh, I see. So it's asking to be spoonfed to want a level playing field, but it's totally different to just be handed victory repeatedly because, worst case scenario, you have to fight opponents of equal level. Sounds to me like old heads wailing and gnashing teeth at the thought of the gravy train stopping.

The game dynamic has changed, there are more characters than there were originally, meaning that the chances of getting the covers you need to actually progress are an order of magnitude less than they were a year ago. That needs to be taken into consideration. I'm just trying to be helpful.

Now if any of you want to discuss this as a matter of game design, I'm all ears as that's what I went to college for. However if you have no better argument than "I got my covers by doing X and think everybody should have to do the same" then you are just stating personal anecdotes which have no basis in what the game is today and as such your argument is useless.

And for the record as far as retro gaming goes, you don't brag about beating Super Mario Bros in one life, you brag about how many times you can beat it in 1 life. My record was 7 with warpzones, 3 without.

Sounds more like there token system is broken and had not been updated to compensate for the number of characters.

I have mixed feelings on the PvP subject. On one hand, I don't want transitioning players to quit because they more players, the healthier the game is. On the other hand, whether directly or indirectly you're asking that players who have not played as long and/or as hard as veterans get a free ride. A free ride veteran players did not have, and most are not whales... They've just been playing the have for a very, very long time.

If you want an equal playing field or one where newer players have a bigger advantage, I recommend as always pve. Between progression, tokens, and placement you should be getting at least 3 3*'s per week just from that. More, if you learn how to play pve well.

If you get in a good alliance, you probably should be getting a min of 6 3*'s per week in PvP. 9 per week for a year is 450+ 3* covers not counting season rewards or token drops. This also not taking into account getting more rewards in PvP as your roster gradually improves.

So transitioning players can do well, it's just you have to work for it like the 166 players you complain about now. This game is set up for gradual progression. You're not getting to the top of the totem pole the first few months. I've been playing many hours, an embarrassing amount, daily for over half a year. Until this week, I only had 4 166 3*'s, and finally got my 5th this week.

I've had to have what you have and just work hard and persevere to earn my roster. So, I tend to find it funny when players want a much easier path. The funny part is they categorize it as "fairness". I remember when I felt the same way, but that was before pve is what is now with weekly events. Once, I learned how to play pve well, it was when my roster and game satisfaction really grew.

By the way, fairness does not mean that you should be able to do as well as everyone else. Fairness means the opportunity to do as well as other players of a similar level. So there is fairness in PvP. Your expectations are what seem to be out of whack. I sincerely hope the developers come up with other ways, whether it's tokens or something else, that does hero newer players develop their rosters more quickly than mine, I think the game is healthier when people don't quit from frustration. However, I also feel that help should not come in the form of punishing players who have invested the time and work you are now bemoaning.

I wish you well, and hope you hang in there so that one day you will be the type of player other players don't like to show up in their nodes.

Unknown

Actually maxed 3* rosters don't fight 2* ones. Maybe 5-6 games most. They start fighting full 3* rosters from very early in PVP. So they are not actually "feeding" on us (I am a 2*->3* myself). As you have heard, having a full 3* roster will take you up to 700-800pts. And that depends on your roster diversity. If you only have 2 3* maxed then hitting 700 will be an achievement for you. Going anywhere higher from 800pts is plain HP on shields and nothing more. So don't think that 3* land is a dream land where all your wishes are granted and you live happily ever after.

Unknown

You want to compete with only players at your level? Do you want brackets of just 2* players, or MMR fields of just 2* players or both? If you are asking for a low level arena are you also asking for the same tier of rewards as the high level arena?

Yes I am starting to get comfortable with my roster even though it is no where near maxed out and the game is more enjoyable than it was when I like nearly everyone else was in the same MMR hell you are in now. You are calling us hypocrites for saying yes we have been there and understand your pain, it gets better, keep going.

Your plan would make it easier for you to advance but take everyone who has already worked past that barrier and make it so they see nothing but 166+ from point zero, how is that fair?

There are people who put insane amounts of time money and effort into this game and I totally understand not wanting to grind nodes as your Friday night, but that makes you not one of those people. Top 20% of each 500 man bracket are getting at least one 3* cover right now, that may be the best ratio they have ever had for giving out covers.

If the wall is insurmountable right now, do not kill yourself trying to climb it. Slow down, collect tokens and progression rewards and daily rewards, concentrate on PVE's hoard iso and climb that wall slowly. If you haven't the patience to go at that pace then you are claiming you don't want to do the same things so many others before you have done and want it to be easier for you at the expense of it being harder for everyone else and I am sorry if that makes me look arrogant but it also makes you look disrespectful of what we have gone through for this game.

Trisul

Magic wrote:

Tanking? I have tried to ask people how they do it and I did not get satisfactory advice. I don't understand the concept (at some levels I detest the concept of tanking - Devs should try to eliminate it by rendering it useless).

The concept is simple if you understand what MMR is. When you lose, you lose MMR and will generally get matched up against easier opponents. It's a fairly slow process, so you actually have to devote a significant amount of time to it, if you want to tank. That's... pretty much it.

If you are looking to progress in PvP, it's pretty tough. You most likely need to tank regularly, and also be really careful about the timing of your event entrance to get bracketed against easier players. But it's definitely possible, I've gotten top 5 with sub-500 scores in the past.

mags1587

I'd like to point out (as others have) that bracketing and matchmaking are 2 completely different things. Matchmaking (or MMR) is the players you fight. Bracketing is the players you go up against for rewards.

If you say that bracketing should be adjusted so that anyone with a few 166 characters should all be in the same bracket, fighting for the same rewards, what that means is that a player with a 3* roster is going to end up dead last in a bracket of 1000. What it means is that points will be insane in those brackets because 3* rosters need at least one of the 3* covers. Of course the people with maxed 3* characters are going to protest that because it doesn't make any sense. Brackets should be made up of a mix of rosters -- players just starting out, players building 2* rosters, players transitioning from 2* to 3*, and players with a solid 3* roster. Sharding is bad enough as it is, it does not need to be tweaked further.

However, if you want to say that MMR should be adjusted so that players with similar rosters are matched up together, I'd agree there's work to be done on that. In the Hulk event, my team of maxed Hulk, Daken, and a 170 X-Force was matched up with a max 3* team only about once every 10 matches; the other teams were underleveled 3* and max 2* teams. I didn't start seeing more maxed 3* teams until about 700 points. I have no idea why. I don't tank at all. I lose occasionally due to cascades, etc, but there was nothing out of the ordinary in this event. I know the devs do keep tweaking MMR but I have no idea how. I do know that there is always going to be a point at which your score is high enough that you cross that threshold -- that you've done so well that you're going to be pitted against everyone. And maybe that should be higher than it is right now, I don't know.

OnesOwnGrief

What would be considering similar rosters? Since I started hitting Sentry/Hood teams often, I've made it a habit to check their roster to see if they had 3 or 5 black on Hood. One person I ran over, despite not having a leveled 166 character had 4 3*s post lvl 100, with LDaken, The Hood, and Sentry being 3 of them. Where would they fall? The levels of their characters were clearly able to hop off 166s (I know because mine have been doing so since 125) and climb up high depending on how often they hop.

Unknown

I've been playing for about a year and a half and now have a pretty sweet roster, but I didn't get lucky. The characters I have were very tedious to win, I recon I'm in the top teir by now. Anyways the point is that to learn how to win, you need to first learn how to lose.

Unknown

LordMojo wrote:

Ahhh, I see. So it's asking to be spoonfed to want a level playing field, but it's totally different to just be handed victory repeatedly because, worst case scenario, you have to fight opponents of equal level. Sounds to me like old heads wailing and gnashing teeth at the thought of the gravy train stopping.

Yes. It is being spoonfed to want a level playing field, when that level playing field consists of you having an easier time at the expense of people who have accomplished more than you.

LordMojo wrote:

The game dynamic has changed, there are more characters than there were originally, meaning that the chances of getting the covers you need to actually progress are an order of magnitude less than they were a year ago. That needs to be taken into consideration. I'm just trying to be helpful.

Yes. There are many threads with ideas concerning the low ratio of token drops and specific 3* drops. This problem needs to be addressed so it is fair......for everyone......without giving you an easier time at the expense of people who have accomplished more than you.

LordMojo wrote:

Now if any of you want to discuss this as a matter of game design, I'm all ears as that's what I went to college for. However if you have no better argument than "I got my covers by doing X and think everybody should have to do the same" then you are just stating personal anecdotes which have no basis in what the game is today and as such your argument is useless.

I got my rewards by doing more than the others who wanted the same rewards, and I think everyone should have to do the same. Personal anecdote or real life?

LordMojo wrote:

And for the record as far as retro gaming goes, you don't brag about beating Super Mario Bros in one life, you brag about how many times you can beat it in 1 life. My record was 7 with warpzones, 3 without.

+1 for trying to take my point and turn it into a pissing contest. -1 for not succeeding.

metallicajake01

Trisul wrote:

metallicajake01 wrote:

Wow! Its really easy for all the people that have awesome 166 rosters to say "screw the 94 guys" because you're well beyond it and had to go through it.

Nobody is saying "screw the 94 guys". The veterans on this board have overwhelmingly been super helpful and friendly to newer players. They acknowledge the difficulty of transitioning to 3*, so I'm not sure why you're resorting to soapboxing and namecalling.

I'm on day 143, have 9 covers on my highest 3*, and still enjoy this game. The rate of progression is slow in MPQ, so if you don't enjoy the journey, you're better off playing something else.

I'm referring to the line of posts after the OP where everyone basically says tough titty, man up, and that we're trying to screw everything up by asking for things to be adjusted. So is calling us all a bunch of big babies any better than anything I said? I think not.

Everyone IS very helpful around here and its very appreciated but its pretty discouraging to have things be so outrageous and then see a line of people saying there's nothing to see here move along in threads like this. Great quote btw leaving out the next adjoining line which says it doesn't make it right! because it doesn't make it right!

I'm enjoying the journey just fine and will keep playing, everyone has a voice, just because you don't like what I said doesn't mean I need to go play another game, sorry I don't share your opinion.

Sorry to be so over the top but I felt the conversation needed a little balance, sometimes you gotta stir the pot a bit to get things back on track.

I have like 25 3* characters that covers are being collected for, how many did the people making these statements have? Its so ironic the data points some of the people on the first page leave out to make their arguments appear so undeniable that this such an out of line game breaking request.

I've pushed hard at certain times but yes definitely slowing down and just doing what I can and not making a sport out of it.

Yours Truly,
-Outspoken for the sake of conversation

SnowcaTT

Make sure it isn't just "covered" 3*'s but level of them. I have had plenty of alliance folks with 8-10 covered 3*'s, but only 3ish leveled to 166: all that ISO makes it a whole different situation.

Solution: put a timer on the D-team points, that ticks down from current point total to 1 points after 8 hours.

This would make the giant 166-wall push in the last 8 hours not hit all the folks that actually played throughout the event. Instead, everyone would find more value by playing several times throughout the event, and that (in turn) would make more nodes worth more points early on, allowing folks to push beyond 600 points before the final couple of hours of the event. Also, retaliations from teams who are tanking won't be worth anything.

I suppose it won't be implemented because it is sort of a "free" shield, anyone try to hit 600-700 early on and simply stop playing before the final eight hours, hoping that score holds for a reward. I think something needs to be done about the last two-hour push though, which is (imo) quickly becoming the worst part of the game.

mjh

TL;DR

The best way to sum up MPQ is "it's a marathon, not a sprint".

Yes there is a 166 wall but that means you are not there yet. You will get there eventually. You can place top150 and get 1 cover at a time, it takes time.

You'll eventually become part of that 166 wall and face another obstacle, . It becomes in very short supply when your roster starts to pile up 3* covers.

This game is a test of diligence, patience and putting up with a lot of other ****.

Unknown

Pieking7 wrote:

I've been playing for about a year and a half and now have a pretty sweet roster, but I didn't get lucky. The characters I have were very tedious to win, I recon I'm in the top teir by now. Anyways the point is that to learn how to win, you need to first learn how to lose.

Ummm....MPQ's one year anniversary is next month..... So not sure how you managed to play 1.5 years... Yea, so....

Unknown

stephen43084 wrote:

Pieking7 wrote:

I've been playing for about a year and a half and now have a pretty sweet roster, but I didn't get lucky. The characters I have were very tedious to win, I recon I'm in the top teir by now. Anyways the point is that to learn how to win, you need to first learn how to lose.

Ummm....MPQ's one year anniversary is next month..... So not sure how you managed to play 1.5 years... Yea, so....

lets ignore the troll who obviously did not do any research before posting

HailMary

LordMojo wrote:

Bracket 1 - Players who have 3 or more fully covered 3* (4* counts as 3* for bracketing purposes) characters.

Bracket 2 - Players who have 1 or 2 fully covered 3*'s

Bracket 3 - Players who have 3* characters that are not fully covered.

Bracket 4 - Players who do not have ANY 3*'s.

Translation: make sharding far more extreme than it ever was.

Not only do you want people with no 3*s only competing against each other, but you want entire brackets filled with nothing but multi-L166 players vying for exactly the same rewards as marshmallow brackets of 1* & 2* players. That said, you apparently still want L94 players to be steamrolling sub-L60 players. This is a rather strange proposal for "game balance."

LordMojo wrote:

The game dynamic has changed, there are more characters than there were originally, meaning that the chances of getting the covers you need to actually progress are an order of magnitude less than they were a year ago. That needs to be taken into consideration. I'm just trying to be helpful.

The covers you needed to actually progress were precisely zero a year ago, because MPQ wasn't even released yet. Veterans have been complaining about nerfed token drop rates from the day guaranteed covers were removed from event token packs. That's already being "taken into consideration" by the same people rebutting you, and is quite separate from your bracketing proposal.

MikeHock wrote:

"Evaluate the way I play" ? ? ??? ? ? I'm not sure what you're suggesting; should we try to lose more? Tanking to try and lower your MMR is just a ridiculous mechanic and highlights this MMR issue.

Evalutating the way you play must be done all the time since D3 introduces new "Features" like team ups & endless nerfs amongst other things, like new characters. No way people are playing MPQ the same way that they played 2-3 months ago or 6 months ago.

Perhaps you shouldn't expect to stay at the top after collecting only daily rewards for months. I've probably sold an entire extra LT, close to an entire extra BP, and close to an entire extra Sentry (should've kept those covers, sigh) by now, and the Hulk PVE that introduced LT was when I started my 2*-3* transition. I'm far from the most competitive player. My alliance has players who started more two months later than me and have multiple L166s already (including one guy who started way later).

Zen808

The problem with this solution is it just kicks the can down the road, where it starts to roll down a snowy hill into a tinykitty giant snowball. (Gotta love them mixed metaphors).

Once you Max Cover a couple guys, you slam right into the death bracket of Sentry-bombing shield hoppers, which you so kindly lumped all into the same place. Good luck with that.

Nefesh

Yeah, this problem bothers me to. I'm a 2* - 3* transition player and in the last few events I get a 166 wall after ~500 points. So I cannot move further and even cant hold my position because of constant attacks of 166's and 90's. As a result I end up over 100 and don't get even ONE guarantied *** cover. I don't really know whether is it my "bad luck" last events puts me into "death brackets" or developers already "fixed" something... But I know that in previous season and even in the beginning of this one I was able to finish top25 few times and I was definitely top100 without problems.

Another strange thing I've noticed that when I was 1* player I was often beaten by both 90's and 166's teams. But now I can't see any underleveled 1* teams, all I saw is just few teams with 1 maxed out 1* character and 2*-3* other ones. So, may be something really was fixed...

But all this system reminds me some underground fightings where someone weak is beaten by hulks for amusement of public. Because every other professional sport has it's weight categories.

SnowcaTT

I was thinking about this thread, from just a week ago. Some nice suggestions in here by the community! Pretty much ignored, and stealth changes implemented.

Dev's response to what can be done about 166 wall : make sure -everyone- can see it as soon as they pass 600 points.

Since everyone gets the same chance (none) to get past that point anymore, it must be fair. Right?

orionpeace

stephen43084 wrote:

Sounds more like there token system is broken and had not been updated to compensate for the number of characters.

I have mixed feelings on the PvP subject. On one hand, I don't want transitioning players to quit because they more players, the healthier the game is. On the other hand, whether directly or indirectly you're asking that players who have not played as long and/or as hard as veterans get a free ride. A free ride veteran players did not have, and most are not whales... They've just been playing the have for a very, very long time.

If you want an equal playing field or one where newer players have a bigger advantage, I recommend as always pve. Between progression, tokens, and placement you should be getting at least 3 3*'s per week just from that. More, if you learn how to play pve well.

If you get in a good alliance, you probably should be getting a min of 6 3*'s per week in PvP. 9 per week for a year is 450+ 3* covers not counting season rewards or token drops. This also not taking into account getting more rewards in PvP as your roster gradually improves.

So transitioning players can do well, it's just you have to work for it like the 166 players you complain about now. This game is set up for gradual progression. You're not getting to the top of the totem pole the first few months. I've been playing many hours, an embarrassing amount, daily for over half a year. Until this week, I only had 4 166 3*'s, and finally got my 5th this week.

I've had to have what you have and just work hard and persevere to earn my roster. So, I tend to find it funny when players want a much easier path. The funny part is they categorize it as "fairness". I remember when I felt the same way, but that was before pve is what is now with weekly events. Once, I learned how to play pve well, it was when my roster and game satisfaction really grew.

By the way, fairness does not mean that you should be able to do as well as everyone else. Fairness means the opportunity to do as well as other players of a similar level. So there is fairness in PvP. Your expectations are what seem to be out of whack. I sincerely hope the developers come up with other ways, whether it's tokens or something else, that does hero newer players develop their rosters more quickly than mine, I think the game is healthier when people don't quit from frustration. However, I also feel that help should not come in the form of punishing players who have invested the time and work you are now bemoaning.

I really think you are overstating the case here regarding "all the hard work".

Everyone knows that in the early stages it was easier to get covers. There were fewer players competing. There were fewer characters on offer so you had a higher chance of getting a cover you needed. There were packs with guaranteed covers. HP was given away more frequently.

And those are just the ones I know about. I'm sure there are other advantages the old school players had. I'm sure you know them all.

Yes, it is WAY easier now to get 2* covers now versus in the early days. But we all know that 3* is where the action is. The transition from 2* to 3* is probably an order of magnitude higher now than it was when you did it.

So, please get off your high horse about walking to school, uphill, both ways. We get it. You've been playing longer. You should have an advantage. I agree. Hell, I think everyone agrees.

But that advantage shouldn't stifle the game or the players. There has to be some middle ground somewhere.