The Real Problem With The X-Force Nerf - The PvP Grind

NorthernPolarity

So there has been a ton of raging about the X-Force nerf ( I like to mentally add a babyrage picture to the beginning and end of each post, it makes it a lot funner! ), and while I don't necessarily agree with the people on the forums about the change being as bad as it actually is, that isn't what this topic is for, so I'd appreciate it if you guys left the raging to other threads. The real issue is that regardless of how bad the nerf is, the core problem is that the PvP grind will take longer as a result.

Time and time again, people complain about the nerfs, about the health pack conspiracy, the grind, so on and so forth which results in the veterans being screwed over, and this really stems from one sole thing: Average match length going up. The best characters in the game (also the fastest) are constantly getting nerfed, and now we're seeing things like general health of all the characters going up. Now, there are definitely some good things about this happening. Longer matches means that more strategies are viable, and that players have more in game decisions and feel more engaged, but there are some definite downsides to this as well, which seem to be the root of most of the veteran's problems:
1. Health pack consumption goes up.

Longer fights = more damage taken. More damage taken = more health packs used. More health packs used = less time to play before you need to regen packs = less fun.

2. Average time to do well in a PvP goes up for veterans.

Pretty obvious. Before you could stomp with xor in the last 90 minutes and push from 0 to 1000 easily. Nowadays with LadyThor and X-Force nerfed, pushes are more drawn out. Matches take longer for a veteran, so overall time spent in a PvP should go up considered.

I think that these two points are really the things that are getting to people. I hear a ton of complaining about these changes making the game unfun, and that's rooted not from the core gameplay itself, but from the fact that the amount of time that they have to spend in each PvP is going up considerably. These character nerfs might change the game to be more balanced, encourage diversity, and make the core gameplay better, but what people are getting fixated on is that instead of having to spend 1.5 hours per PvP, they now have to spend 2.5 hours getting the same score, with more spaced out pushes due to running out of health packs. And this isn't really a problem with the character changes themselves right? It comes inherently with the PvP / PvE systems that Demiurge has implemented. You're basically on this character treadmill, and in order to do well in PvP, you HAVE to grind up however many points per PvP every 2.5 days and spend a lot of your time doing it. Veterans are expecting to spend 1.5 hours per this per PvP and to be able to do it all in one run, but this is becoming less and less true as the game becomes more balanced. The core gameplay opens up a lot more from these changes, but time commitments increase as well and players feel like they're suffering as a result.

How do we fix this? I'm not going to propose anything like "make the game pure PvE", or "get rid of shields": things that are unrealistic and will probably be way too risky for the devs to try out. Instead, there are two simple fixes that would make the experience similar to how it was before:

1. Lower the equilibrium score in PvP and the progressions accordingly so that the average time spent in a PvP is the same as it was before.
Equilbrium score is the score that you can stay at unshielded for long periods of time without being attacked and losing heavy amounts of points (500-600 for 3-4* rosters typically). This point basically determines how high points can go, and is how long you have to play the PvP for. PvPs are two phases: phase 1 is pushing to this score, and then phase 2 is hopping from this to as high as possible. Lowering this score would mean that people need to play less in order to reach it, and thus would decrease the average amount of time spent during a PvP. Of course this would mean that progressions become harder to reach, so progressions need to be lowered as well to compensate. So instead of it being 500-600, lets make it so that it's 400-500 instead, making the amount of matches youd have to play per pvp lowered by 4-5.

Someone with a strong math background should probably help me out, but I think that the MMR change that they did earlier was actually the opposite of this: We’re reducing the amount of points that you lose in a Versus loss by 20%.
This is great for progression awards, but since there are more points in the system, this means that equilibrium score goes UP, so you need more points to do well in a PvP. If anything, they should be INCREASING the amount of points you lose per match, and driving down the equilibrium score so that everyone earns less points (AND LOWERING PROGRESSIONS ALONGSIDE IT).

Here's an example of how this would work:
Currently: equilibrium score is at 500 points. Joe plays 10 50 point matches to hit this score, and then hops 10 times at 50 points a match to hit 1k.

New system: equilibrium score is at 400 points. Joe players 8 50 points matches to hit this score, and then hops 10 times at 50 points a match to hit 900 points.

What is the net result? Nothing changes except final points across the board are lowered by 100, meaning Joe plays 2 less PvP matches overall. He has 100 less points, but since everyone else has 100 less points, he's still relatively at the same placement tier. The only problem is that its harder to get progressions, but just lower the progressions and its fine.

2. Increase the number of health packs given to a player.
Instead of it being 5 packs with one every 30 minutes, lower it to something like 8 health packs with one every 15 minutes. People complain about using more health packs, and the amount of health packs used by a player should be similar to how it was before these nerfs. More health packs lowers the constant fear of wiping, and punishes the player less when they mess up.

Of course, the only way to know for sure if my assumptions are true is to look at the data from before compared to now. If time spent in a PvP is indeed longer and health pack usage is going up considerable, then adding these changes should go a long way in keeping the veteran players happy.

Trisul

Alternatively, the devs can focus MPQ more towards PvE considering that systems changes for PvP are going to be developmentally expensive and difficult. But PvP is currently much more rewarding than PvE for the time invested... why does that have to be the case?

Make PvE more rewarding and more fun, and PvP balance becomes less of an issue.

Unknown

Or just do away with health packs all together. I mean, clearly their main source of revenue is character releases and token packs so who cares? Every character who is alive exits the fight at full health, those who are downed have a regen period to get back up, no health packs.

Gate systems like health packs and lives in F2P games are typically garbage. If I want to play this game for X hours why is the game trying to stop me from doing that? And if you want accelerating health packs why not just go the full mile and remove them.

NorthernPolarity

Lerysh wrote:

Or just do away with health packs all together. I mean, clearly their main source of revenue is character releases and token packs so who cares? Every character who is alive exits the fight at full health, those who are downed have a regen period to get back up, no health packs.

Gate systems like health packs and lives in F2P games are typically garbage. If I want to play this game for X hours why is the game trying to stop me from doing that? And if you want accelerating health packs why not just go the full mile and remove them.

The risk adverseness makes proposing a drastic solution like that far less likely to happen than an incremental approach.

TheOncomingStorm

Grind? What grind? I only spend 3+ hours a day on mpq.

Unknown

This is actually a very valid point, which needs to be made. Clearly, over time, the company has tried to keep the speed of the game to a timeframe. The players have noticed that if they can speed that timeframe up, they both last longer and get more points. So we are at an impasse there, one side has the will to have the matches last (and teoretically allow for characters with "longer-play" tactics), and the other side (the players) wanting to speed it up as much as they can, so they get the most out of their resources.

Both sides do clearly make sense.

Remove health packs (or perhaps keep them, but only make them needed for characters knocked out, everyone else heal full). Revamp the points system in PvP, which is, and has always been, really frustrating anyways.

jackstar0

I'm down for more healthpacks (as it would also address my issue with disconnects counting as an auto-retreat) or removing them entirely.

I don't see that kind of drastic change (removing them) happening though. But bumping to 10 base with a 20-25min wait would be good for me.

And yes, slowing the game down is a strange direction for the game to go. I do like how several of my faves might hang longer in PvE, but the off-set to PvP is potentially troubling.

bknfoodie

NorthernPolarity wrote:

How do we fix this? I'm not going to propose anything like "make the game pure PvE", or "get rid of shields": things that are unrealistic and will probably be way too risky for the devs to try out. Instead, there are two simple fixes that would make the experience similar to how it was before:

1. Lower the equilibrium score in PvP and the progressions accordingly so that the average time spent in a PvP is the same as it was before.
Equilbrium score is the score that you can stay at unshielded for long periods of time without being attacked and losing heavy amounts of points (500-600 for 3-4* rosters typically). This point basically determines how high points can go, and is how long you have to play the PvP for. PvPs are two phases: phase 1 is pushing to this score, and then phase 2 is hopping from this to as high as possible. Lowering this score would mean that people need to play less in order to reach it, and thus would decrease the average amount of time spent during a PvP. Of course this would mean that progressions become harder to reach, so progressions need to be lowered as well to compensate. So instead of it being 500-600, lets make it so that it's 400-500 instead, making the amount of matches youd have to play per pvp lowered by 4-5.

2. Increase the number of health packs given to a player.
Instead of it being 5 packs with one every 30 minutes, lower it to something like 8 health packs with one every 15 minutes. People complain about using more health packs, and the amount of health packs used by a player should be similar to how it was before these nerfs. More health packs lowers the constant fear of wiping, and punishes the player less when they mess up.

Of course, the only way to know for sure if my assumptions are true is to look at the data from before compared to now. If time spent in a PvP is indeed longer and health pack usage is going up considerable, then adding these changes should go a long way in keeping the veteran players happy.

Stop bargaining, grab a pitchfork. They're not going to give more healthpacks for free when they make money off of them. Progression rewards will probably change eventually.

Unknown

Slowing the game down isn't really a strange direction to go. It's always been so.

The outliers that have been nerfed has most often been the ones that allow the turbocharging through the games, sometimes to a ridiculous point (*cough* Rags), and the rest of the times been when they trivialise content (Spiderman and the winfinite combo).

GrumpySmurf1002

The counter to the health packs is to spread the diversity of usable teams at the top

We're so used to one-team-fits-all in PvP that the thought of doing anything else seems laughable. I think (or hope) the idea here is to make it such that there are at least 10-15 characters usable at the top end, which includes a mix of 3s and 4s.

That would mean when 3Thor/Kamala dies, you switch to Cap/Cage, or whatever (just picking characters off top of my head), with hopefully minimal effect on match length or defensive strength.

Now, maybe there will just be a new-team-fits-all after it's done, but the more balanced it gets, the more likely this solves itself.

As far as equilibrium, I don't know about others, but the MMR changes already moved mine down to 450 or so (was previously 550-600, as described). I climbed above it 3 different times as a test, and each time saw new attacks come rolling in (i.e. people I did not attack). Now I don't have a max roster, but it's strong enough that it wasn't an issue in past.

racanrpa

Regarding the time spent playing each pvp, you need to take into consideration this new mmr changes.
In this last hulk pvp, for example, i didn t fight a single 2* team. right after the seeds i got players with lv120-140 to maxed teams. So climbing this time was slower, harder, and more health packs consuming.
I don t like the x-force nerf, but mainly because what you said, it makes him slower. I think the bigger issue for me about this is not how much time you need to get to 1000, but the time you need to finish a fight during hops. If you have a long fight you can return easly with a -30/40/50 banner after finishing. So now that the game evolve to a more balanced one (wich i think is not a bad thing) they need to take this into consideration, because the scenario where you are hitted a lot in the first fight of the hop is very probable.

Unknown

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

The counter to the health packs is to spread the diversity of usable teams at the top

We're so used to one-team-fits-all in PvP that the thought of doing anything else seems laughable. I think (or hope) the idea here is to make it such that there are at least 10-15 characters usable at the top end, which includes a mix of 3s and 4s.

That would mean when 3Thor/Kamala dies, you switch to Cap/Cage, or whatever (just picking characters off top of my head), with hopefully minimal effect on match length or defensive strength.

Now, maybe there will just be a new-team-fits-all after it's done, but the more balanced it gets, the more likely this solves itself.

As far as equilibrium, I don't know about others, but the MMR changes already moved mine down to 450 or so (was previously 550-600, as described). I climbed above it 3 different times as a test, and each time saw new attacks come rolling in (i.e. people I did not attack). Now I don't have a max roster, but it's strong enough that it wasn't an issue in past.

You do see where this is exactly the same as getting rid of health packs entirely, and downed characters are "benched" for a period of time right? Just to make the game not TOTALLY grind to a halt sans healing you need to have your characters heal to full when they come out of a fight, unless they are downed.

mrflopwelligan

I would MUCH rather prefer shorter games. Don't really have time for long, long games.

GrumpySmurf1002

Lerysh wrote:

You do see where this is exactly the same as getting rid of health packs entirely, and downed characters are "benched" for a period of time right? Just to make the game not TOTALLY grind to a halt sans healing you need to have your characters heal to full when they come out of a fight, unless they are downed.

Not really, no. Having characters come out of a fight either full or downed sort of defeats the diversity purpose.

I don't know about you, but it's not common to take one of my strongest teams into a PvP fight and have one of them come out downed. Yeah, it happens, but you'd extend the playability of a single character by a lot if you didn't have to worry about healing after match.

The decision point for when to heal, switch, or use injured is a strategy element I would hate to see lost.

Unknown

The current mmr completely eliminates the safety zone. Since you are immediately facing more equal teams after the seed teams, you are A) more likely to get retaliated against, and less likely to get skipped because you have no power advantage. I was attacked almost immediately out of the gate in Hulk and faced a constant yo-yo of winning a match for a net loss. And it only gets worse as you score more.

I agree that the progressions should be adjusted even further than they were if this is the new state of the the game.

Longer matches are becoming more problematic. I only have certain blocks of the day when I can play (which is still a generous time commitment), so I'm being penalized by reducing the number of games I can play.

I like the strategic thought I have to put into managing health packs, and rarely spend hp to get them. Sometimes it's nice to have to a mechanic that makes me put the game down.

SnowcaTT

I agree with the title.

I was tracking every thing I could in this PVP, matches/points/who I saw/what I skipped/what hit me/what I attacked. I'll post the results at some point.

Spoiler: I saw about 100 teams, and more than half had XF. That can't be good for the health of the game.

Edit: my 5/5/2 XF is very, VERY pissed today. Black needed fixing, but green could have been left alone.

racanrpa

SnowcaTT wrote:

I agree with the title.

I was tracking every thing I could in this PVP, matches/points/who I saw/what I skipped/what hit me/what I attacked. I'll post the results at some point.

Spoiler: I saw about 100 teams, and more than half had XF. That can't be good for the health of the game.

Edit: my 5/5/2 XF is very, VERY pissed today. Black needed fixing, but green could have been left alone.

Actually, i thimk both green and black needed fixing. Just green not as hard as it was. Black has a good fixing. It can do massive damage, and negates Ap, but green is too weak now. I think if they left the max damage at 3-3.5k, and at the most 1 more AP needed, it would balance him perfectly.
I like a more balanced game, one where you can beat each character with any other, instead of having to use only one at all times

Unknown

NorthernPolarity wrote:

A bunch of stuff.

This pretty much hits the nail right on the head. Character power levels are only important relative to their interaction with the current metagame. The problem with the X-Force nerf isn't some theoretical "power band", it's that its current power is masking the structural problems with MPQ PvP: skip taxing, point loss, out-of-game coordination, health pack usage rate, game length, etc.

If only I had any confidence that this would end up in those things being fixed...

atomzed

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

The counter to the health packs is to spread the diversity of usable teams at the top

We're so used to one-team-fits-all in PvP that the thought of doing anything else seems laughable. I think (or hope) the idea here is to make it such that there are at least 10-15 characters usable at the top end, which includes a mix of 3s and 4s.

Actually this is what I am doing now. I have 18 max 3*, and I rotate my teams around so that I can continue to play. I usually do it for PVE but in pvp, if I run out of health packs and need to play one my game before shielding, I will bring out my Team B.

GrumpySmurf1002

atomzed wrote:

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

The counter to the health packs is to spread the diversity of usable teams at the top

We're so used to one-team-fits-all in PvP that the thought of doing anything else seems laughable. I think (or hope) the idea here is to make it such that there are at least 10-15 characters usable at the top end, which includes a mix of 3s and 4s.

Actually this is what I am doing now. I have 18 max 3*, and I rotate my teams around so that I can continue to play. I usually do it for PVE but in pvp, if I run out of health packs and need to play one my game before shielding, I will bring out my Team B.

I do too, but PvP it's a rotation of XForce and about 6-8 characters right now, depending on the featured and the opponent. Probably won't change much for me, except that I can rotate out XForce as well.

GothicKratos

I'm not going to address the meat and potatoes (or that's what I felt that part of the post was) because I pretty much agree with you. The character changes, especially to top tier characters, have an over reaching affect on everybody in ways that aren't "my guy is weaker" and you did a fantastic job illustrating that.

NorthernPolarity wrote:

1. Lower the equilibrium score in PvP and the progressions accordingly so that the average time spent in a PvP is the same as it was before.

Absolutely. I feel like this is something they should look into every single time they look into something (and I do feel like a lot of the time they do - see responses about DDQ after the Magneto changes or the Progression Award rebalances about Shield Cooldowns) every time they make changes to the top end of the spectrum (balancing champions mostly) or whenever they make mechanical changes (i.e. MMR, Match-Making, Shields, etc).

NorthernPolarity wrote:

2. Increase the number of health packs given to a player.
Instead of it being 5 packs with one every 30 minutes, lower it to something like 8 health packs with one every 15 minutes. People complain about using more health packs, and the amount of health packs used by a player should be similar to how it was before these nerfs. More health packs lowers the constant fear of wiping, and punishes the player less when they mess up.

I'm on board with changing up how many Health Packs we have available, but 32 an hour sounds pretty over-the-top. Somewhere in the middle of that is probably a pretty good starting point to collect data - say something like 15-20 packs an hour.

I would also not necessarily be against having a different pool of Health Packs for PvE and PvP - but I don't know how that would work from a coding standpoint. Sounds like a gigantic hassle.

NorthernPolarity wrote:

Of course, the only way to know for sure if my assumptions are true is to look at the data from before compared to now. If time spent in a PvP is indeed longer and health pack usage is going up considerable, then adding these changes should go a long way in keeping the veteran players happy.

And so are dialogues like this. Loads of people are upset, but nothing is going to get better by just complaining. Characters that are so above the curve they require themselves to beat them are going to get changed...that's just how it goes. Finding ways to make the game work happily with those changes is the real obstacle, we as a community (both gamers and developers) need to overcome.