1800 to top 5 my bracket

Unknown

atomzed wrote:

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]



I was going to make a whole post about sharding on my own but I guess this is a good a place as any. Here's the thing, I think i recognize your name enough to know that you WERE around for the time based brackets? If not, It's not really unfair to new players anymore than the way it is set up now. You have to look at the big picture here. With time based entries you will maybe get a a few crazies in there who are going to score 1300+ but you won't have a full bracket full of them. When it used to be time based you would see top 10's with scores ranging from 1300-750. D3 apparently hated this gap and decided to screw all the veterans into crazy brackets and then have all the new players get easy win brackets. With time based a new player will probably never win a bracket but they will easily be able to get top 25 since the scores will be so spread out. You have to think about the guys like budget who for some reason are deemed "veteran" enough to be put into these death brackets. Guys like him are seeing brackets that have 1000 points end up top 100. He is caught in the middle getting screwed. With time based getting 1000 points would be MINIMUM top 10. If you want to still have uber newbie brackets go for it. but having crazy veteran brackets is just stupid. For the veterans AND the transitioners.

Not to mention, think about this, Why does anyone here push above 1300? It's because you see that to get the win / top 5 you have to push higher. Then the guys in 6-10 see this, and they in turn push higher. D3 is forcing people to keep leap frogging each other to put up higher and higher scores which to a lot of people in the game are simply not possible. However, if you get a time based bracket and you get up to 1300 and see that the second place guy is only at 1100, You likely won't push anymore because you have the win in the bag. This defalates the alliance scores also. If you really sit back and think about every consequence of time based brackets, It is way better all around!

Wonko33

I don't understand why OP thinks he should get top 5 with only 3 166 characters. Over time you will grow your roster and get there.

- doesn't matter if they "earned" or paid for their rosters

- I do concede the point that the 2 --> 3* transition is harder now

Shuino

Hmm weird, I have come in 1st in the last 4 or 5 PvP events with between 500 and 600 I can't image playing a bracket with someone hitting 2000....

_RiO_

Shuino wrote:

Hmm weird, I have come in 1st in the last 4 or 5 PvP events with between 500 and 600 I can't image playing a bracket with someone hitting 2000....

Leader in my last two brackets ended at 2100+.
Seen it going as high as 2800 once. It's ridiculous.

Unknown

Wonko33 wrote:

I don't understand why OP thinks he should get top 5 with only 3 166 characters. Over time you will grow your roster and get there.

Because I busted my ****? Because I started with less than 24 hours to go and still pulled 1400? Because 1400 with only 3 maxed-out chars is, quite frankly, completely batkitty crazy? Because if I wasn't getting seeded into the same brackets as countless other veterans, this wouldn't have even been an issue? I come from a fighting game background. In those games, playing well gets you rewarded. If you win a major, chances are, in the next major, you're going to be seeded away from the other players who win majors. Food for thought.

Raekwen

There are only so many brackets, and getting to be more and more people with the rosters that can compete with the higher scores. I'd much rather have this, than what was suggested earlier (smaller brackets but only top 2/3 for rewards.)

I don't get the sense of entitlement people seem to feel in this game. You aren't guaranteed anything. You busted your ****? Grats. So did the rest of us. I've been busting my **** for a year putting together my roster, and often spend so much time a week doing this that it's like a second job. I don't like that aspect of it, but I like finishing outside of the top 5 even less. So I do what it takes to achieve what I want. If 1400 gets me what I want, fine. If 2000 is needed, then I will do that.

2* players shouldn't be able to compete with the top 5. Transitioning players shouldn't be able to compete with the top 5. A high school sports team shouldn't have the rules changed so they can compete against professionals. Take your lumps, build your roster, and come play at the top. Though I'm not sure what the problem is? You have a maxed Sentry, and almost maxed Hood. Putting up the points needed shouldn't be a problem, unless you just don't want to push that hard. Then that becomes a personal choice, and I go back to the fact that you aren't guaranteed anything.

To your point though, the guy who won my bracket only had 2 maxed 3* (and it wasn't Sentry or Hood). And he scored 1900+. I admired his effort so much I backed off and let him have the NF cover he needed since I didn't.

Unknown

I mean ban Sentry and max scores go down by a good 300 points. The entire problem is that matches can end in under a minute. Slow down the game and scores dive.

Wonko33

Budget Player Cadet wrote:

Wonko33 wrote:

I don't understand why OP thinks he should get top 5 with only 3 166 characters. Over time you will grow your roster and get there.

Because I busted my ****? Because I started with less than 24 hours to go and still pulled 1400? Because 1400 with only 3 maxed-out chars is, quite frankly, completely batkitty crazy? Because if I wasn't getting seeded into the same brackets as countless other veterans, this wouldn't have even been an issue? I come from a fighting game background. In those games, playing well gets you rewarded. If you win a major, chances are, in the next major, you're going to be seeded away from the other players who win majors. Food for thought.

the people who beat you have been doing the same thing you just said but have been doing it for a year, that's why they can get more points, you think they just sit on their butts and get 1600? they earn the HP to shield hop, put in the time to have more maxed characters etc, that's why for the moment they finish higher.

I do agree that progressions is harder for new players than it was 10-12 months ago, but they still put the time in, 3-4* characters never rained from the sky.

Or they spent a few Ks and bought their way to the top, if you can't accept that free to play games will only bring you frustration.

Unknown

How about capping the top points to the last progression reward points? Is that a bad idea?

Sandmaker

Wonko33 wrote:

you think they just sit on their butts and get 1600?

I'm pretty sure the large majority of them sits on their butts while getting to 1600. It's just not super comfortable playing a match-three game while standing.

OnesOwnGrief

My final score was 1838. That was forth place and it came with a ton of luck, tons of HP, and a ridiculous amount of tension. Places 3-8 were so close to each other that it caused everyone in that range to push higher and higher. Two fell off at 1300 and it became a heated battle over the next 500 points. This battle waged on until the final 10 minutes of the PvP where being hit during a single match shield hop could be the difference between top 5 and top 10.

Fortunately, this was entirely expected because Blade was not only a new character but a good one. To not see this coming from anyone in a top 100 alliance is just plain foolish. It's safe to say nobody enjoys seeing these types of brackets but there's very little you can do about it. You either continue to climb or you quit and take top 10 or 25. Going for that 3rd cover is more than likely going to be a bloodbath no matter what if its a new character.

There are also a few of ways to look this as well. A few of us actually take PvE very relaxed because scaling effectively removes us from getting all 3 covers over someone with just a 2* roster. We end up getting maybe 1 or 2 covers, sometimes none, because of it. We know that PvP is coming and that's where we get our hand to take what we want. If we lack the cover and didn't draw it by luck, we have to compete for it. There is also the fact that for those of us who are willing to spend HP on a cover, is placing high in the PvP still cheaper than 3750 HP, in most cases it is. Also, keep in mind that Season Rewards are a major prize too and those points aren't easily made up in Simulator. I scored poorly on one PvP and that may be the difference between 3, 2, or 1 Heroic 10-Pack.

endlessvoid

Congratulation OnesOwnGrief, I had enough but problem with matching in that's PvP. Everyone who came is top 5 in that bracket earned it.

HailMary

KevinMark wrote:

How about capping the top points to the last progression reward points? Is that a bad idea?

So, in some brackets, the entire T10 would get #1 prizes? How would you hand out T5 rewards? Placement rewards are a mechanism by which D3 controls cover outflow rate in the game. This would likely seriously mess with that.

ark123 wrote:

I mean ban Sentry and max scores go down by a good 300 points. The entire problem is that matches can end in under a minute. Slow down the game and scores dive.

So, only 1850 instead of 2150? I'm not sure the OP's frustration would be lessened by such a prospect.

Budget Player Cadet wrote:

Because I busted my ****? Because I started with less than 24 hours to go and still pulled 1400? Because 1400 with only 3 maxed-out chars is, quite frankly, completely batkitty crazy? Because if I wasn't getting seeded into the same brackets as countless other veterans, this wouldn't have even been an issue? I come from a fighting game background. In those games, playing well gets you rewarded. If you win a major, chances are, in the next major, you're going to be seeded away from the other players who win majors. Food for thought.

I don't have a fighting-game background, but from what tiny bits I know, PVP fighting-game tourneys aren't baked into the games' basic progression mechanic. You don't get in-game upgrades for winning such things. AFAIK, fighting games also don't care if you tried really hard to win. You either win enough to progress to later rounds, or you don't. There is no A for effort.

At the other end of the spectrum, you have MMORPGs which completely lock you out of high-level dungeons if you haven't leveled up sufficiently, i.e. if your roster is too weak.

MPQ is neither.

All this is regardless of the fact that the people who scored 1800+ likely entered around the time you entered and busted their **** harder.

Unknown

HailMary wrote:

KevinMark wrote:

How about capping the top points to the last progression reward points? Is that a bad idea?

So, in some brackets, the entire T10 would get #1 prizes? How would you hand out T5 rewards? Placement rewards are a mechanism by which D3 controls cover outflow rate in the game. This would likely seriously mess with that.

It is true that this would give more rewards than current system to players overall but is that really a bad thing? It's possible that entire top 10 would get #1 prizes in some brackets or even more but how many players are in brackets now? 1000? If all of the top 10 scored 1300 and got #1 prizes then 11th person who scored 1299 would get top 5 prize. Then, they would probably need to change the nomenclature for those rewards. I know it sounds like a bad idea with the business perspective but I still wanted to ask.

over_clocked

KevinMark wrote:

HailMary wrote:

KevinMark wrote:

How about capping the top points to the last progression reward points? Is that a bad idea?

So, in some brackets, the entire T10 would get #1 prizes? How would you hand out T5 rewards? Placement rewards are a mechanism by which D3 controls cover outflow rate in the game. This would likely seriously mess with that.

It is true that this would give more rewards than current system to players overall but is that really a bad thing? It's possible that entire top 10 would get #1 prizes in some brackets or even more but how many players are in brackets now? 1000? If all of the top 10 scored 1300 and got #1 prizes then 11th person who scored 1299 would get top 5 prize. Then, they would probably need to change the nomenclature for those rewards. I know it sounds like a bad idea with the business perspective but I still wanted to ask.

There are as few as 500 people in versus brackets.

atomzed

KevinMark wrote:

HailMary wrote:

KevinMark wrote:

How about capping the top points to the last progression reward points? Is that a bad idea?

So, in some brackets, the entire T10 would get #1 prizes? How would you hand out T5 rewards? Placement rewards are a mechanism by which D3 controls cover outflow rate in the game. This would likely seriously mess with that.

It is true that this would give more rewards than current system to players overall but is that really a bad thing? It's possible that entire top 10 would get #1 prizes in some brackets or even more but how many players are in brackets now? 1000? If all of the top 10 scored 1300 and got #1 prizes then 11th person who scored 1299 would get top 5 prize. Then, they would probably need to change the nomenclature for those rewards. I know it sounds like a bad idea with the business perspective but I still wanted to ask.

See my thread on why progression reward will be a solution, but it will come as a "cost".

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=16420

Unknown

Top 5 in mine was all over 1300, tops was over 2K. I was ecstatic to score 822, which was my highest PVP yet...and managed 23rd spot. New characters get ridiculously brutal. I'm hoping for a less competitive time in this one, since so many people who have been playing forever have a max LThor, and I've had trouble getting his covers, despite playing for 7 months now. (He's at 2/1/5, even had to toss a green because it's maxed already.)

chaos01

KevinMark wrote:

HailMary wrote:

KevinMark wrote:

How about capping the top points to the last progression reward points? Is that a bad idea?

What about just making it a race to 1300? 1st gets top prize so on until you get to the point when people stop hitting 1300. Leads to probably roughly the same placement. Less HP spent shielding after 1300, etc.and still a score only vets can get too.

Unknown

chaos01 wrote:

KevinMark wrote:

HailMary wrote:

KevinMark wrote:

How about capping the top points to the last progression reward points? Is that a bad idea?

What about just making it a race to 1300? 1st gets top prize so on until you get to the point when people stop hitting 1300. Leads to probably roughly the same placement. Less HP spent shielding after 1300, etc.and still a score only vets can get too.

Then you have the exact opposite problem that PvE has. Only the first hour will matter.

Unknown

I have honestly never seen scores this high before Sentry arrived on the scene. I remember brackets having First Place at like 1200 or so at most and having 700 points was enough for Top 25, Top 10 sometimes. However, that was during the age of time brackets, rather than sharding. With this the current reward structure, I don't think time based would be unfair. Back during time based and my early 3* transition days, I was consistently making Top 25 or Top 50. That was when 3* was Top 50 for individual.