A couple upcoming changes to PvP events

Unknown

Other than the shield upgrade cost there has been slight changes to progression rewards as well.
For example the DA recruit token is now at 300 instead of 250. Nothing to really change anything that matters but a change none the less.

Kelbris

Psykopathic wrote:

Other than the shield upgrade cost there has been slight changes to progression rewards as well.
For example the DA recruit token is now at 300 instead of 250. Nothing to really change anything that matters but a change none the less.

There used to be a token at both 250 and 800. Now, there's only a token at 300.

Same with Ares covers; we used to get a green at 325, and a yellow at 600. Now, there's only a yellow at 700. With most of The Hunt's submissions having the easiest ranked Ares reward yielding a yellow cover, I'm sure more people would rather they have gotten the green (or even a red).

Unknown

DOH. Reading the list it seem you do just EVERYTHING to ruin the rest of fun here and make people leave. Except maybe pulling a bag on their head and beating them till moving.

In the last tournament you already threw in landmines: all those 50/0 "attack packs" guess everybody call alley mugging. (The fact that you also receive the chance to do that hardy modifies the picture.)

So now all tournamets will be like the lightning when you play and inevitably get bashed from whatever position in last minutes getting 150-200 pts hits every 2 minutes. Dropping back to just ISO level from #2. Maybe we could rename the game ladders and snakes as it more resembles that.

The bashing was bad enough but at least experience showed that you can lift off that storm zone and get to play as it would be supposed to. Now you're taking that away or moving to the finish line where people are barely waiting to shield up and go rest. With some chance for staying somewhere, in risk only from climbers.

Also obviously we can kiss goodbye to the progression, prizes again, to enjoy chasing the foot of the rainbow.

And to add insult to all the injuries you *increase* the cost of shields? What you should have to decrease already and/or allow to pause and enjoy the full bought length?

And adding cost to the skip *before* you fixed it to allow filtering for viable games up front, like a checkbox asking to give only people with more points than me? Or at most X points below? You're right, skipping is not fun and I'd rather spend the time playing, but you keep feeding **** pairs. And now your lack of usable interface will even cost ISO? Now give me ....ing break already.

I'm glad I stumbled on this annoucement instead of just experiencing these changes on the field. I think I rather sit out the period until you turn the wheel to the good direction, or if not, well, thanks for all the fish. I'm just so baffled, these forums are filled with all kind of good suggestions that would serve as improvement, you just ignore them and, eh, whatever.

Bcorm

Spoit wrote:

Bcorm wrote:

Misguided wrote:

Bcorm wrote:

I'm not quite sure exactly how your MMR is calculated but I'm afraid that these new changes might penalize and frustrate players. I noticed that I was seeing a lot of 50 point matches lately, the problem was there was no way I could beat them, even with the optimal combination of boosts. If these changes take place it would further frustrate people in my position. It would cost Iso to skip a battle I have no chance of winning or I burn 3 to 6 health packs to try and hope I can pull it off. Then after, hope I don't get 0 Iso as a reward and been attacked 5 times during the match. I'm not saying the MMR system is completely broken but it does need some tweaking before things playing off it are implemented further exacerbating the problem. I've noticed that I've been receiving 0 Iso rewards roughly 70% of the time so to institute these changes would make the Tournament system basically an Iso and Health Pack drain. I'm sorry if this comes across as whiney, that's not my intention, I just feel that with these changes and a flawed MMR it will just further the gap between players and be more of a test of wallet strength, not strategy.

Rewards should be 70 or 140 (and it sounds like these may increase?) never 0. Not sure what you are referring to here.

I was referring to the rewards for winning the match. I've been getting 0 Iso roughly 70% of the time, 70 about 20% of the time and 140 10% of the time.

That's a bug. Double check you iso totals before and after a match to see if it's just not showing the prompt, and then email support

I just played a few matches and I got one win for 70 and one for 0. I just mailed support. I just assumed that since the rewards said a chance to win 70 or 140 Iso that none was an option as well. I've been playing since October and can't even begin to fathom how much I missed out on due to this bug. Had I known I would have done something about it back then.

Nemek

pasa_ wrote:

I'm just so baffled, these forums are filled with all kind of good suggestions that would serve as improvement, you just ignore them and, eh, whatever.

90% of the suggestions on this forum are awful.

Unknown

Kelbris wrote:

Psykopathic wrote:

Other than the shield upgrade cost there has been slight changes to progression rewards as well.
For example the DA recruit token is now at 300 instead of 250. Nothing to really change anything that matters but a change none the less.

There used to be a token at both 250 and 800. Now, there's only a token at 300.

Same with Ares covers; we used to get a green at 325, and a yellow at 600. Now, there's only a yellow at 700. With most of The Hunt's submissions having the easiest ranked Ares reward yielding a yellow cover, I'm sure more people would rather they have gotten the green (or even a red).

I would say green is easiest to gain and Yellow is the one to have 5 by majority of people.

Unknown

I see where this game is headed and its only a matter of time before people stop playing this game.

You know the old saying? "Why fix something thats not broken?".

Unknown

bahamut685 wrote:

Charging us to skip is counter intuitive, when 95% of matches include level 80-120 opponents for level 30 players, especially when those opponents are 10 point matches at best. so maybe adapt match making to also consider hero levels, or else tournaments are going to become a desolate wasteland, and even more of a pay-to-win feature.

I have to agree with this post as I am partially going through that myself as well. Right now those who started later are in disadvantage compared to early players and this makes it even worse. Also with upcoming Thor/Wolverine rebalance it will get even worse I fear.

Unknown

Badman82 wrote:

I am finally convinced. The devs are playing a game. The second they fix one problem they take it away or make it worse lol. "Oh you're tired of losing points? Ok just buy this shield and you'll be fine ". Shields soon double in price. "Oh you can't find opponents worth more than 10 points? Ok well now you can attack people that have spent hours climbing up the progression ladder and knock them down. I know they won't like it but they should've bought a shield ". Congrats demiurge, you have truly thought of everything .

Exactly my thoughts. A real piece of work this volley of punches below the belt. Out of the blue, when we had impression there is improvement finally, even if just small and not curing the root causes pointed out, yet in the right direction.

Unknown

darkorochix wrote:

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..

QFT.

I understand that the Devs are making money here. I have no problem with that. But the most important part of the online game is being fair to its players. And all those changes punish people who want to play without paying (or without paying much) - if the Devs don't like people who don't want to pay, why bother making this game free? I think it is more discouraging for players to install a new ("free") game only to see that without spending some $$$ You will get nowhere in it.

To make my point clear - I don't mind spending money on this game, as I really enjoy it (hell, I already spend on it about 150-200$), but making it more and more Pay to Win will slowly decrease the amount of players. Less players = less profit. Less profit = no more MPQ.

Unknown

Last tournament (Ares), i've been fighting only high level players (only 85+, many 100+). I can't win, i can't progress, i can't play. the only high level character i have is a wolverine, i've got no decent 3*.
One HUGE issue in this game is that every tournament must have logical "weight" category. People who have 100-140+ 3* have to fight between themselves, there's no strategy in fighting absurdely high levels opponents with dull teams, it's only open-farming.

If you want better tournaments, work better on categories. Paying iso or money is a lack of idea, as there are always people ready to pay to bypass the rules.

PS. You're doing the wrong way with the skip cost, as people who have to skip a lot is mainly people who can't fight this kind of über teams. They NEED iso to make their low levels characters to progress, not to have the opportunity to play this game decently. Really wrong way to make your tournaments better.

Unknown

Morphee-moi-mal wrote:

Last tournament (Ares), i've been fighting only high level players (only 85+, many 100+). I can't win, i can't progress, i can't play. the only high level character i have is a wolverine, i've got no decent 3*.
One HUGE issue in this game is that every tournament must have logical "weight" category. People who have 100-140+ 3* have to fight between themselves, there's no strategy in fighting absurdely high levels opponents with dull teams, it's only open-farming.

If you want better tournaments, work better on categories. Paying iso or money is a lack of idea, as there are always people ready to pay to bypass the rules.

PS. You're doing the wrong way with the skip cost, as people who have to skip a lot is mainly people who can't fight this kind of über teams. They NEED iso to make their low levels characters to progress, not to have the opportunity to play this game decently. Really wrong way to make your tournaments better.

Agree with you....not sure why they are making us pay to skip when their matchmaking is messed up. They need to fix that first then they can tweak the skip cost or what not.

Unknown

With regards to skipping why not start with a set number of skips. Then if you skip you lose one or if you battle you gain one. This would promote a more strategic use of skips and you wouldnt have to put an iso cost to skipping.

Unknown

Madjam wrote:

With regards to skipping why not start with a set number of skips. Then if you skip you lose one or if you battle you gain one. This would promote a more strategic use of skips and you wouldnt have to put an iso cost to skipping.

I like this. +1

Unknown

Or just apply the skip cost to begin from a certain point value.

Example: under 500 points no skip cost. After that players get a small skip cost.

turul

Changes would be all OK except for Double shields cost VS -50 losses. One have to go

Unknown

Skip cost? Just win match - level your character and deplete your iso to 0. And then skip for 0 cost.

Thanos

Maybe i'm being a little naive but why cant the PvP events be run like the PvE events? Instead of losing points from retaliations just have a cumulative score. That way you get rewarded for the amount of time you put in. I know i'd be more likely to play lower ranked opponents if i did'nt have to fear losing a ton of points on the retaliation. If you still really needed to have a point loss system maybe just make it a fixed amount of points per loss, like 5 or 10 points instead of 30, 40 or 50.

Unknown

Thanos wrote:

Maybe i'm being a little naive but why cant the PvP events be run like the PvE events? Instead of losing points from retaliations just have a cumulative score. That way you get rewarded for the amount of time you put in. I know i'd be more likely to play lower ranked opponents if i did'nt have to fear losing a ton of points on the retaliation. If you still really needed to have a point loss system maybe just make it a fixed amount of points per loss, like 5 or 10 points instead of 30, 40 or 50.

It could be done that way , no point losses, just cumulative scores (progression rewards would need to be changed drastically ), points gained based on other teams hero levels / stars or something. More points for beating equal or better teams, much less for tanking other rounds to fight easy people. Shields would be no use any more though, so this won't happen because they wont give up that revenue.

Unknown

Thanos wrote:

Maybe i'm being a little naive but why cant the PvP events be run like the PvE events? Instead of losing points from retaliations just have a cumulative score. That way you get rewarded for the amount of time you put in. I know i'd be more likely to play lower ranked opponents if i did'nt have to fear losing a ton of points on the retaliation. If you still really needed to have a point loss system maybe just make it a fixed amount of points per loss, like 5 or 10 points instead of 30, 40 or 50.

PVP is all about risk for a high reward, if you can't lose points that what's the point? No reason to play.