Upcoming Versus Matchmaking Test

1356789

Comments

  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    daibar wrote:
    If a 2* roster is good enough to pull it off, why not?
    No one's saying they shouldn't... it's the 2*s saying it's too hard to do so.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    simonsez wrote:
    daibar wrote:
    If a 2* roster is good enough to pull it off, why not?
    No one's saying they shouldn't... it's the 2*s saying it's too hard to do so.
    Perhaps, I'm misunderstanding the context of the following quotes then:
    SnowcaTT wrote:
    To all the 2*'s who complain about hitting the wall: you shouldn't get past that wall, you are 2*. You shouldn't get T100, you'll get there eventually.
    808SpicyToro wrote:
    That said, catering to the 2*'s to let them reach T100 is wrong. It invalidates all the experience and work of the 3*'s.

    I agree that it's gotten harder to place top 100 as a 2*. Time sharding, shield cooldowns have all worked against a 2* with time and skill. Even if a 3* cover were given to top 150, it would still be competitive, but achievable (or at least less unachievable) for those who need it. I disagree that a 2* winning a 3* cover hurts a 3* player. If a 3* is willing to put a fraction of the effort that a 2* is, they will win that cover.

    I don't expect a 2* team to be able to always hit 900 points or top 100, but it's nice to at least have the opportunity to improve instead of being stuck in the 2* purgatory for months.
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    daibar wrote:
    Perhaps, I'm misunderstanding the context of the following quotes then
    I see what you mean... I took that to mean, "you shouldn't expect to rank T100", not "you're not allowed to rank T100"
  • SnowcaTT
    SnowcaTT Posts: 3,487 Chairperson of the Boards
    daibar wrote:
    I don't expect a 2* team to be able to always hit 900 points or top 100, but it's nice to at least have the opportunity to improve instead of being stuck in the 2* purgatory for months.

    Once in awhile when people ask about this D3 comes out and says something like "It's expected to be a marathon, not a race". It seems like they expect (I'm guessing here) a three month timeframe to get into 2* land and about a year timeframe to get into 3* land.

    I did indeed mean it shouldn't be expected that you are in 600+ regularly, but I'm sure with luck, strategy, and resources it is possible. I've never hit 900, but 600 will get you into top 100 more often than not.
  • udonomefoo
    udonomefoo Posts: 1,630 Chairperson of the Boards
    Grizzlegom wrote:

    Their complaints are typically that they get that score but somehow still manage to miss the top 100 (yay death brackets).

    That's me. I can get to 600ish with my 2* team if I'm lucky and don't get targeted too much on the way there and shield up immediately. I don't shield though, because I realized I still only got top 100 about 20% of the time. That's 375 hp to maybe get one 3* cover. Come on now.

    My frustration comes from having already paid about $50 to buy hp for roster slots. I was ok with paying what I consider full price for a game (like I would for a xbone game) because I really like this game. But to have paid that and still feel like they're trying to milk me is frustrating.
  • DaveR4470
    DaveR4470 Posts: 931 Critical Contributor
    simonsez wrote:
    Sorry, but your logic is completely faulty here. You're basically saying that if one has a 4* team, you should be able to climb freely without ever losing points, since you've earned your points by beating comparable teams.

    I'm not saying anyone should ever be free from losing points. I'm saying that if I get to 500, then get knocked down to 150 from losses, the yellow node matchups I get at that point should be the same level players as they were when I was at 150 points the first time. In my experience, they're not. They're still 500-point level opponents that I can't beat. So I wind up stuck at 150, because I can't get beatable opponents anymore (other than revenge nodes). That's the problem. I'm saying that at 150 I should see similar opponents such that I could, with work and luck, rise to 500 again. At which point I'd be roadkill for 3* teams again, which is fine, because that's how it should work. Either I shield, or I keep on playing and trying to earn points. That's not how it's been working for me. My choice is either I shield, or I get beaten down to a lower point total with limited ability to continue to win points in the event.

    I think you'd agree that regardless of whether or not I 'deserve' to be at 500 points, or any point total in between, if I was beaten all the way back down to zero points, I shouldn't still be seeing ONLY X-force/4hor/Cmags teams as yellow nodes like I did at 500 points. Because that's what's happening.
  • Azoic
    Azoic Posts: 269 Mover and Shaker
    I really hope this fixes matchmaking. I am working on building my 2* roster, but my highest is Thor at 66 and Mag at 65. Otherwise, I have a 2 cover 4*Thor at lvl 86 (so useless really). I have a ton of 3* characters with a single cover. But after the seeder teams, I might see a few lvl 30/40 combos, and then they are all 94-240. So basically I don't have a chance to win another 3* cover since I'm being placed against people with full rosters already. The rich keep getting richer and the newbs get left behind with the current system.

    In the last High Stakes bout, I joined a bit later, but worked up to rank 25 fighting folks my level. Then it was all X-force wolverine teams. I spent around 2k Iso skipping teams throughout the day, but never once saw a team I had even a slight hope of beating, eventually knocking me down to 123. So where did all those other teams go that I fought along the way? Honestly, the MMR/brackets shouldn't even place folks with the 2* roster in groups with maxed out 4*.
  • Roswulf
    Roswulf Posts: 87
    As I see it, the issue is not that 2* rosters should get top 100. Obviously people with 2* rosters are not generally in the top 20% of PvP players (barring extreme bracket luck/ obsession).

    The problem is that the PvP awards given to players not in the top 20% are close to useless to 2* players. Giving players close to useless rewards for substantial amounts of play is not a recipe for player retention or happiness. Limiting 3* rewards to the top 20% of players is bad design given how many players have cover-maxed 2* rosters at this point in MPQ's life cycle.
  • Pylgrim
    Pylgrim Posts: 2,332 Chairperson of the Boards
    Will, since you are finally addressing MMR, can you talk a bit about the "wall"? This is the phenomenon where you suddenly go from finding people around and below your roster's level to suddenly 249/270/270 only teams without any gradation. Moreover, this seems to happen with no rhyme and reason at all. Sometimes you find it super-early (at 500) or rather late (at 750).

    Also, could you talk about how it is almost impossible to find teams that give 40+ points once you clear 200 points? Climbing is nowadays super slow because every single team (regardless of difficulty) gives you only 18-24 points. This also, regardless of time bracket, joining time or any other external factor (I've tried them all).
  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards
    Pylgrim wrote:
    Also, could you talk about how it is almost impossible to find teams that give 40+ points once you clear 200 points? Climbing is nowadays super slow because every single team (regardless of difficulty) gives you only 18-24 points. This also, regardless of time bracket, joining time or any other external factor (I've tried them all).
    That's not generally true.
    I just went from 0 to 300 in Slice 1 of Thor on nothing but 40+ matches.

    Of course those matches were against maxed 3* guys, but still.

    Do you tank? Because if you do, then you get those **** enemies for non-existant points until 300, where it suddenly switches to maxed 3*s - that was my experience two seasons ago, when I still bothered to waste time on tanking.
  • Pylgrim
    Pylgrim Posts: 2,332 Chairperson of the Boards
    Bowgentle wrote:
    Pylgrim wrote:
    Also, could you talk about how it is almost impossible to find teams that give 40+ points once you clear 200 points? Climbing is nowadays super slow because every single team (regardless of difficulty) gives you only 18-24 points. This also, regardless of time bracket, joining time or any other external factor (I've tried them all).
    That's not generally true.
    I just went from 0 to 300 in Slice 1 of Thor on nothing but 40+ matches.

    Of course those matches were against maxed 3* guys, but still.

    Do you tank? Because if you do, then you get those **** enemies for non-existant points until 300, where it suddenly switches to maxed 3*s - that was my experience two seasons ago, when I still bothered to waste time on tanking.

    I don't tank, but I appreciate that you include your own experience with the climb. We really should be able to understand what causes such disparate experiences between players.

    What's your roster composition? I have an X-Force at level 165, three maxed 3*s and most of my other 3*s are levels 110-150. All my other 4*s are sub-100.
  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards
    Pylgrim wrote:
    I don't tank, but I appreciate that you include your own experience with the climb. We really should be able to understand what causes such disparate experiences between players.

    What's your roster composition? I have an X-Force at level 165, three maxed 3*s and most of my other 3*s are levels 110-150. All my other 4*s are sub-100.
    Maxed Xforce, Thor, Fury, 14 maxed 3*s, the rest of the useable 3*s at 110+.
  • SnowcaTT
    SnowcaTT Posts: 3,487 Chairperson of the Boards
    I don't think they are running their MMR test now, right? It almost seems like they are after R70 went in.

    I don't tank, I have a 217 (very recently raised, so my MMR may be shifting anyway) X-force and two 140's, a bunch of 127's. This team has brought me lots of D wins in Sim this season, so that might be a shift reason as well? Another reason might be this double ISO - I've seen lots of teams tank for it the last two events, MMR might be really hosed due to that?

    My usual experience: less than 94's up to 200, 94's up to 550, solid 166 wall either at 500/550/600 (seems to change every event) - tons of iso skipping to try to find one or two teams that aren't three 166+ (often seeing multiple 270's as well). Usually these matches (after 200 points) are worth between 18-22 points. Shield before 700, usually T50 but never T25.

    My Thor PVP experience: transition teams as soon as I got out of the three seed teams. I guess that's "equal to me", but where were the 2* teams that I should pass on the way? Do they get their own bracket and a shot at T25 I'm not going to get? Often the first part of the climb is fun, I get to try out all the 127's without worry that they'll get hit back. But since I'm facing teams with one (and often only one) 166 I know they'll get back at me: so EVERY time it's 217 X-force + 140 Daken + non-loaner (127 before boost) Thor. These are worth more (30-40 the entire way) so I'm doing less of them. But I -like- the iso from lots of easy rounds, I'd much rather play double the amount of rounds.

    This is incredibly boring for me to play, and I'm sure it's incredibly boring for opponents to see this same team over and over. This is why folks complain about X-force, I have to play highest character every time if there is any fear of reprisal. Perhaps the D points need to be looked at....either take away retributions to encourage more diversity of roster play, or figure out another way to have that happen.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    I have been playing this game for 106 days now, and I can crack T100 with a 2* roster on a semi regular basis. While it would be nice for them to give the 3* for the top 200 in a PVP event, I won't complain. Personally, I only get upset with drop rates for 3* on event/heroic tokens. With that being said, I would love an event that put me against other who are early in this 2*-3* transition so I could know that feel for being T10 or better (yeah, its like that!), till then I will take my lumps and scrape out somewhere between T80 - T125 and live with it.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Are we sure this experiment hasn't already started? I just joined the Lord of Thunder PVP and after the initial seed team, I ran smack into a 166 Punisher/Hulk worth a whopping 12 points. Is this supposed to be happening?
  • dr tinykittylove
    dr tinykittylove Posts: 1,459 Chairperson of the Boards
    Fievel wrote:
    Are we sure this experiment hasn't already started? I just joined the Lord of Thunder PVP and after the initial seed team, I ran smack into a 166 Punisher/Hulk worth a whopping 12 points. Is this supposed to be happening?

    these sort of teams have always popped up from time to time. Probably someone tanking. just skip to the next.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    Fievel wrote:
    Are we sure this experiment hasn't already started? I just joined the Lord of Thunder PVP and after the initial seed team, I ran smack into a 166 Punisher/Hulk worth a whopping 12 points. Is this supposed to be happening?

    same here(lord of thunder), it just after first seed xforce team pop up so sudden, from 20-350 point all i fought are 120-220/270 lv. usually from 200 to 500 pts all i seen are 2* teams, until now....
  • Joey Jellico
    Joey Jellico Posts: 103
    Guy in my alliance that has no characters above a few maxed 2* finished High Stakes with 648 pts and got 1st place in his bracket.

    I, myself (roster with three 3* around lvl 125) finished High Stakes with 567 pts and got 96th place in my bracket (the leader at 1140).


    HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE????

    Did he get in a small bracket? Should I just wait til the event has been running for 2 days before joining??? Or am I being punished for leveling some my characters past 94 like the insane PVE scaling.
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    Joey Jellico wrote:
    HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE????
    Bracket placement isn't random. Yes, as you guessed, you do get punished for having a better roster.
  • Joey Jellico
    Joey Jellico Posts: 103
    simonsez wrote:
    Joey Jellico wrote:
    HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE????
    Bracket placement isn't random. Yes, as you guessed, you do get punished for having a better roster.
    Guess I should have sold all these 3* covers and stayed happy in 2* land. What kind of game is this where you get punished for playing more/doing well????

Categories