PvP Gameplay Updates

Unknown

I posted a thread about this already.

This will make the game impossible for some of us to play. My queue is constantly filled with stuff I don't have a prayer of beating and with that I can barely beat and then I will have to sit around and wait until my characters heal. This will definitely kill it for me.

Unknown

I have been lurking for a while but this issue finally forced me to register and post.

It seems like the main goal for the devs is to make it so matches in PvP tournaments are more evenly matched. Why?

The most fun I have is when having about 2-3 matches before having to use a heal.

Ideally I play about 2-3 matches, heal my most damaged character and then hopefully only need to use 1 heal per match to keep kicking my most damaged character back up to full health. If I play a match and don't need to use a heal,I feel like I'm doing a great job. If my party totally get's wiped out and need to use 3 healths, I really feel a lot of pain because that means I'm going to have to stop playing soon. I can usually play for an hour or so before having to wait 2.5 hours to recharge.

If you even the odds either through a skip tax or more accurate matchmaking, that means I will have to use 3 healths for the average battle because I will suffer a lot of damage from the previous battle and will need my characters at full health in order to have a chance at winning the next. With this kind of mechanism I can only see playing 2-3 matches total before having to wait 2.5 hours for health to refill. If the number of battles per day is reduced then top scores will be even lower than the ~800 we are seeing now.

If the purpose is to funnel people into buying more health and power boosts. you already have that mechanism. I just dropped $40 this last couple weeks on extra slots and health packs because I wanted to maintain my position in a couple recent events. the rubber banding is a great incentive to get people into PvE. Once you have some decent characters and you need that last cover to complete your character and it's only available as a top 10 leaderboard award. you will need to spend money on health packs. but this seems to be due to not being able to fit enough battles into the time limit of the event in the final hours.

Sure, when you are a new player, it seems like you get your butt kicked in the PvP events, but then again, you get your butt kicked in the PvE events as well. You have to gain some characters and levels before you can start doing well. It feels like a real achievement when you get your first few progression rewards, then after about a week of playing you can get 200-300 consistently and can start ranking high enough to get some decent leaderboard awards. And it feels even better the first time you are able to hold your own in a tournament without being dragged back down as soon as you stop playing.

This feels right to me, it's a good progression system.

To me, the tournament events feel like king of the mountain (a very muddy and slippery mountain), you have to use all your might to climb up as high as you can. at first you can only take a couple steps before being pulled down from someone trying to climb over you. but the more you work the higher on the mountain you can get. and if you are at the top, you really have to be on your game in order to hold your position. It feels like a unique fun mechanic.

If I were to fix anything, I would find a way to not force people to tank in order to change their bracket. a skip tax will only end up making tanking even more necessary because tanking will be the only free way of lowering your competitions level.

Tanking is a chore and interferes with having fun. Skipping does NOT interfere with fun, in fact it feels more like you are a hunter that is trying to surmise your prey before you strike.

I think a lot of these issues is because of the server trying to automatically judge skill and provide brackets behind the scenes. If anything, it should be done by something that is less controllable by the player, like highest standing in a tournament or average strength of the character you own. There is an argument that win/loss is the only way to account for skill. but it's too easy to manipulate and skill (while important) is not as impactful as the characters in your arsenal. It's not like chess where everyone has the exact same pieces and it's 100% about skill.

The idea I like the most is to have well defined brackets that are set by the game designers. Nothing replaces the ability of a human to adjust settings manually to make things more fair and fun. Leave skip as it is, retain the ability to fight weaker players because it makes the game more fun. but have a beginner bracket with appropriate awards (mainly 1* cards and the rare 2*) and have a pro bracket where you can get the 3-4* heroes and meaningful ISO prizes (current ISO Prizes are pitiful for higher level characters). Have a few brackets in between. You can hang out in the beginner bracket and be the top dog but in order for you to get interesting prizes you will eventually have to start from the bottom of the more powerful bracket and work your way up again. This provides a great repeating progression cycle for the player and more importantly, there is no way to "game" the system.

At the very least, if you make it so battles are even in tournaments, you will eventually need to be more generous with health packs. which defeats the monetization of said item.

bahamut685

Stillhart wrote:

Speedy0307 wrote:

Cool a skip tax, now I have to play teams I have no hope of beating. Glad they are fixing the high priority problems for their users.

Playing and losing is a good way to lower your MMR so that you start playing teams you CAN beat. It's actually a good idea. Having a hidden MMR is stupid if you can always pick your fights.

In theory, this will make the PvP ladder reflect more of a true distribution. The people at the top will have those L141 3* characters and the people in the middle will have the maxed out 2* chars, etc.

Of course this introduces a new problem: the rich get richer. The people with the uber teams get the uber rewards making their teams even harder to beat.

LOL, number 2 in my bracket's highest level character is 48, so the ranking does NOT reflect team quality. And the rich get richer isn't a new problem, since you always need specific 3- or 4-star heroes to get top ranks in sub-events.

bahamut685

Hooray for skip tax, without fixing MMR.

1 in 10 matches I find 'only' has an average party level 15-20 levels above my party.

Unknown

Speedy0307 wrote:

Cool a skip tax, now I have to play teams I have no hope of beating. Glad they are fixing the high priority problems for their users.

Glad I'm not the only one wondering how I beat teams with heroes 20 levels above my top one.

What's worse is that users who may be "cheating", may be messing up the developer's selection algorithm causing us to face off heroes of legendary stature.

Is there a way to lose consecutive matches and causing the selection algorithm to select more "fair" opponents?

There's a difference between challenging oneself and committing suicide.

The most important thing I think these new enhancements have not necessarily addressed is whether it all makes the game more "fun". Is there a chance to create a questionnaire to get users feedback on what they like and what can be addressed?

There is so much to love about this game but it continues to move in a direction to discourage people from actually playing. Guess it relieves stress on their server if fewer of us are playing.

Wiseg8

Unknown

WiseG8 wrote:

Glad I'm not the only one wondering how I beat teams with heroes 20 levels above my top one.

Fairly quickly is best, if you want to gain more rating than you lose.

Are you coming from an MMO background? Levels don't mean all that much in this game. You can get high placements even if you're cover-capped to 61 in some cases. Hell, I trundled up to 400 in Best There Is with a level 25 Loki before subbing in something people might take at least slightly seriously. A level 100 *** is about evenly matched with a level 85 ** because of the way the progression curves are set. At level 141 they have a small edge in match damage over you and more generous hit points, but it's nothing insurmountable with handy advantages like knowing what skills do and being able to pass up match-4s as long as the AI doesn't hit an eternal cascade of doom. And that'll end you, like as not, in an even match, so what's the difference?

Unknown

Veracity wrote:

WiseG8 wrote:

Glad I'm not the only one wondering how I beat teams with heroes 20 levels above my top one.

Fairly quickly is best, if you want to gain more rating than you lose.

Are you coming from an MMO background? Levels don't mean all that much in this game. You can get high placements even if you're cover-capped to 61 in some cases. Hell, I trundled up to 400 in Best There Is with a level 25 Loki before subbing in something people might take at least slightly seriously. A level 100 *** is about evenly matched with a level 85 ** because of the way the progression curves are set. At level 141 they have a small edge in match damage over you and more generous hit points, but it's nothing insurmountable with handy advantages like knowing what skills do and being able to pass up match-4s as long as the AI doesn't hit an eternal cascade of doom. And that'll end you, like as not, in an even match, so what's the difference?

Levels do mean something depending on the character. Yes with Ragnarok, Capt Zero, The Russian Chick, Grey Suit Black Widow, Spiderman, Thor, Modern Black Widow(if that is the one that Stuns), Magneto(both) and probably a few others I am forgetting levels arent that big of a deal

When you are looking at ones that dish out serious damage it becomes a huge problem as the can 1 shot your team members. Of course these are the ones being played and filling our queues at least mine lol

Kelbris

I'd like a simple question answered by the devs about this skip tax. Any one of them.

It's pretty clear that the developers intend for us to play the game in certain ways; maybe saying that they're discouraging that we do certain things may be a better explanation. They don't want spammable abilities? Makes sense, and puts the game at a higher challenge. Cool. No issues there.

Don't want us tanking? Makes sense. It's a disingenuous way to make it seem like you're worse at the game than you really are. Hell, I was putting out a tank team so that people with mid-level teams would hit me, then pulling out my big guns and retaliating, knowing that there was very little chance of them being able to fight back. If it's in the game, I'm gonna do it unless there's a more fun option. Let's not get onto a tangent about tanking, though.

Now, the skip tax in itself is supposed to discourage us from skipping everyone. The devs do have some solid logic with "Skipping isn't fun." I mean, hell, sitting there mashing a button until I find a match I feel like playing ISN'T FUN.

However, if I'm going to be penalized for skipping, that means if I get a string of 18-20 point matchups, I'm supposed to take one to make sure I don't waste a bunch of ISO. Yet, if I attack someone for less than 25 points, they're gonna hit me back for more than 25 points, and I'm going to have a net loss of my tournament rank. Here's where my very simple question comes into play:

If I get a string of matches below 25 points, am I supposed to fight one and get a net loss of my tournament rank, to make sure I don't get a net loss of ISO from skipping?

I don't want to be overly critical. I do enjoy this game a good deal. I just want to know what your logic behind this is.

bahamut685

Veracity wrote:

WiseG8 wrote:

Glad I'm not the only one wondering how I beat teams with heroes 20 levels above my top one.

Fairly quickly is best, if you want to gain more rating than you lose.

Are you coming from an MMO background? Levels don't mean all that much in this game. You can get high placements even if you're cover-capped to 61 in some cases. Hell, I trundled up to 400 in Best There Is with a level 25 Loki before subbing in something people might take at least slightly seriously. A level 100 *** is about evenly matched with a level 85 ** because of the way the progression curves are set. At level 141 they have a small edge in match damage over you and more generous hit points, but it's nothing insurmountable with handy advantages like knowing what skills do and being able to pass up match-4s as long as the AI doesn't hit an eternal cascade of doom. And that'll end you, like as not, in an even match, so what's the difference?

Especially when buffs are present levels DO mean something. 85 Thor can one-hit most non-top-level players' teams (and matches for over 400 damage).

Kelbris

Bump and such

DD-The-Mighty

Kelbris wrote:

I'd like a simple question answered by the devs about this skip tax. Any one of them.

It's pretty clear that the developers intend for us to play the game in certain ways; maybe saying that they're discouraging that we do certain things may be a better explanation. They don't want spammable abilities? Makes sense, and puts the game at a higher challenge. Cool. No issues there.

Don't want us tanking? Makes sense. It's a disingenuous way to make it seem like you're worse at the game than you really are. Hell, I was a scumbag putting out a tank team so that people with mid-level teams would hit me, then pulling out my big guns and retaliating, knowing that there was very little chance of them being able to fight back. If it's in the game, I'm gonna do it unless there's a more fun option. Let's not get onto a tangent about tanking, though.

Now, the skip tax in itself is supposed to discourage us from skipping everyone. The devs do have some solid logic with "Skipping isn't fun." I mean, hell, sitting there mashing a button until I find a match I feel like playing ISN'T FUN.

However, if I'm going to be penalized for skipping, that means if I get a string of 18-20 point matchups, I'm supposed to take one to make sure I don't waste a bunch of ISO. Yet, if I attack someone for less than 25 points, they're gonna hit me back for more than 25 points, and I'm going to have a net loss of my tournament rank. Here's where my very simple question comes into play:

If I get a string of matches below 25 points, am I supposed to fight one and get a net loss of my tournament rank, to make sure I don't get a net loss of ISO from skipping?

I don't want to be overly critical. I do enjoy this game a good deal. I just want to know what your logic behind this is.

So lemme see if i get this right:

You use cruddy tactics to game the system so you can coast your way to the upper levels, then you turn around and cry when there's no more dirtbag tactics left to use to lock up your precious 1st-3rd place.

Well at least i see why they allowed us to look at the rosters, so we can hopefully avoid players like you. I just hope players like you don't start QQ'ing when if also remove retaliations...

Konman

An ISO tax is certainly going to increase the frequency of retaliations. Especially if you get attacked a lot, and all your queues are filled with retaliation battles. You either retaliate or lose 10 ISO.

What happens if you have no ISO? I've often had a zero balance of ISO. Are you not allowed to skip at all?

They are going to force mw to fight battles I can't win, and then force me to stop playing while my battered team heals. I would think that they would want people on their game as often as possible, enjoying themselves...I guess not though.

Dayv

Konman wrote:

An ISO tax is certainly going to increase the frequency of retaliations. Especially if you get attacked a lot, and all your queues are filled with retaliation battles. You either retaliate or lose 10 ISO.

I believe they said there would be no cost to skip a retaliation. I can't find the post, though.

Unknown

DD-The-Mighty wrote:

Kelbris wrote:

I'd like a simple question answered by the devs about this skip tax. Any one of them.

It's pretty clear that the developers intend for us to play the game in certain ways; maybe saying that they're discouraging that we do certain things may be a better explanation. They don't want spammable abilities? Makes sense, and puts the game at a higher challenge. Cool. No issues there.

Don't want us tanking? Makes sense. It's a disingenuous way to make it seem like you're worse at the game than you really are. Hell, I was a scumbag putting out a tank team so that people with mid-level teams would hit me, then pulling out my big guns and retaliating, knowing that there was very little chance of them being able to fight back. If it's in the game, I'm gonna do it unless there's a more fun option. Let's not get onto a tangent about tanking, though.

Now, the skip tax in itself is supposed to discourage us from skipping everyone. The devs do have some solid logic with "Skipping isn't fun." I mean, hell, sitting there mashing a button until I find a match I feel like playing ISN'T FUN.

However, if I'm going to be penalized for skipping, that means if I get a string of 18-20 point matchups, I'm supposed to take one to make sure I don't waste a bunch of ISO. Yet, if I attack someone for less than 25 points, they're gonna hit me back for more than 25 points, and I'm going to have a net loss of my tournament rank. Here's where my very simple question comes into play:

If I get a string of matches below 25 points, am I supposed to fight one and get a net loss of my tournament rank, to make sure I don't get a net loss of ISO from skipping?

I don't want to be overly critical. I do enjoy this game a good deal. I just want to know what your logic behind this is.

So lemme see if i get this right:

You use cruddy tactics to game the system so you can coast your way to the upper levels, then you turn around and cry when there's no more dirtbag tactics left to use to lock up your precious 1st-3rd place.

Well at least i see why they allowed us to look at the rosters, so we can hopefully avoid players like you. I just hope players like you don't start QQ'ing when if also remove retaliations...

The PvP system is already rigged. Attacking someone with a roster as strong as yours for fewer than 25 points is stupid. All it does is open you up to a net loss, ensuring that you hit a brick wall at around 600 points, or constantly roll shields after quick bursts. You can either try frantically to tread water or you can pay to win, and that's without a skip tax.

Unknown

justaplayer wrote:

Veracity wrote:

WiseG8 wrote:

Glad I'm not the only one wondering how I beat teams with heroes 20 levels above my top one.

Fairly quickly is best, if you want to gain more rating than you lose.

Are you coming from an MMO background? Levels don't mean all that much in this game. You can get high placements even if you're cover-capped to 61 in some cases. Hell, I trundled up to 400 in Best There Is with a level 25 Loki before subbing in something people might take at least slightly seriously. A level 100 *** is about evenly matched with a level 85 ** because of the way the progression curves are set. At level 141 they have a small edge in match damage over you and more generous hit points, but it's nothing insurmountable with handy advantages like knowing what skills do and being able to pass up match-4s as long as the AI doesn't hit an eternal cascade of doom. And that'll end you, like as not, in an even match, so what's the difference?

Levels do mean something depending on the character. Yes with Ragnarok, Capt Zero, The Russian Chick, Grey Suit Black Widow, Spiderman, Thor, Modern Black Widow(if that is the one that Stuns), Magneto(both) and probably a few others I am forgetting levels arent that big of a deal

When you are looking at ones that dish out serious damage it becomes a huge problem as the can 1 shot your team members. Of course these are the ones being played and filling our queues at least mine lol

This is my team. 5/5/2 level 102 spiderman, 5/5/3 level 85 wolverine, 4/3/4 level 76 magneto. I just fought a match with level 141 wolverine xforce, 141 magneto and another 141 character. I was afraid i wasn't going to win but I wanted to try it out anyway. I came out unscathed. Levels don't matter when there's no rhyme or reason to why heroes are made the way they are. I could've beat that team with a level 40 spidey.

Kelbris

DD-The-Mighty wrote:

Kelbris wrote:

I'd like a simple question answered by the devs about this skip tax. Any one of them.

It's pretty clear that the developers intend for us to play the game in certain ways; maybe saying that they're discouraging that we do certain things may be a better explanation. They don't want spammable abilities? Makes sense, and puts the game at a higher challenge. Cool. No issues there.

Don't want us tanking? Makes sense. It's a disingenuous way to make it seem like you're worse at the game than you really are. Hell, I was a scumbag putting out a tank team so that people with mid-level teams would hit me, then pulling out my big guns and retaliating, knowing that there was very little chance of them being able to fight back. If it's in the game, I'm gonna do it unless there's a more fun option. Let's not get onto a tangent about tanking, though.

Now, the skip tax in itself is supposed to discourage us from skipping everyone. The devs do have some solid logic with "Skipping isn't fun." I mean, hell, sitting there mashing a button until I find a match I feel like playing ISN'T FUN.

However, if I'm going to be penalized for skipping, that means if I get a string of 18-20 point matchups, I'm supposed to take one to make sure I don't waste a bunch of ISO. Yet, if I attack someone for less than 25 points, they're gonna hit me back for more than 25 points, and I'm going to have a net loss of my tournament rank. Here's where my very simple question comes into play:

If I get a string of matches below 25 points, am I supposed to fight one and get a net loss of my tournament rank, to make sure I don't get a net loss of ISO from skipping?

I don't want to be overly critical. I do enjoy this game a good deal. I just want to know what your logic behind this is.

So lemme see if i get this right:

You use cruddy tactics to game the system so you can coast your way to the upper levels, then you turn around and cry when there's no more dirtbag tactics left to use to lock up your precious 1st-3rd place.

Well at least i see why they allowed us to look at the rosters, so we can hopefully avoid players like you. I just hope players like you don't start QQ'ing when if also remove retaliations...

I would LOVE IT if they removed retaliations. There was a tournament where they didn't work for a whole day back in November. It was pretty sweet.

Also, my old tactic didn't boost ranking at all. If anything, I'd end up losing about 100 points. However, I used to do that when if the winner gained 25 points, the loser lost somewhere in the ballpark of 12. In that situation, we'd both gain about 10 points. The only real benefit to doing it was when I ran up to 1100 (before the new points system where points gained are very close to points lost), all my matches would be for like, 8 points, so I had nothing to do.

You're using a classic straw man argument. I don't care that tanking is gone. In fast, i pretty much AGREED with the decision, if you took the time to read my post. However, it was the easiest thing for you to attack, so you misrepresented my argument. It was pretty cute.

My post is addressing skip tax vs. the points system. Please try reading it in whole.

DD-The-Mighty

Kelbris wrote:

DD-The-Mighty wrote:

Kelbris wrote:

I'd like a simple question answered by the devs about this skip tax. Any one of them.

It's pretty clear that the developers intend for us to play the game in certain ways; maybe saying that they're discouraging that we do certain things may be a better explanation. They don't want spammable abilities? Makes sense, and puts the game at a higher challenge. Cool. No issues there.

Don't want us tanking? Makes sense. It's a disingenuous way to make it seem like you're worse at the game than you really are. Hell, I was a scumbag putting out a tank team so that people with mid-level teams would hit me, then pulling out my big guns and retaliating, knowing that there was very little chance of them being able to fight back. If it's in the game, I'm gonna do it unless there's a more fun option. Let's not get onto a tangent about tanking, though.

Now, the skip tax in itself is supposed to discourage us from skipping everyone. The devs do have some solid logic with "Skipping isn't fun." I mean, hell, sitting there mashing a button until I find a match I feel like playing ISN'T FUN.

However, if I'm going to be penalized for skipping, that means if I get a string of 18-20 point matchups, I'm supposed to take one to make sure I don't waste a bunch of ISO. Yet, if I attack someone for less than 25 points, they're gonna hit me back for more than 25 points, and I'm going to have a net loss of my tournament rank. Here's where my very simple question comes into play:

If I get a string of matches below 25 points, am I supposed to fight one and get a net loss of my tournament rank, to make sure I don't get a net loss of ISO from skipping?

I don't want to be overly critical. I do enjoy this game a good deal. I just want to know what your logic behind this is.

So lemme see if i get this right:

You use cruddy tactics to game the system so you can coast your way to the upper levels, then you turn around and cry when there's no more dirtbag tactics left to use to lock up your precious 1st-3rd place.

Well at least i see why they allowed us to look at the rosters, so we can hopefully avoid players like you. I just hope players like you don't start QQ'ing when if also remove retaliations...

I would LOVE IT if they removed retaliations. There was a tournament where they didn't work for a whole day back in November. It was pretty sweet.

Also, my old tactic didn't boost ranking at all. If anything, I'd end up losing about 100 points. However, I used to do that when if the winner gained 25 points, the loser lost somewhere in the ballpark of 12. In that situation, we'd both gain about 10 points. The only real benefit to doing it was when I ran up to 1100 (before the new points system where points gained are very close to points lost), all my matches would be for like, 8 points, so I had nothing to do.

You're using a classic straw man argument. I don't care that tanking is gone. In fast, i pretty much AGREED with the decision, if you took the time to read my post. However, it was the easiest thing for you to attack, so you misrepresented my argument. It was pretty cute.

My post is addressing skip tax vs. the points system. Please try reading it in whole.

I don't think you know what strawmanning is.

You're right here admitting you cherry tap lower level players who have "very little chance of them being able to fight back", for whatever stupid reasons. I don't really care how many points you lose or win or whether you agree/disagree with the ability to do so, just noting that stupidity like that happens and you are one of the many that do it. By your own admission no less. There's nothing to twist. You do it and that is the reality. That is ....unless you were lying.

Unknown

A fundamental issue that needs to be fixed is the issue of high lv cover players in the same bracket as low lv players competing for the same high lv rewards.

You're matched against other ppl that are suppose to be similar to you, but the low lv players get the same amount of points, and have a higher chance of winning due to the fact that there's more causal low lv players and less retaliation.

if your avg team is 120+ you know that your playing with more active players and you'll hit a wall sooner due to attacks.

Game needs a tier system of player lv, With better rewards as you get into the higher tiers.