Misleading PvP nodes -- can we fix this please?

Hayek

Let me start by saying that I have a fairly decent roster, where I've had at least 2 of the buffed characters at level 166. Most of my characters are decently covered to the point where I can be competitive in most PvPs. Still, getting all the PvP progression rewards is a hefty investments in shields, to the tune of 1000 . Some of the recent changes make it a greater gamble trying for those top rewards - more health means longer matches, and let's not get into those matchmaking changes.. but I digress.

You can plan for your opponent's health.
You can expect to be hit sometimes while hopping.
What you can't plan around how many points you should expect to get if you win a match.

I'm not sure if this has always been the case, because I'm fairly new to the 800-1100 range PvP, but once you get up to those numbers, the amount of points the nodes show can vary drastically from what you actually get. For example, I was shielded at 972 points in the PvP, with two 30 point nodes queued up. The first node actually gave me 30 points, allowing me to get the reward, but the second gave me 5 -- yes, FIVE -- points. I was hit during the second match for -46 points (thanks new match making). Had I done those fights in the opposite order, instead of 972 + 30, I would have gotten 972 + 5 - 46 + 30, leaving me lower than I started and without a progression reward.

This aspect of the game requires strategy, but it's very difficult to strategize when you are given misleading information. And in this case, this can cost you a lot of and leave you without anything to show for it. This doesn't seem like it would be a difficult thing to fix.. Can't we calculate how much those nodes will give you dynamically when you access the PvP page?

Unknown

The problem here is that despite MPQ appear to be an 'always online' game, it's not. Its architecture is setup to be fairly asynchronous, as you can verify by pulling your connection to the Internet in the middle of a game and you'll notice that the game will still continue to play until you finally win or lose the battle. The MPQ client does not get updated scores from the server which is why the score you see may have nothing to do with reality. Now the easy way to fix this would be to just ask the server for the current score of your opponent whenever you click on the node, but I wonder if doing that will cause the server to explode from traffic since that's the only reason I can see why it's not done this way.

Hayek

Phantron wrote:

The problem here is that despite MPQ appear to be an 'always online' game, it's not. Its architecture is setup to be fairly asynchronous, as you can verify by pulling your connection to the Internet in the middle of a game and you'll notice that the game will still continue to play until you finally win or lose the battle. The MPQ client does not get updated scores from the server which is why the score you see may have nothing to do with reality. Now the easy way to fix this would be to just ask the server for the current score of your opponent whenever you click on the node, but I wonder if doing that will cause the server to explode from traffic since that's the only reason I can see why it's not done this way.

That's not a bad compromise. The game does have to be online in order to start a match. Even if you could display it in the last possible screen before the match starts -> boosts and team ups, it would still be something. But we ping the server every time we hit the "skip" button and the servers can handle that just fine. If they had a "refresh" button on the PvP page that could refresh the node values, that shouldn't be any more expensive server traffic-wise than the skip.

Vhailorx

I think your idea would be a bandwidth and battery hog phantron. But there should be a way to search the leaderboards for players, so the more dedicated PvP players can check their targets scores manually at the cost of some mobile data traffic. Right now you can only do this if you target someone in the top ten of your bracket (or the top then alliances).

Unknown

I think a better way to handle this would just be to implement what many of us have been asking for ages: just make it so that whatever score is displayed on screen at the time you enter is the score you get when you win the match. Sure it'll mean that some extra points may appear out of nowhere, and other times you may get fewer points than otherwise if the opponent gained points by completing another match before you beat them, but it would make planning a lot easier.

And award progression rewards based off your prematch state, rather than your post-match state, so if you get hit several times it doesn't prevent you from getting progression at least.

Of course the best way is to do away with point loss entirely and shift all cover rewards to progression rewards so players can truly play on their own time, which would be the proper way to fix this. Ranking rewards could just be extra ISO and HP.

Unknown

theHappyDance wrote:

I think a better way to handle this would just be to implement what many of us have been asking for ages: just make it so that whatever score is displayed on screen at the time you enter is the score you get when you win the match. Sure it'll mean that some extra points may appear out of nowhere, and other times you may get fewer points than otherwise if the opponent gained points by completing another match before you beat them, but it would make planning a lot easier.

And award progression rewards based off your prematch state, rather than your post-match state, so if you get hit several times it doesn't prevent you from getting progression at least.

Of course the best way is to do away with point loss entirely and shift all cover rewards to progression rewards so players can truly play on their own time, which would be the proper way to fix this. Ranking rewards could just be extra ISO and HP.

I prefer Hayeks refresh button. I sometimes line up players a day in advance who I know will be one of the top rankers, this is often the only way to guarantee end game points when everyone is shielded.

ballingbees

I have met the exact situation many times myself. Usually I try to queue guys in my bracket, so that it is clear where they stand, and check if they are shielded. If I meet those outside my bracket, usually I try to queue up guys from the top alliances. That way, before I actually hit the node, I can go to the top alliances score page and check out their scores to make sure they are indeed still ranking high.

Unknown

You don't want to overload the Commodore 64 they have set up as a server.



...no, wait, they probably had to upgrade that during Ultron - maybe 2 Commodore 64's and a Spectrum.

evil panda

Not that I disagree with you guys, but this is one of the easier MPQ problems that players can solve themselves

Ebolamonkey84

While it would be nice for the nodes to be accurate, it definitely has become part of the strategy for people. I love climbing up to about 700-800 the night before a PVP ends, dumping points to alliance members, and then getting the retals that are worth a ton of points from people who thought I was worth more to them.

JamieMadrox

theHappyDance wrote:

I think a better way to handle this would just be to implement what many of us have been asking for ages: just make it so that whatever score is displayed on screen at the time you enter is the score you get when you win the match.

Way too easy to abuse. Me and a partner climb to a predetermined amount of points. He starts boosting me by retreating. He queues me for big points. I start boosting him by retreating. He hits me for big points. I queue him. He retreats to me. I hit him for big points. Etc.

theHappyDance wrote:

Of course the best way is to do away with point loss entirely and shift all cover rewards to progression rewards so players can truly play on their own time, which would be the proper way to fix this. Ranking rewards could just be extra ISO and HP.

This would also eliminate shields and shield hopping, but would mean that people would be able to post MASSIVE scores each event.

Bowgentle

Jamie Madrox wrote:

theHappyDance wrote:

Of course the best way is to do away with point loss entirely and shift all cover rewards to progression rewards so players can truly play on their own time, which would be the proper way to fix this. Ranking rewards could just be extra ISO and HP.

This would also eliminate shields and shield hopping, but would mean that people would be able to post MASSIVE scores each event.

Which wouldn't be a problem - but it means that the 4* cover would go back to 2400.
Good luck hitting that.

acescracked

Wondering why OP didn't write this up as.."I queued a player for later when my shield is set to expire. Game showed node as being worth 20 points. But instead gave me 45 points -- yes FORTY-FIVE points. I was hit during the match but got a defensive win of +10"...you want the node to give 20 points and not the 45, right?

Nobody would write up a thread complaining about good fortune and wanting the system changed. So please, whomever is in charge of considering any change please disregard this thread. I like queuing up nodes knowing they are going to be worth more when my shield expires.

p.s. as Ebolamonkey wrote, I also love hitting 1k+, tanking way down and watching hits come in for -10 and retaliating for +30...so evil. LOL

Unknown

Just fought a non-queued match within the last 5 or so minutes (the next one that popped up).

Match showed 30 points, fought, finished, was awarded 14 with a minute to go. Ultimately lost T25 by FOUR points. I... can't... even...

Oh MPQ, how you make enjoying the time I spend with you difficult...

DBC

fmftint

Drummerboycroy wrote:

Just fought a non-queued match within the last 5 or so minutes (the next one that popped up).

Match showed 30 points, fought, finished, was awarded 14 with a minute to go. Ultimately lost T25 by FOUR points. I... can't... even...

Oh MPQ, how you make enjoying the time I spend with you difficult...

DBC

Simple, you weren't the only one that hit that player, but you were one of the slowest

Unknown

fmftint wrote:

Simple, you weren't the only one that hit that player, but you were one of the slowest

Oh, well that makes it seem totally reasonable.

DBC

Unknown

Jamie Madrox wrote:

theHappyDance wrote:

Of course the best way is to do away with point loss entirely and shift all cover rewards to progression rewards so players can truly play on their own time, which would be the proper way to fix this. Ranking rewards could just be extra ISO and HP.

This would also eliminate shields and shield hopping, but would mean that people would be able to post MASSIVE scores each event.

Not exactly. I made a previous post regarding my more detailed thoughts on how this could be implemented, and massive scores wouldn't be possible in that system. Players could still grind for top placement once they reached progression, but their score gains would fall off pretty sharply since it would be based on enemy level vs their own score (so higher their score, less gain from enemies of any given level, so scores would be fairly predictable since theres a maximum level of enemies they'd face). There would be the issue that it'd mean whoever grinded the most would win the bracket, but that's less an issue in my mind than all the issues associated with the current system.

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=29639&p=358506#p358506

Unknown

theHappyDance wrote:

Not exactly. I made a previous post regarding my more detailed thoughts on how this could be implemented, and massive scores wouldn't be possible in that system. Players could still grind for top placement once they reached progression, but their score gains would fall off pretty sharply since it would be based on enemy level vs their own score (so higher their score, less gain from enemies of any given level, so scores would be fairly predictable since theres a maximum level of enemies they'd face). There would be the issue that it'd mean whoever grinded the most would win the bracket, but that's less an issue in my mind than all the issues associated with the current system.

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=29639&p=358506#p358506

I thought we also made counterpoints about throwing up 270 IW + Elektra, and how it discourages people from leveling their characters to max, since if they can win with say level 140's cover maxed, they'll get more points. That might have been a different thread though.

With the original problem: fixing this problem leads to the problem of excess data transfer and battery usage. This has been discussed before and the issue of excess data use is a bigger problem than having exactly accurate PVP points. Further, it's a pain to have to be connected at all times, particularly if your device or carrier doesn't have the greatest reception.

Unknown

daibar wrote:

theHappyDance wrote:

Not exactly. I made a previous post regarding my more detailed thoughts on how this could be implemented, and massive scores wouldn't be possible in that system. Players could still grind for top placement once they reached progression, but their score gains would fall off pretty sharply since it would be based on enemy level vs their own score (so higher their score, less gain from enemies of any given level, so scores would be fairly predictable since theres a maximum level of enemies they'd face). There would be the issue that it'd mean whoever grinded the most would win the bracket, but that's less an issue in my mind than all the issues associated with the current system.

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=29639&p=358506#p358506

I thought we also made counterpoints about throwing up 270 IW + Elektra, and how it discourages people from leveling their characters to max, since if they can win with say level 140's cover maxed, they'll get more points. That might have been a different thread though.

With the original problem: fixing this problem leads to the problem of excess data transfer and battery usage. This has been discussed before and the issue of excess data use is a bigger problem than having exactly accurate PVP points. Further, it's a pain to have to be connected at all times, particularly if your device or carrier doesn't have the greatest reception.

This not a valid point. Please reread what I wrote it in its entirety.

You'd see enemies of differing level based on your point score, which would be tied to progression, and would have no relation to their score whatsoever. It doesn't matter what team you field against them. You'd get the same amount of points no matter what. But you'd be encouraged to start using your better teams as you progressed because enemy teams would transition to be higher level as you did so, and sic would be quicker work with higher tier characters once you reached that stage. Your reasons for fielding 270's would be that they'd become necessary if you wanted to grab the 4* cover since you'd be facing 4*'s at that level no matter what. And once you'd cleared progression rewards, you'd be facing basically all 4*'s to compete for top placement (extra HP / ISO rather than cover rewards).

Buret0

Phantron wrote:

The problem here is that despite MPQ appear to be an 'always online' game, it's not. Its architecture is setup to be fairly asynchronous, as you can verify by pulling your connection to the Internet in the middle of a game and you'll notice that the game will still continue to play until you finally win or lose the battle. The MPQ client does not get updated scores from the server which is why the score you see may have nothing to do with reality. Now the easy way to fix this would be to just ask the server for the current score of your opponent whenever you click on the node, but I wonder if doing that will cause the server to explode from traffic since that's the only reason I can see why it's not done this way.

Devs: "Now you can press a button to refresh the score for each node. This feature costs 25 HP per use."

Buret0

Vhailorx wrote:

I think your idea would be a bandwidth and battery hog phantron. But there should be a way to search the leaderboards for players, so the more dedicated PvP players can check their targets scores manually at the cost of some mobile data traffic. Right now you can only do this if you target someone in the top ten of your bracket (or the top then alliances).

Do you really think that a search function is going to be less server traffic than a score refresh?