Feedback on ISO cost for skipping

Unknown

So the ISO-cost on skipping matches is up, and it's 10 iso pr. skip.

First I think it's an interesting idea. I like the dampener on the cherry picking.

That said - I'm very skeptical to the cost on skipping a retaliation. Retaliation is usually against a team that has proven that they can beat you once, and often they can also do it on the defence.
The average power of an aggresor ofcourse can change a little now that skipping costs, but I doubt it.

Only very skeptical about the cost on a retaliation skip - hope you will keep a keen eye on this, an personally I would take away the retaliation cost.

EDIT: Hmmm and now the cost is gone again. Suppose it was just a test?...

Unknown

If the "skip tax" is only 10 ISO then I'm fine with it. Thanks to the Wolverine nerf, I'm no longer afraid of him and skipping every time I see one at level 70+ (which was alot). 10 ISO is nothing. How long does it take to go beat up a couple of level 1 Hammer Snipers, and that gets you two skips.

I find the only time I skip is when I'm matched with teams that I have a good chance at losing to (20+ levels higher than my guys), something I'm not in the mood to fight at this time, or worthless retals that will just open me up to losing another huge chunk of points.

Dayv

I still think the skip tax should be paid to the team being skipped.

Unknown

My matching has been so bad lately that, combined with the loss penalty, overpricing boosts, and nerfing one of my highest level characters, I'm probably just going to be taking it easy in tournaments for a while. Instituting all of these changes before they fixed matchmaking was a terrible idea.

Unknown

Too bad I can't quit playing twice

The usual "sequence error" turn on cost now - fix broken game offers later or never.

Enjoy. The last one leaving please turn off the lights.

Unknown

DayvBang wrote:

I still think the skip tax should be paid to the team being skipped.

I'm against the skip tax because I think the matchmaking is broken, and this is a poor way to treat a symptom instead of the problem. But if matchmaking worked, this is what should happen.

Unknown

Is that why I've been skipping into the same teams over and over now? I'm not seeing this change in game. Matchmaking is horrid, and the skip tax just capitalizes on their shoddy system. Matchmaking and team diversity is so bad that match selection is actually a time-sink, and significant consideration in the last hour of an event (or the entire duration of lightning events, I'd imagine). I get the desire to reduce cherry picking teams, but this is punishing players for playing optimally around a system that is flawed. Why not make it opt-in instead of opt out. If you want to slog through the horrible, buggy, existing matchmaking system, it is free, and your punishment is the inordinate amount of time you will spend clicking "skip" to find a reasonable match. If you want a tailored matchup, pay a small ISO bounty to procure an easy, even, or challenging matchup (based on event points or something).

* Creates an ISO sink.
* Disincentivizes use of skips BY PROVIDING A SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE.
* Replaces single buggy matchmaking algorithm with a tranched sorting system that functions better by having to do less.
* Doesn't tax players for dev shortcomings, either the botched matchmaking, matchmaking bugs, match bubbles, or pairing with hackers.
* Increases % of play time spent in matches vs. searching for suitable opponents.
* Doesn't upset existing expectations about how the game functions in non-transparent ways.

Unknown

DayvBang wrote:

I still think the skip tax should be paid to the team being skipped.

That is a bit "win more", and doesn't provide the intended ISO sink, but I like the way you think!

Unknown

I think skip tax can work if you


1) Fix the matchmaking problems

2) introduce the tax after the third or fourth consecutive skip, then scale it up with each additional skip.

Unknown

Posted in the wrong forum originally.

Devs, I know that it is still under consideration to add a cost, but I think I have a suggestion in place of that. If the intent is to get people to stop skipping till they get the person they know they can trash, why not make it a diminishing returns situation instead. Take the old reduction for losing attempts and instead apply it to skips. Skip too many times in the same slot and you are down to nothing (or very little) in points till you actually fight (win or lose) someone in that slot.

I think that would encourage people to take on challenging battles while also taking the feeling of "dollar gouging" out of it.

Unknown

Ben Grimm wrote:

Instituting all of these changes before they fixed matchmaking was a terrible idea.

Unknown

Slavlin wrote:

Posted in the wrong forum originally.

Devs, I know that it is still under consideration to add a cost, but I think I have a suggestion in place of that. If the intent is to get people to stop skipping till they get the person they know they can trash, why not make it a diminishing returns situation instead. Take the old reduction for losing attempts and instead apply it to skips. Skip too many times in the same slot and you are down to nothing (or very little) in points till you actually fight (win or lose) someone in that slot.

I think that would encourage people to take on challenging battles while also taking the feeling of "dollar gouging" out of it.

I think that would cause more frustration. People skip to avoid low-point values. Making that worse would only discourage people from playing. People don't like to skip. It is annoying as is. We don't need more penalties for skipping. We need incentives not to skip. The only way this system works is if they restructured matchmaking so that consecutive wins gave you higher point fights. Then the penalty of lower-point fights would make sense. Skipping would be saying that you are not strong enough to win, which is probably what it was meant for.

Unknown

I can't express enough what a horrid idea this is. Matchmaking is so broken it isn't even funny. I constantly see characters in there with nearly twice my level and you want to tax me to skip them?? When I do see matches that have characters closer to my level most of the time they will do so much damage to my characters that I cannot continue to play and it often takes a while to find something I think I can beat and continue to play. Whoever thought that making players wait for them to heal to continue is a fun gaming experience really needs to rethink things!

After the boost increase and the screw on the Thor and Wolverine (the buyback costs are a rip off even though increased) So lets be honest and call it what it is just another way to make the game so harder to get us spend more money at least that is how it appears.

Therefore I have spent all I am spending until I see some changes that make the game better for players. I am all for capitalism and supporting hard work but I will not support greedy people. I have already started playing less. I was enjoying playing and struggled to get where I could play for a longer period of time and often hit #1 in tournaments but your decisions are killing it for me. I have requested a fix to matchmaking before but if this is the plan I see why it is being ignored. When a game starts to feel like work you may want to back up and start rethinking things. These match three games are a dime a dozen the strategy aspect is what makes this one fun but if you bleed your players it will drive them away.

Dayv

Dunkelgrau wrote:

DayvBang wrote:

I still think the skip tax should be paid to the team being skipped.

That is a bit "win more", and doesn't provide the intended ISO sink, but I like the way you think!

Half to the skipped player, then?

I just like the idea of earning pocket ISO for having a team no one wants to fight.

Unknown

DayvBang wrote:

Dunkelgrau wrote:

DayvBang wrote:

I still think the skip tax should be paid to the team being skipped.

That is a bit "win more", and doesn't provide the intended ISO sink, but I like the way you think!

Half to the skipped player, then?

I just like the idea of earning pocket ISO for having a team no one wants to fight.

all this will do is give people with the better teams even more of an advantage

Dayv

justaplayer wrote:

DayvBang wrote:

Dunkelgrau wrote:

DayvBang wrote:

I still think the skip tax should be paid to the team being skipped.

That is a bit "win more", and doesn't provide the intended ISO sink, but I like the way you think!

Half to the skipped player, then?

I just like the idea of earning pocket ISO for having a team no one wants to fight.

all this will do is give people with the better teams even more of an advantage

And yet, also to low-ranked players people are skipping due to poor returns.

Unknown

I think if you charge iso to skip - make shure the same team in not back again in the next try >_>
Its bad enough to be stuck rotating through 6-10 ppl you dont want to fight (mostly due to low points gain), but to pay tax for it...

Unknown

DayvBang wrote:

justaplayer wrote:

all this will do is give people with the better teams even more of an advantage

And yet, also to low-ranked players people are skipping due to poor returns.

That's why it doesn't work with this system, which is the same reason this system doesn't work. Skipping happens for too many different reasons because the current matchmaking system doesn't work well. The ISO tax is not a good way to solve it. However, it is what the devs decided to do, so we have to put up with it until they realize it doesn't fix things.

Unknown

DayvBang wrote:

And yet, also to low-ranked players people are skipping due to poor returns.

If you skip low ranking fights you are making a huge mistake.

Unknown

justaplayer wrote:

DayvBang wrote:

And yet, also to low-ranked players people are skipping due to poor returns.

If you skip low ranking fights you are making a huge mistake.

Why? Those people now have two incentives to retaliate. You are worth more points, and they lose ISO if they skip. What advantge do you have from taking those opponents on?

Unknown

Blue Shoes wrote:

justaplayer wrote:

DayvBang wrote:

And yet, also to low-ranked players people are skipping due to poor returns.

If you skip low ranking fights you are making a huge mistake.

Why? Those people now have two incentives to retaliate. You are worth more points, and they lose ISO if they skip. What advantge do you have from taking those opponents on?

Don't look at it in terms of competing. In some tournaments I could care less about placement. I have advanced my roster very quickly with my play style. Some tourneys I enter to place some I enter not to. The ones I don't care about placement have helped me as much as the ones I do. I believe it was Sun Tzu that made it clear that you should pick your battles.