1800 to top 5 my bracket

Unknown

It's perhaps worth noting that I have a grand total of 3 finished 3*s.

What the ****?

atomzed

It's blade. New character who is a good character.

The new shiny has made every competitive player to come out and score a new high.

I hear that most brackets are tough. Not just yours.

Unknown

atomzed

Umm... and wat do you propose?

The high scoring totals are due to player behaviours and not due to any change from d3.

I also like to get top 5 consistently, but I can't see any changes that d3 can do to "soften" the bracket, short of screwing the newbie players by placing them into the veteran bracket. (Which many transition players are already complaining about).

If anyone has any fair solutions to both veteran, transition and new players, please share.

chaos01

I feel your pain. Just set a personal best with 634 in a PVP. Missed out on top 100 because of my bracket. I checked with 10 minutes left, top 5 was over 2000.

Flare808

That might have been my bracket. Just for the record, I don't aim to break 2,000 every PVP. The score that I get is dictated by different factors (new covers/other people in the bracket/season score needs/ etc). Blade was on the line and along with that is the competitiveness to not be beat by other alliances. Like atomzed said, a lot of us are accustomed to getting T5 and will fight for it. We got stuck in a tough bracket, not much we can do about it. Realistically, people only need 2 max 3 stars to be competitive: Sentry and Hood. Although I have more maxed 3*, they are a nonfactor in PVP (BP, Pun etc.)

mohio

The thing is, it just takes 6 "veterans" to decide they absolutely want top 5 and will "pay" for it. It doesn't even have to be a death bracket. I've seen top 5 at 1500 and top 10 at 900, it just comes down to those 6 guys all pushing higher and higher to try to make sure they aren't the one on the outside looking in. Now that more and more people have maxed Sentry and Hood, it's not a matter of who CAN put up those scores, it's who is willing to pay the HP (and put in the necessary time) to get the scores needed. While I agree 1800 for top 5 is a little beyond reasonable, I can't really fault them for doing it.

Unknown

chaos01 wrote:

I feel your pain. Just set a personal best with 634 in a PVP. Missed out on top 100 because of my bracket. I checked with 10 minutes left, top 5 was over 2000.

atomzed wrote:

I also like to get top 5 consistently, but I can't see any changes that d3 can do to "soften" the bracket, short of screwing the newbie players by placing them into the veteran bracket. (Which many transition players are already complaining about).

Yeah... **** sucks, man.

Unknown

I'm almost certain #1 in my bracket didn't break 1000 and might not have broken 900.

Unknown

Added bonus: my alliance scored what I'm being told is its best ever. We ended up about 15 spots lower than we typically do.

Unknown

atomzed wrote:

Umm... and wat do you propose?

The high scoring totals are due to player behaviours and not due to any change from d3.

I also like to get top 5 consistently, but I can't see any changes that d3 can do to "soften" the bracket, short of screwing the newbie players by placing them into the veteran bracket. (Which many transition players are already complaining about).

If anyone has any fair solutions to both veteran, transition and new players, please share.

Going back to the time based entries instead of this **** sharding for one? There is a single bracket open at a time, for all players, based on time of entry. Fair luck of the draw for all. I am so sick of having to waste tons of HP and iso pushing to 1800+ for top5 while i see guys getting 1st place in brackets with 600 points. It's just not fair at all. sharding has gotten completely out of control.

atomzed

sms4002 wrote:

atomzed wrote:

Umm... and wat do you propose?

The high scoring totals are due to player behaviours and not due to any change from d3.

I also like to get top 5 consistently, but I can't see any changes that d3 can do to "soften" the bracket, short of screwing the newbie players by placing them into the veteran bracket. (Which many transition players are already complaining about).

If anyone has any fair solutions to both veteran, transition and new players, please share.

Going back to the time based entries instead of this tinykitty sharding for one? There is a single bracket open at a time, for all players, based on time of entry. Fair luck of the draw for all. I am so sick of having to waste tons of HP and iso pushing to 1800+ for top5 while i see guys getting 1st place in brackets with 600 points. It's just not fair at all. sharding has gotten completely out of control.

And would that be fair to the transition players? There are already many complaints for this group of players that they can not crack top 100 and above. A pure time based bracket may make it easier for us veterans, but it sure will screw the new players even more than now.

Like I said, I would want to be in top 5 consistently, but I can't think of anyway that helps me, without screwing the new players.

Flare808

I purely time based system is by definition, fair. No hidden nudges to clump vets together. Whenever you join, you are placed in a bracket with whoever else joins around then. Just pure blind luck on which bracket you get. As someone who frequently gets T5, this would be more attractive than fighting up to 2,000 while someone else can stroll to T5 with 1100.

The problem is that there are just so many more people transitioning to 3* than before. I hear a lot of people saying "I used to score XX and get rank XX." With more people reaching 3*s, the slots for T100 get more and more competitive, driving the average scores needed upwards. The anniversary event accelerated this progression. Even at the higher end of PVP, I see so many more people hitting me. It's not just SHIELD, 5DV, and Raiders, but a myriad of non-brand name alliances as well.

HailMary

Now imagine seeing that kind of T5 requirement in the previous PVP, which didn't award a brand-new high-tier 3*.

Yep, that was my bracket.

My FFW bracket was relatively cushier: 1700 for #1, 1300+ for T5. Ya win some, ya lose some, and the ones ya lose suck.

Unknown

At this point any change to brackets won't change much for transitioning players, I don't have single char above 94 but for top 100 in mine you needed above 600, even shields don't help.

Unknown

How about smaller brackets?

atomzed

Flare808 wrote:

I purely time based system is by definition, fair. No hidden nudges to clump vets together. Whenever you join, you are placed in a bracket with whoever else joins around then. Just pure blind luck on which bracket you get. As someone who frequently gets T5, this would be more attractive than fighting up to 2,000 while someone else can stroll to T5 with 1100.

Your suggestion is fair to us veterans. But is it fair to players who have only 2* max characters? They will be thinking "tinykitty, there's no way I can compete with those people with max 3*. It's not tinykitty fair as my roster is so poor compared to them!"

Just look at budget player first post. He's unhappy that his bracket requires 1800 for top 5, when he *only* has 2 max 3*. This isn't meant to single out budget player, but more to illustrate the point that new players will feel that a pure time based bracket as "unfair".

The problem is that there are just so many more people transitioning to 3* than before. I hear a lot of people saying "I used to score XX and get rank XX." With more people reaching 3*s, the slots for T100 get more and more competitive, driving the average scores needed upwards. The anniversary event accelerated this progression. Even at the higher end of PVP, I see so many more people hitting me. It's not just SHIELD, 5DV, and Raiders, but a myriad of non-brand name alliances as well.

[/quote][/quote]

Your observation shows that the mpq population is maturing. It mirrors the progress of society, like education and life expectancy. For example, 50 years ago having a graduate degree is a *big* deal. It guarantee you a good job. Now, a graduate degree is basic requirement, and to differentiate yourself, one needs a master or MBA.

Again, how should mpq solve this "inflation" issue? I absolutely have no idea.

atomzed

double post

Unknown

What could D3 do to soften the blow? Cap the scores to top progression points and count the players with same points as one in the ranking. Example: crayplaya 1300 points rank #1, mpqisdope 1300 points rank #1. Is this a good solution or are there negative consequences to it that I cannot think of other than D3 not earning as much money from shield hopping?

Polares

Really crazy bracket, I was 21 with 930 points. I was hoping T10 (probably not, but hoping), but in the end I could be happy I got T25 and got both covers.

It is really crazy difficult when new good characters are awarded, maybe in these instances more covers should be awarded? But I agree that joining a braket by time is fair, and I think joining a bracket by MMR or some other metric could be hell, and really unfair.

PS: And of course timezone was EEUU friendly aaaaaand EU got screwed again

Unknown

The only solution would be progression rewards. But it would be less competitive and less profitable for D3.

Part of the success of this game is based on the stress you have getting what you want. Less stress means probably less interest in the game.