What is going on with PvP MMR and 94/166 opponent selection?

franckynight

Unknown

Lyrian wrote:

j12601 wrote:

A whole lot of **snip**


What I suspect:
I'm thinking opponent selection is now based on roster as well as MMR.

MMR plays a role up until 400 points.
400-600 MMR plays a part but gives you maxed opponents if your roster has them.
600+ MMR is mostly ignored and you are given opponents with similar rosters. This allows 2-3 transitioning players to achieve decent scores.
800+ MMR and roster are ignored.

Any thoughts on this? Have you been experiencing something different?

This is the exact topic that got me in trouble with community last time, where I was asked never to talk about this again in public.

Well, someone else brought up the topic first, so I think its fair game to discuss this topic openly, so here we go...

For the sake of time, I'm not going to dig up the developer posts on this topic. Someone can if they really want to do this.

What you are observing is called "MMR buckets" by the devs. This system was implemented quite awhile ago to curb the benefits of tanking one's MMR and to prevent people from running to 800+ points while containing MMRs so low that they are invisible to everyone else. How this works is that at certain point thresholds, a floor in placed under the player in terms of matchmaking. No matter how low the player's MMR is, they cannot see any players below the "floor" because they moved to the next bucket of difficulty (although there may be some momentary remnants in the player's MMR queue until these are exhausted via playing or skipping). By forcing players into harder fights, their MMRs are quickly adjusted back to appropriate levels where they can be targeted by everyone.

Until the last event, these point totals have been aligned with the hero point awards in Versus events (400/600/800 points), representing full 2**, 3*** transition, full 3***/4****.

In the last event, the bucket thresholds appear to have been significantly lowered. There appear to be only two thresholds now, 300 and 600 points for full 2**s and 3/4****s respectively.

This makes achieving the HP at 800, and the covers at 1100/1300 considerably more difficult, as now a player has to run 200 points against 166s/270s for the 50 HP, 500 points for the 1100 cover, and 700 points for the 1300 cover. That's at least 2-3 additional shield hops for the needed for the covers (assuming 2 fights per hop).

My guess is that the devs felt that too many players were achieving 1100/1300, which is simple with Sentry. So, the apparently solution here is to simply require more shield hops to reach the two covers to either make the covers scarcer or at least more expensive to obtain.

And yes, as mentioned in this thread, roster-based PvE scaling is in full effect in the DA PvE. The devs gave everyone 4 days of practice time on the Gauntlet, before implementing the system into standard PvEs. Look out for the train wreck incoming on the those final main map nodes in the last 12 hours. Everyone did take extra practice on the Gauntlet Finale nodes from that extra day in that dry run... right? Also: One could argue that this is the response to the cries from the Gauntlet event that the prizes weren't worth it. Is the rights and benefits in obtaining a new character motivation enough to run the Gauntlet Finale all over again?

heh funny that i was thinking the same thing and here's a post on it. i can usually hit 900 no problem with my patch/BP, and if i want to push higher for an 1100 cover i'll shield hop. this time around for fatal attraction once i crossed 600, it was sentry/hood and xforce teams galore. try as i may i havnt been able to hit 800 for the hp. 3x now i've tried to climb to 800 and each time i manage to get close enough i'm either out of health packs or i'm attacked and brought back down to the 600s. i dont have a sentry/hood team myself so that explains that i guess. and i'm f2p player so i refuse to shield under 900 with less than a day left. and shielding to get to 800 to gain HP that i'm losing in the process defeats the purpose...

wymtime

Lyrian wrote:

j12601 wrote:

A whole lot of **snip**


What I suspect:
I'm thinking opponent selection is now based on roster as well as MMR.

MMR plays a role up until 400 points.
400-600 MMR plays a part but gives you maxed opponents if your roster has them.
600+ MMR is mostly ignored and you are given opponents with similar rosters. This allows 2-3 transitioning players to achieve decent scores.
800+ MMR and roster are ignored.

Any thoughts on this? Have you been experiencing something different?

This is the exact topic that got me in trouble with community last time, where I was asked never to talk about this again in public.

Well, someone else brought up the topic first, so I think its fair game to discuss this topic openly, so here we go...

For the sake of time, I'm not going to dig up the developer posts on this topic. Someone can if they really want to do this.

What you are observing is called "MMR buckets" by the devs. This system was implemented quite awhile ago to curb the benefits of tanking one's MMR and to prevent people from running to 800+ points while containing MMRs so low that they are invisible to everyone else. How this works is that at certain point thresholds, a floor in placed under the player in terms of matchmaking. No matter how low the player's MMR is, they cannot see any players below the "floor" because they moved to the next bucket of difficulty (although there may be some momentary remnants in the player's MMR queue until these are exhausted via playing or skipping). By forcing players into harder fights, their MMRs are quickly adjusted back to appropriate levels where they can be targeted by everyone.

Until the last event, these point totals have been aligned with the hero point awards in Versus events (400/600/800 points), representing full 2**, 3*** transition, full 3***/4****.

In the last event, the bucket thresholds appear to have been significantly lowered. There appear to be only two thresholds now, 300 and 600 points for full 2**s and 3/4****s respectively.

This makes achieving the HP at 800, and the covers at 1100/1300 considerably more difficult, as now a player has to run 200 points against 166s/270s for the 50 HP, 500 points for the 1100 cover, and 700 points for the 1300 cover. That's at least 2-3 additional shield hops for the needed for the covers (assuming 2 fights per hop).

My guess is that the devs felt that too many players were achieving 1100/1300, which is simple with Sentry. So, the apparently solution here is to simply require more shield hops to reach the two covers to either make the covers scarcer or at least more expensive to obtain.

And yes, as mentioned in this thread, roster-based PvE scaling is in full effect in the DA PvE. The devs gave everyone 4 days of practice time on the Gauntlet, before implementing the system into standard PvEs. Look out for the train wreck incoming on the those final main map nodes in the last 12 hours. Everyone did take extra practice on the Gauntlet Finale nodes from that extra day in that dry run... right? Also: One could argue that this is the response to the cries from the Gauntlet event that the prizes weren't worth it. Is the rights and benefits in obtaining a new character motivation enough to run the Gauntlet Finale all over again?

One thing I would like to add is that I think the 600 point bucket has been in place for a while. I can generally run up to the high 500's without getting attacked. If I go over 600 before I go to sleep I get hit big time. The one benefit I have seen is that once you get above 600 points it is easier to find opponents worth more points and not as many 20-25 point players. They might be the maxed Sentry/X-Force but they are worth 40-50 points. I would rather go after 40+ points and play less matches than play for 25 points and be open to more retaliations.

HairyDave

This may or may not be related but is anyone else seeing a lot more MMR bubbles? I keep running into the same four or five guys over and over - it's happened at 400, 500, 600 and 700 points so far. I've found I just have to attack one, maybe two, of them whatever they're worth (and it's usually rubbish) to break out of it but it's getting really frustrating wasting ISO that could be better used fed to X-Force.

simonsez

j12601 wrote:

We've been explicitly told that PVE scaling takes into account your roster

Even if this were a good idea in theory, the implementation of it is pretty damn poor when after 2-3 days of PvE I know that anyone and everyone in front of me on the leaderboard is going to be someone with a 2* roster.

Unknown

TheUnwiseOne wrote:

Faced level 94*s and all loaner Dakens up to 600. As soon as I crossed 600 it was replaced by 249/166/166.

BASTARDS.

You'll get no sympathy from me, I entered the Fatal Attraction event yesterday morning and I saw level 100-166s across the board. Once in a while I come across a team with a loaner daken (like me) or a maxed 2*, but it is rare. I'm currently ranked 329th with a 162 pts.

SnowcaTT

Lyrian wrote:

My guess is that the devs felt that too many players were achieving 1100/1300, which is simple with Sentry. So, the apparently solution here is to simply require more shield hops to reach the two covers to either make the covers scarcer or at least more expensive to obtain.

If this is the case, this is a terrible solution to their problem. If one character is ruining the system the game is based on, something should be done about that character.

3* "transition" team I guess, max character level 110. I came into the forums wondering what the heck was going on. Every PVP I have been able to top 100 with 600 points, and often top 50 with 700 points. I can never top 25, but hey...transition and all.

Today I've hit 600 four different times, and it's the 166 wall immediately. Two attacks get me back down to 500 (losing 50ish each time), it takes 4-5 wins at about the 20 point max I can find to get back up to 600.

So ok, you are trying to get the transitioners beyond the 94's. But why is it -nothing- but huge level's as soon as you break 600 now? I would think a more fair MMR would be to bucket people together with similar rosters, not "one 95 is equal to eight 166's".

This new bucketing system, if that's what this is: ridiculous, bizarre. Absolutely no reason to play many rounds before the last hour of the tournament. I'll be camping out at 550 then, and line up three nodes of matches that are possible.

Unknown

SnowcaTT wrote:

Lyrian wrote:

My guess is that the devs felt that too many players were achieving 1100/1300, which is simple with Sentry. So, the apparently solution here is to simply require more shield hops to reach the two covers to either make the covers scarcer or at least more expensive to obtain.

If this is the case, this is a terrible solution to their problem. If one character is ruining the system the game is based on, something should be done about that character.

3* "transition" team I guess, max character level 110. I came into the forums wondering what the heck was going on. Every PVP I have been able to top 100 with 600 points, and often top 50 with 700 points. I can never top 25, but hey...transition and all.

Today I've hit 600 four different times, and it's the 166 wall immediately. Two attacks get me back down to 500 (losing 50ish each time), it takes 4-5 wins at about the 20 point max I can find to get back up to 600.

So ok, you are trying to get the transitioners beyond the 94's. But why is it -nothing- but huge level's as soon as you break 600 now? I would think a more fair MMR would be to bucket people together with similar rosters, not "one 95 is equal to eight 166's".

This new bucketing system, if that's what this is: ridiculous, bizarre. Absolutely no reason to play many rounds before the last hour of the tournament. I'll be camping out at 550 then, and line up three nodes of matches that are possible.

I don't think the sharding is intended to slow down people hitting 1100/1300 because if that's a problem they could just make it 2000/2600 like when an opponent can be selected while shielded. This isn't to say that the current ease of getting 1100/1300 is intended. Prior to Sentry factoring in a nontrivial chance of complete failure to reach 1300 (if you make a push but nobody else is, it'd be pretty hard to get there just due to a lack of opponents) the cost to hit 1300 could get pretty close to 1300. Looking at the revenue chart found in various sites I suspect the game's player base grew significantly which also made it easier, because even up to around the 900s you still didn't take full loss predicted by the formula. Yes it's something like someone gets +25 and you lose 24 points, but if you've enough guys doing that it'll still add up.

Unknown

j12601 wrote:

400-600 MMR plays a part but gives you maxed opponents if your roster has them.
600+ MMR is mostly ignored and you are given opponents with similar rosters. This allows 2-3 transitioning players to achieve decent scores.
800+ MMR and roster are ignored.

Something has changed, but no, 600+ with similar roster is not happening. I'm full 2* and highest 3* is lvl91 Punisher. Last few events, up to 400-500 I'm getting **** opponents. Half leveled 2*, base level 3*, even had Yelena+Juggs+loner in high 300 range. Once I'm past 500 it's freaking minefield full with maxed 3* and 4* with 'normal' team once every 5 skips. I used to grind to near 600 then going to sleep (Europe yay), but it still let me get top100 cover, right now I'm regularly beaten to pulp with best defensive 2* team in game down below 500 by maxed teams. I'm on verge of quitting, not because I don't want to play, but because I'm physically denied being able to progress further, with being able to only score single 3* cover per week from guaranteed PvE.

y2fitzy

I'm seeing the same as Nivrax. Have five maxed 2*s, then a bunch of 3*s with a handful of covers, nothing particularly usable.

first 400-500 is comfortable enough, rarely maxed 2*s and when they are, they tend to be with base (or close to it) 3*s. In other words, fairly comfortable wins.

But the moment I passed 500 the last couple of PVP, it went mental. Level 200+ Dakens all over the shop in Fatal Attraction. Now, they aren't always maxed 3*s to be fair, but they are always lv 120+. Basically, high enough that I know that one decent hit and I'm ******.

Couple of weeks ago I was able to cruise that 500-600 route with loaner Loki, maxed Ares and Thor. The idea that I could do something similar today seems almost farcical

Bowgentle

reckless442 wrote:

Are there people who may be doing better than me at farming ISO? Sure. I don't dispute that. Franckynight rocks LRs like a champ for ISO, while I only can do a few per week. But I also don't believe there are so many people raking in ISO at such greater amounts than me to explain the sudden explosion of max-level X-Forces out there, especially considering that I do spend on the game. Unless the number of whales in this game is far bigger and the amount they are spending is far larger than any of us really imagines, something is terribly off.

The difference is simple, reck - you've put ISO into guys like Mostorm, Marvel and She-Hulk, while there are guys who levelled no-one except Sentry/Daken/Hood since it was clear that this was the only combo you needed to win.

So, that's 190K for Mostorm, 100+K for Marvel, 100+K for She-Hulk? Let's assume 400K - that's almost a complete 4*.

I started saving ISO for Fury when I decided I wanted to buy covers after season 3 ended. Had 300+K saved up, grinded the remaining 170K in a few weeks.
Then I maxed Deadpool for 190K, maxed Falcon for 60K and put about 100K into levels for other guys.

Then X-Force became _good_ so I started to save up ISO again and maxed him about 3 weeks ago - and am up to 150K ISO again.

But I've totally ignored all new chars - my Beast is 43, Marvel at 55, Mostorm at 76, Colossus at 78, She-Hulk at 90.

So, with ISO saved since season 2 I was able to max two complete 4*s and Deadpool.

I don't think there's anything fishy about players running around with high level X-Forces, unless they have multiples, maxed lol.

yogi_

Just a comment on X-Force in the larger scale of things.

For a long time, XF and IW were largely afterthoughts. Many high level players had him but never used him. Then he became usable. People are now going to be putting ISO into him and he's going to be everywhere. This is not even the real issue.

The issue is that there are only three high level characters (only two usable), so for the top players it's now often going to be teams of X-Force and maybe Fury and whoever else, simply because they are (in the broadest use of the term), the best characters. Iron Patriot is coming eventually and he might end up being a 4* but not going to change anything that much. The 4*s are the next level of the game but the simple lack of number of them means you are going to see the handful of them everywhere at the top levels of the game for a long time to come still (particularly as people will now start investing in them) and each current tier of 3* will move down a notch.

From one perspective, the 4* characters are glorified 3*s.

If you had the 50 characters of the game resorted into brackets (eg. 5 1*, 10 2*, 20 3*, 15 4* or whatever) or everyone was levelled to a single number, this issue wouldn't matter, but an interim solution could be to make these the new 3* Gold characters.

In preparation, you change all the current (meaninglessly titled) Gold characters to regular ones and IW should just be moved down to a normal 3*. NF and X-Force might need very small % nerfs but it means they work alongside the 3*s more, they aren't so alone in their own classification with limited immediate expansion and the 3* Gold label actually means something.

You can keep it to limited cover giving out (the same as now) though at this second, I'm not sure how you handle the ISO issue - maybe not much change. This does not fundamentally change the characters in anyway, but given the dominating nature that X-Force is going to become, it could be worth considering.

Unknown

yogi_ wrote:

Just a comment on X-Force in the larger scale of things.

For a long time, XF and IW were largely afterthoughts. Many high level players had him but never used him. Then he became usable. People are now going to be putting ISO into him and he's going to be everywhere. This is not even the real issue.

The issue is that there are only three high level characters (only two usable), so for the top players it's now often going to be teams of X-Force and maybe Fury and whoever else, simply because they are (in the broadest use of the term), the best characters. Iron Patriot is coming eventually and he might end up being a 4* but not going to change anything that much. The 4*s are the next level of the game but the simple lack of number of them means you are going to see the handful of them everywhere at the top levels of the game for a long time to come still (particularly as people will now start investing in them) and each current tier of 3* will move down a notch.

From one perspective, the 4* characters are glorified 3*s.

If you had the 50 characters of the game resorted into brackets (eg. 5 1*, 10 2*, 20 3*, 15 4* or whatever) or everyone was levelled to a single number, this issue wouldn't matter, but an interim solution could be to make these the new 3* Gold characters.

In preparation, you change all the current (meaninglessly titled) Gold characters to regular ones and IW should just be moved down to a normal 3*. NF and X-Force might need very small % nerfs but it means they work alongside the 3*s more, they aren't so alone in their own classification with limited immediate expansion and the 3* Gold label actually means something.

You can keep it to limited cover giving out (the same as now) though at this second, I'm not sure how you handle the ISO issue - maybe not much change. This does not fundamentally change the characters in anyway, but given the dominating nature that X-Force is going to become, it could be worth considering.

X-Force is everywhere, already!

reckless442

Bowgentle wrote:

reckless442 wrote:

Are there people who may be doing better than me at farming ISO? Sure. I don't dispute that. Franckynight rocks LRs like a champ for ISO, while I only can do a few per week. But I also don't believe there are so many people raking in ISO at such greater amounts than me to explain the sudden explosion of max-level X-Forces out there, especially considering that I do spend on the game. Unless the number of whales in this game is far bigger and the amount they are spending is far larger than any of us really imagines, something is terribly off.

The difference is simple, reck - you've put ISO into guys like Mostorm, Marvel and She-Hulk, while there are guys who levelled no-one except Sentry/Daken/Hood since it was clear that this was the only combo you needed to win.

So, that's 190K for Mostorm, 100+K for Marvel, 100+K for She-Hulk? Let's assume 400K - that's almost a complete 4*.

I started saving ISO for Fury when I decided I wanted to buy covers after season 3 ended. Had 300+K saved up, grinded the remaining 170K in a few weeks.
Then I maxed Deadpool for 190K, maxed Falcon for 60K and put about 100K into levels for other guys.

Then X-Force became _good_ so I started to save up ISO again and maxed him about 3 weeks ago - and am up to 150K ISO again.

But I've totally ignored all new chars - my Beast is 43, Marvel at 55, Mostorm at 76, Colossus at 78, She-Hulk at 90.

So, with ISO saved since season 2 I was able to max two complete 4*s and Deadpool.

I don't think there's anything fishy about players running around with high level X-Forces, unless they have multiples, maxed lol.

Bowgentle, I'm not saying that isn't the case for some people and there certainly are some people, especially long-term and active players, who had the ISO to do this. However, I would be much less suspicious if I were seeing more rosters like yours, which reflect obvious choices about where to put ISO. However, I'm also seeing a fair number of rosters with max X-Force and/or Fury that have as many or more max-level 3*s as me. In many instances, I'm also seeing that with players who have put ISO into very new characters like Colossus and Beast, characters I have not even begun to level.

And I should point out that, while I have maxed a lot of characters over time, it has been months since I maxed anyone. In addition to not leveling Colossus or Beast, I have not maxed Deadpool, Captain Marvel, Steve Rogers, Daredevil, She-Hulk, or 2* Human Torch. I also have bought ISO, despite knowing it is a bad deal.

Phaserhawk

The simplest way to balance PvP is to go straight roster. D3 basically needs to say to themselves, characters A,B,Q,T,W,V are top tier, mid tier. once they have character secretly ranked and valued you then see how far they are leveled for additional points.

Example, you have 4 mid tier 3*'s mid tiers are worth 100 points, plus their level so you would have 1064 points. You also have a maxed Sentry, he's top tier and worth 300 points, plus level so you get 466 with him, you do this from 4*'s to 1*'s are each player is assigned a value based upon their roster. You can create "death brackets" but it would be with players of the same roster value.

Another option is to again rank characters from the strongest to weakest as a player with a maxed IM40 shouldn't have the same amount of points as a Sentry. However this time instead of using a character level as an additive you use covers. So Sentry is worth a grand total of say 3900 points, but each cover is only 300. So if your Sentry is maxed leveled but only 2/3/4 he will only be worth 2700 pts, vs. someone who has a 3/5/5 but never leveled it, they get full points.

The second option is actually the most fair, as we all want covers, and the only way to tank your MMR is to either sell characters or not get covers, which no one will do, so it keeps the elites from the underdeveloped, and keeps the insane maxed roster opponents at bay. You essential are saying, while person A. has a maxed roster but never gets more than 800 pts, he will be in the same boat as a maxed roster maxed level, because he could score as high as a maxed roster, he just chooses not to. It still penalizes a group of people, but it's far less, and far more fair than a win/loss record in a game you can just purposely lose. If you want Doc Ock he will increase your overall MMR points potentially moving you up in a bracket

Unknown

I don't understand why people complain about the 94/166 wall. While there are problems in PVP game play, I don't think this is not working as intended. When I was in the 1* land I could barely hit 300 points, if I was lucky enough, with maxed 1*. Now I have 5 maxed 2* and I can go to 500-600 per event. You will hit a wall eventually as you climb up. Don't expect it to be a walk in the park up until 900 points. Having better characters helps you climb higher.

Some real PVP issues are:

1. Rewards are broken for the amount of points you can get with your roster:
If you have a 2* roster you can climb up to 600 max. That will secure you 50HP, some ISO and 1 2* cover from progression rewards. While the HP is nice and the ISO is just OK, the 2* cover does not help me move into the 3* transition. I'm not saying give me a 3* cover, but there can be more appropriate rewards for the points you accumulate.

2. Rank rewards are more or less nice but the last hour time frame is what determines the winners rather than effort throughout the event:
You have a 2.5 day event and people are only entering on the last 10-12hrs to start climbing. What is the point of keeping it open for 2.5 days if the playable time is the last hours? Might as well open events for just those 12hrs and move on to the next one (But that would give more covers, which is another financial drawback for D3).

3. Point loss is just too high:
I mean if I gain 600 points and I lose 300 in 1 hour it is too much of a disappointment. If 600 is what I usually score for in PVP and I decide to reach that score in the 1st day of the event, do not punish me for not playing the next day. I mean losing points is fine, but losing 50%+ of your effort is just the thing that is pushing all the game play in the last 10 hours.

These issues have higher priority than the "Wall". I can fight the wall if I feel like it is worth it.

SnowcaTT

SnowcaTT wrote:

This new bucketing system, if that's what this is: ridiculous, bizarre. Absolutely no reason to play many rounds before the last hour of the tournament. I'll be camping out at 550 then, and line up three nodes of matches that are possible.

Yep. I was sitting at 580 this morning with more than 24 hours left, still sitting around that number, still sitting in top 10. Everyone has figured out this strategy. Even less reason then before to play much with more than three hours remaining.

MarvelMan

Okin107 wrote:

I don't understand why people complain about the 94/166 wall. While there are problems in PVP game play, I don't think this is not working as intended. When I was in the 1* land I could barely hit 300 points, if I was lucky enough, with maxed 1*. Now I have 5 maxed 2* and I can go to 500-600 per event. You will hit a wall eventually as you climb up. Don't expect it to be a walk in the park up until 900 points. Having better characters helps you climb higher.

The issue is how abrupt the walls are. The climb should be more gradual, such that if you are transitioning 2* to 3* you see similar teams. Currently that only happens below about 300 points. After that its max 2*s til 500/600 or so, then straight to maxed 3*s.

Okin107 wrote:

1. Rewards are broken for the amount of points you can get with your roster: *snip*

See the above comment, so this really IS about the wall.

Okin107 wrote:

2. Rank rewards are more or less nice but the last hour time frame is what determines the winners rather than effort throughout the event*snip*

Meh, I just dont see this one. I usually enter fairly early, push to 500 and take my hits, come back later that day and push to 700, take some hits then make my last push. That is pretty much effort through out. Plus, I often dont get to play the last hours (its bedtime for my kids) so I shield up and am fine.

Okin107 wrote:

3. Point loss is just too high*snip*

I would suggest this is less about dramatic point loss and more about the window of opponents you see. Plus, i have run up to almost 700 then tossed in a tank team (loaner/lvl 15 bagman/lvl 15 MagMN) and still stayed above 400 points. Obviously there is something restricting point loss already in place or I would have been beat to just about nothing.

Unknown

Okin107 wrote:

1. Rewards are broken for the amount of points you can get with your roster: If you have a 2* roster you can climb up to 600 max. That will secure you 50HP, some ISO and 1 2* cover from progression rewards. While the HP is nice and the ISO is just OK, the 2* cover does not help me move into the 3* transition. I'm not saying give me a 3* cover, but there can be more appropriate rewards for the points you accumulate.

Nobody likes tokens, but I would be more than satisfied if they added a token to the 500 award. As is, it is 250 iso for the majority of players who reach it.

Okin107 wrote:

2. Rank rewards are more or less nice but the last hour time frame is what determines the winners rather than effort throughout the event:
You have a 2.5 day event and people are only entering on the last 10-12hrs to start climbing. What is the point of keeping it open for 2.5 days if the playable time is the last hours? Might as well open events for just those 12hrs and move on to the next one (But that would give more covers, which is another financial drawback for D3).

Disagree completely. You need to figure out how your real life schedule fits with the end time and how much you are willing to spend in shields (for me 150 per event - either 2 3 hour or 1 8 hour). Be in position (between 450 and 600 points depending on how strong your defensive team is) and when you are approaching shield time, use all your usable characters and healthpacks and then slap the shield on. You should be able to get the shield on over 600 points and frequently finish in the top50. It just takes a little practice on the rhythm of events and when to push up.

Okin107 wrote:

3. Point loss is just too high:
I mean if I gain 600 points and I lose 300 in 1 hour it is too much of a disappointment. If 600 is what I usually score for in PVP and I decide to reach that score in the 1st day of the event, do not punish me for not playing the next day. I mean losing points is fine, but losing 50%+ of your effort is just the thing that is pushing all the game play in the last 10 hours.

It is a 2.5 day event. Unless you have 166s, you have to stay off the radar. Basic rule of thumb is 100 points at the start of the event, plus 100 points every 12 hours. Stay at or below those thresholds and you will not get attacked as much. Again, you need to be shielded at the end if you are looking for placement awards.

Okin107 wrote:

These issues have higher priority than the "Wall". I can fight the wall if I feel like it is worth it.

The problem is not the wall, as much as how the matchmaking changed recently.

I used to see a steady stream of 75-94s through about 500 points. Using no more than the 4 free skips, I could find opponents worth 30 or more points to this point as well. From 500 up to 700 points, it was mostly 94-125s, again worth 25-30 points each. By 700, I needed to shield my 110 level team, because the attacks were coming faster than I could win.

Now until 400 or 450 points, I rarely see characters above 70 and once I hit 300, no available points above 23. At the 400 point mark, I start seeing 94s, but again available points of 20-23.

So now it is a slower climb to a lower progression reward, against less challenging/interesting opponents.

This is definitely working as intended, keeping a smaller percentage of players reaching the hero points at 800. With the removal of hero points from PvE progression rewards, I am seeing a stealthy pattern.

Trisul

MarvelMan wrote:

The issue is how abrupt the walls are. The climb should be more gradual, such that if you are transitioning 2* to 3* you see similar teams. Currently that only happens below about 300 points. After that its max 2*s til 500/600 or so, then straight to maxed 3*s.

It actually sounds about right, mirroring the general groupings of the playerbase. There's probably a large congregation of maxed 2* players and another big group of 3* players, with much smaller pools of players that main underleveled 3* between. For most of the 2* --> 3* transition, the 3* guys tend to not be useful until they pretty much have the covers they need to max them, and so their A-team tend to remain maxed 2*s until they can nearly max a 3*, which takes a long time.