Changes to Versus Matchmaking [Update]

Options
2456723

Comments

  • Punisher5784
    Punisher5784 Posts: 3,837 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Hi, all,

    Will here from Demiurge to talk about some changes to Versus matchmaking that you can expect starting with the SMASH HIT event that starts today, 4/7.

    Quick summary of the changes:
    • We’re reducing the amount of points that you lose in a Versus loss by 20%.
    • We’re changing the matchmaking search parameters to more strictly limit how much harder your opponents can be (until you climb closer to the top and run out of matches worth plenty of points).
    • We’re making Kamala Khan the reward for the Versus event that starts 4/9.

    Great! Now can you address the Thick as Thieves PVE?! The KK progression award is almost unobtainable with the crazy scaling. enemystrike.png
  • If someone told me a year and a half ago that my reward for playing so much would be to face other similarly strong players for exactly the same rewards as new players then I'd have quit long before I did.

    People like to feel progress outside of simply having a bigger roster.

    New players don't expect to be able to compete with the big guns - they're not stupid, they know that. Getting beat up might put some off, but it'll make many others want to fight more to improve their roster so that they can compete. With Deadpool's daily's, improved token draw rates and relentless PvE opportunities it's not as if there's a tough barrier to 3* land any more. It's the ISO that holds people back, not the card availability.
  • Has there ever been consideration to putting a cap on how many points you can lose from being attacked? When trying to get the 1000 4Thor blueflag.png during Heavy Metal, the mission that would have given me 1000 points instead resulted in a loss of 160 points because I was attacked 6 times. Rather than rally and try for it again, I nearly threw my phone out the window and instead gave up on the event completely.

    I know that shields are part of your vision for depleting the HP economy, but being attacked that many times while out of shield only 5-8 minutes per hop is just cripplingly discouraging. That event alone has almost killed my desire to ever try for the 4* progression reward.
  • Demiurge_Will
    Demiurge_Will Posts: 346 Mover and Shaker
    Options
    MarCr wrote:
    The biggest problem I had with the previous PVP was that I rushed off at the start and once I hit about 700 points all I could see was the same 5 people for about 12 hours, no mater how many times I skipped it was the same 5 people. At the start they gave me 40 points by the end about 4 each. I'm guessing it was because the matchmaking search parameters were so narrow that they were the only result. It made the game totally unplayable and I understand if I had of waited till later in the event the outcome would have been different as more people rose through the ranks. Is there anything in place to mitigate this problem?

    This sounds like what you'd see if there aren't many other people in the event with scores as high as yours. That experience is going to be similar in both matchmaking systems. Like you say, your pool of opponents will change as other players rise through the ranks.
  • JamieMadrox
    JamieMadrox Posts: 1,798 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    The big flaw I see in the logic here is that anyone that has played up to now had to go through getting stomped on by better rosters until their roster was geed enough to compete. So why do the new guys get a pass now? I understand the desire to make the first time and new user experiences better, but do it somewhere other than PVP. I had to grind out the prologue and PVE constantly for months before I was ready to even place in 3* cover territory for PVP. Now we're catering to guys that are barely 2 months in and have 2* rosters. How does this make OUR user experience better?
    MarCr wrote:
    The biggest problem I had with the previous PVP was that I rushed off at the start and once I hit about 700 points all I could see was the same 5 people for about 12 hours, no mater how many times I skipped it was the same 5 people. At the start they gave me 40 points by the end about 4 each. I'm guessing it was because the matchmaking search parameters were so narrow that they were the only result. It made the game totally unplayable and I understand if I had of waited till later in the event the outcome would have been different as more people rose through the ranks. Is there anything in place to mitigate this problem?

    This sounds like what you'd see if there aren't many other people in the event with scores as high as yours. That experience is going to be similar in both matchmaking systems. Like you say, your pool of opponents will change as other players rise through the ranks.
    It's always been this way. As an early climber/shielder/hopper this wall was there before the new system and will likely be there no matter what. At some point you're top of the mountain and everyone else is below you.
  • Arondite
    Arondite Posts: 1,188 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    It seems the developers are by no means deaf. Excellent form.
  • fmftint
    fmftint Posts: 3,653 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    can you define, worth plenty of points? getting up near the top and seeing the same 4 people worth 13 points isn't worth exposing yourself to huge point losses


    and coddling low ranked players isn't healthy for the game either. every system has a food chain, its ridiculous to think anyone should be immune to it

    When you remove the fish, the sharks have to cannibalize themselves and just stop playing
  • Demiurge_Will
    Demiurge_Will Posts: 346 Mover and Shaker
    Options
    One of the bigger complaints I saw was that high point players (800+) were highly visible to people just starting the event, which led to massive point losses when attempting to climb.

    Has there been any thought to reducing the ceiling/increasing the floor of scores that are visible to a player?

    Hey, GrumpySmurf,

    Good question. A ceiling on the scores that are visible to a player creates "bubbles" where, if players get far enough ahead of the pack, they're invulnerable. Reducing points losses is aimed at softening the situation you describe.
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    The reason why we haven't tried that yet is just that there are meaningful technical and design challenges involved, and we haven't yet devoted the resources needed to give it a shot in game. It's a sound idea and there are a couple of different features along those lines that we've explored on paper.
    Maybe I'm oversimplifying it, but you already have PvP events that overlap slightly due to time slices. All you would need to do is have the events overlap more significantly, and set up the prize structures so that players self-select into the event that offers the prizes (hence, difficulty level) that's appropriate.
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Good question. A ceiling on the scores that are visible to a player creates "bubbles" where, if players get far enough ahead of the pack, they're invulnerable. Reducing points losses is aimed at softening the situation you describe.
    Losing 36 points instead of 45 isn't really a whole lot of softening. I don't think anyone has a problem with someone at 1200 being seen by someone at 800, but letting someone at 100 see someone at 800 seems very wrong.
  • Has any consideration been given to upping the number of seed teams so that people can get some cushion below them before the feeding frenzy starts?
  • PorkBelly
    PorkBelly Posts: 526 Critical Contributor
    Options
    I'll withhold judgment until I try it out.

    However, if it is still based on the MMR that was effect in Heavy Metal, I can't see how mildly tweaking it is going to make the experience better, especially if we're going to be dealing with maxed, buffed Hulks right after the seed teams.

    Teenage Riot, on the other hand, has been a lot of fun.
  • spccrain
    spccrain Posts: 249
    Options
    Ok I'm ready to accept all the down votes for this post so hit me.

    I'm on day 495. I struggled, all of us 4* ppl struggled..that was the tinykitty point! You struggle until you build yourself up then you don't have to struggle anymore. That's the point of any game like this. You get your tinykitty kicked for a while then you do the tinykitty kicking! When I started we didn't have 1/2 of the advantages that the new people have and the game was balanced. Hell we had the useless environment tiles, no team-ups, no alliances, no time slices, weird specialized boosts, and yeah I got killed trying to climb. Now they have the Deadpool Daily, a reduced point reward structure, shields, a crazy roster of new characters, and different time slices. The time slices alone make placing 200% easier. You can simply avoid the groups you don't want to play with and you actually have a choice of when you can play! DPD just gives away rewards that we would have to devote 3 days to achieve. We didn't have that! I had to grind for every win, bust my tinykitty for every reward and practically kill myself for a 4* and it was awesome! You got such a great feeling when you placed in top 100 because you earned it! It was an achievement! Now everyone expects it to be handed to them and they complain that it's too hard, they get attacked too much, they can't easily get 1k because the big, mean whales are attacking them...YES WE ARE! That's the point of progressing! You don't build yourself up so you can struggle more than before. You spend the time (or in some peoples cases money) so that you can be ahead of the rabble not behind them. The PvP structure might need updated but not by simply making us fight max XForce Hood immediately. All that does is make the things that we've worked for meaningless and gives progression in the game pointless.
  • TheOncomingStorm
    TheOncomingStorm Posts: 489 Mover and Shaker
    edited April 2015
    Options
    The new system improves the experience of newer players, but does so by making the experience for veterans worse. There seem to be better alternatives.

    For instance, At certain scores attacks by higher levels give points to the attackers, but the defender doesn't lose points.

    For example, up to 300 any 2* roster or higher that attacks 1* roster gains points, but the 1*doesn't lose it.

    After 300, 1*s would lose points. 2*'s up to 600, 3*s up to 800.

    In terms of the new mmr system, players outside of the mmr band aren't shown. I'm saying, show them, but if they are outside that mmr band, one player would gain points, but the player below the mmr band wouldn't lose points.

    Veteran players' experience would remain the same, while the experience of newer players would improve.

    Or something similar.

    Tl; dr: the best solution works for all level of players. Helping newer players while not penalizing veteran players does not have be mutually exclusive goals.
  • woopie
    woopie Posts: 311 Mover and Shaker
    Options
    simonsez wrote:
    The reason why we haven't tried that yet is just that there are meaningful technical and design challenges involved, and we haven't yet devoted the resources needed to give it a shot in game. It's a sound idea and there are a couple of different features along those lines that we've explored on paper.
    Maybe I'm oversimplifying it, but you already have PvP events that overlap slightly due to time slices. All you would need to do is have the events overlap more significantly, and set up the prize structures so that players self-select into the event that offers the prizes (hence, difficulty level) that's appropriate.

    Issue probably arises when they have to start adding together season scores. Running concurrent seasons (choose easy/normal/hard at the beginning?) might be more than the server hamsters can handle. The question also becomes, do I care about competing for 4*s that aren't appreciably better than 3*s or do I want to pad my score for the end of season 10 packs?
  • Demiurge_Will
    Demiurge_Will Posts: 346 Mover and Shaker
    Options
    The big flaw I see in the logic here is that anyone that has played up to now had to go through getting stomped on by better rosters until their roster was geed enough to compete. So why do the new guys get a pass now? I understand the desire to make the first time and new user experiences better, but do it somewhere other than PVP. I had to grind out the prologue and PVE constantly for months before I was ready to even place in 3* cover territory for PVP. Now we're catering to guys that are barely 2 months in and have 2* rosters. How does this make OUR user experience better?

    New players today have it harder than new players did even a few months ago - there are a lot more players with more advanced rosters.

  • This sounds like what you'd see if there aren't many other people in the event with scores as high as yours. That experience is going to be similar in both matchmaking systems. Like you say, your pool of opponents will change as other players rise through the ranks.

    This has always been a bit of an issue when scoring high, but being unable to be matched with a large spectrum of the player base meant that this problem became exaggerated. When I say I seen 5 players for 12 hours, I literally mean I seen 5 players for 12 hours. Before, people with weaker rosters would often break early and they would help the total, now they're gone and there's a massive hole that needs to be filled by players (possibly from other slots, but I understand that people in earlier slot would be at a disadvantage from being attacked by later slots).

    Either way, I'm going ultra casual while this is worked out.
  • Demiurge_Will
    Demiurge_Will Posts: 346 Mover and Shaker
    Options
    If someone told me a year and a half ago that my reward for playing so much would be to face other similarly strong players for exactly the same rewards as new players then I'd have quit long before I did.

    The strength and depth of your roster was still the most important deciding factor in who came out on top in Heavy Metal, and that will continue to be the case going forward.
  • simonsez
    simonsez Posts: 4,663 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    woopie wrote:
    Issue probably arises when they have to start adding together season scores. Running concurrent seasons (choose easy/normal/hard at the beginning?) might be more than the server hamsters can handle. The question also becomes, do I care about competing for 4*s that aren't appreciably better than 3*s or do I want to pad my score for the end of season 10 packs?
    You might not like my answer, but the "minor league" PvP shouldn't be part of any season score. Reasons: it'll keep vets from wasting their time with it, and keep the playing field open for transitioners; the main season prize is the 4*... transitioners don't need that yet; yes, they lose out on the 10 pack, but let's face it... that might net them two 3*s. During the season they'll have gotten 30 3*s from the DDQ. Is a 10 pack REALLY that big of a deal anymore?
  • GrumpySmurf1002
    GrumpySmurf1002 Posts: 3,511 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Good question. A ceiling on the scores that are visible to a player creates "bubbles" where, if players get far enough ahead of the pack, they're invulnerable.

    Not necessarily. It would 'simply' require that the top x% of scores are always visible to each other. So if you have a player who somehow runs all the way to 1500 with the next 10% of scorers all around 500, he's still visible to those players. But from the other side, if you have 0 pts in an event, the ceiling of visibility should be at the minimum score required for 50 point matches, whatever that is. So 0 might be able to see the 500 players, but can't see the 1500.

    Thus you've eliminated the top of the leaderboard getting sniped by people just starting, which will lead to at least a little more satisfaction from the veteran/high scoring player.