A couple upcoming changes to PvP events

Unknown

I hope skipping a retaliation doesn't cost you.

Unknown

Knock3r wrote:

My gut reaction says that this will promote more people to wait until the final hours of a tournament.

Exactly what I was thinking.

A number of people said shield costs would go up, and they were right. I would like a bit more specific info on what the progression levels are going to be, but I guess we will see later.

It's kind of a shame, because I do like the strategic value shields have added. In the first tournament with them, I only used one shield and made a good bit of HP. Since then, I have been more aggressive, shielding multiple times in a couple of tournaments. I have incurred net HP losses, but had good finished that were more than worth it. At double the cost, no way I am shielding three different times.

Spoit wrote:

Yes, thanks for communicating about it ahead of time, that much is appreciated.

Absolutely.

Unknown

Shield costs increasing will probably trigger a fresh round of people griping about P2W and rich-getting-richer (which might now be legit, since those people can afford shields more easily if shield usage is no longer breakeven) and about how it feels bad to have to choose between ponying up close to the cost of a roster slot for a shield, or getting slammed for -200 points. I'm sure whoever proclaimed that shield prices will go up will tell us he called it. Not very excited about this, it doesn't feel more strategic to me, it just feels like I'm getting pinched harder on hero points, but that's just a kneejerk reaction, I'm open to seeing how it actually plays out.

I think there is a very valid point on the shields. Raising the price will reduce their use overall I think, which should theoretically create more ranking movement, but not at the top of the leaderboards. I'm not going to spend six hours grinding my way up to 1800 and not throw up a shield, regardless of the HP cost, because I dont' want to wake up to a series of -50 massacres. Stronger players who already earn a steady diet of HP or those with deeper pockets will gain even greater advantage over the middle/lower class.

In my opinion the AI is so worthless and there is such an advantage to the attacker (first strike, boosts, opponent selection) that there should be no penalty for losing a defense, but the penalty for losing an attack should be severe (double the match value?) Tournament should be cumulative push for the highest score based on offense, because the way you designed this game renders a successful defense nearly impossible.

Unknown

I think misguide d's statement of increasing rewards was very interesting.

I also VERY strongly agree to no ISO loss on skipped retaliations.

Unknown

Actually, I wish retaliations were stored separately from the normal matches. Preferably a list, so you can scroll through them all and choose the ones you want to fight or discard.

Unknown

Funny how we (myself included) are getting sidetracked from the main thing here, which is removal of the ceiling on matchmaking rating for finding matches. After all, that's why they are planning the iso fee. Otherwise, we'd skip forever until we found a 50 point match. Not the right approach, in my opinion, but willing to wait and see.

Unknown

Misguided wrote:

Funny how we (myself included) are getting sidetracked from the main thing here, which is removal of the ceiling on matchmaking rating for finding matches. After all, that's why they are planning the iso fee. Otherwise, we'd skip forever until we found a 50 point match. Not the right approach, in my opinion, but willing to wait and see.

How about free skipping only if the match is worth less than 10 points?

Unknown

I'm still not thrilled at the idea of letting people attack WAY WAY WAY above their current point range (in current tourney I am at 2400, got hit by someone with 376). A small ISO cost for skipping is minor when you can skip and find people worth a full 50 points. Win the fight, maybe get 140 ISO , probably enough to skip more until you can find another.

Spoit

Bucky76 wrote:

I'm still not thrilled at the idea of letting people attack WAY WAY WAY above their current point range (in current tourney I am at 2400, got hit by someone with 376). A small ISO cost for skipping is minor when you can skip and find people worth a full 50 points. Win the fight, maybe get 140 ISO , probably enough to skip more until you can find another.

Yeah, someone with 0 points hitting someone at 2400 is pretty....silly?

Unknown

So now I get to see the same 5 people in MMR hell AND I get to pay to skip them.

Is there some way my tablet could also administer a light electronic shock during the process? Let's go for a hat trick.

Unknown

MMR bubbles would be less of a problem if, once you skipped someone, you could not draw them again until one of your scores had changed. Granted, the game would need some sort of function to expand the range it pulls from if you completely depopulate your MMR bubble. Otherwise, I echo thoughts here that it would suck to be stuck with the same 5 people in your bubble, and then be forced to skip them each five times before you drew someone new who would actually give you points or give you a chance to win.

IceIX

Just to pop in for a moment, the skip cost is currently a trifle. That could always change depending on how things proceed, but the general idea is not to bleed players through this but to make them stop and think for a moment before whacking the Skip button again and again. If anyone has played Clash of Clans, think of the skip cost in those terms.

Unknown

Ghast wrote:

So now I get to see the same 5 people in MMR hell AND I get to pay to skip them.

Is there some way my tablet could also administer a light electronic shock during the process? Let's go for a hat trick.

It is already a hattrick. MMR hell, pay to skip and getting hit with a lot of -50s while trying to find someone who's worth some points and thinking about if you should skip or engage the 5 to 15 point battles...

Unknown

so i am currently 2400 in my bracket..
how i do this is by skipping 10-15 0-2 pointer and fight any 20-30s..
if you want me to pay to skip, you better dont put any 0-2s pointer for me to fight..

make this game interesting to play, dont treat it as a fast money grabber and let it die when no one play..

Unknown

I'm thinking maybe still having a cap on how high rating people you can fight, just a much larger cap than before, perhaps 1000 points ahead of you at max?

Unknown

Just do it guys. Why not?

You have the reasons, you have the arguments, just try it out . How bad could it be? This is the preview version in the end (at least on steam). If now is not the time to test, when would it be?

There are many people giving their feedback, i'm sure you guys can make the game better for everyone in the end.

Unknown

Curious to see how this plays out - reserving judgement until we play a few events with these changes in place. It feels like this will help make actual placement in the events more accurate and fair, which I'm all for. It also feels like it will put higher tier progression rewards once more out of reach. Perhaps the numbers are showing that too many people are hitting them right now? There's a fine line between making them a worthwhile challenge to achieve and downright impossible; it's frustrating to see those rewards slip out of reach due to a rash of -50 retaliations. I recognize this is a difficult balance to achieve without implementing live changes and seeing how they play out.

Personally, I'm fine with making them harder to get so long as you're not overly exposed to backsliding. This defeats the entire concept of "progression". Shields seem to have been conceived as a means to strategically increase one's placement, but the community as a whole tend to use them to drive progression. Those two reward systems are at odds in how they drive player behavior.

eidehua

IceIX wrote:

Just to pop in for a moment, the skip cost is currently a trifle. That could always change depending on how things proceed, but the general idea is not to bleed players through this but to make them stop and think for a moment before whacking the Skip button again and again. If anyone has played Clash of Clans, think of the skip cost in those terms.

Makes sense now-- shields and the skip mechanic are both in clash of clans as well.

Unknown

How about having a free skip limit (i.e. 15 skips) before you have to wait for it to refill? I would assume people would be more conservative with their skips with this approach too (hey, it works on me with Pandora music).

Unknown

IceIX wrote:

If anyone has played Clash of Clans, think of the skip cost in those terms.

The skip cost in COC can be less than 1% of the resources earned back from a single raid.