Changes To Scoring In Versus Events

aesthetocyst · May 2015

simonsez wrote:

TheOncomingStorm wrote:

Except they might be trying to gather the impact of each change separately.

There's no possible impact that reducing the points gained via def wins could have, other than to reduce scoring. This is nothing that needs to be tested. Yeah, great it's not a season event, but plenty of people want the PX at 1k. If it were a IW cover, it'd be easier not to care about the half-assed scoring modification in this event.

Reducing the def pts, w/o also increasing the offensive pts, cost me another shield to reach 1K (got it into my head that I just HAD to have that yellow Fury). Actually, maybe 2 shields, as I kept landing within 20pts of 1K on subsequent hops, only to get sniped back again and again during the (should have been the) "last" fight for 1K.

Just before this, I had 2 defwins for 13pts. Which the day before would have been 39. So instead of taking 3 attempts to make 1K from 900, the first would have been sufficient.

But, you know, small sacrifices made to realize the greater glory of MPQ.

TheOncomingStorm · May 2015

fmftint wrote:

ArkPrime wrote:

djsquillz wrote:

ArkPrime wrote:

It's also funny that this "loophole" has been used and talked about publicly for months and they decided it was an emergency now. We call it "boosting" and it's been around longer than I've played the game.

I'd say that over the past season and a half, i noticed more and more and more and more people doing it. I honestly think what happened is that too many crews started using this method too frequently for D3 to ignore it any longer.

marc

Maybe more people with average scores were doing it, but entire seasons were dominated by people who did nothing but this.

it really accelerated last off season when they posted the point loss formula, that one line was basically a tutorial on how to manufacture points.

and I think they are only calling it a loophole to avoid a mass sandbox event. loopholes don't get you banned, exploits will

Sadly, after providing the formula and getting these results, I'm pretty sure they'll never do that again. Also, think any hope we ever had of them explaining scaling better is out the window as well.

TheOncomingStorm · May 2015

Chrono_Tata wrote:

So, from what I understand, the increase in point loss from a defensive loss has been increased, while point gains from fights remain the same until the next season? I know is that I'm gonna be pretty pissed if this causes me to lose out on the Prof X cover on the Nefarious Foes PvP.

I'm sitting here shielded at 800 points (thankfully not pushing to 1k since I already maxed Fury), and 2 guys with 300 points have hit me, which would have caused me to lose 70+ points if i weren't shielded. How do these guys even see me, and is it really reasonable to expect people to hit 1k legitly with this kind of nonsense?

I think this is the real problem that needs attention that they are seemingly ignoring. Players should not be able queue other players 300+ points away from them when there are other viable targets closer to their points range.

This feels more like a loophole. If they are serious about making pvp more fair, I don't see how they can have a genuine discussion on the matter that does not include this issue. If this issue is not included, then it's not about fairness, it is really about how mpq wants pvp to play out each event.

Buret0 · May 2015

tanis3303 wrote:

Maybe the Dev Team (and the players too!) should be asking a different question - Why do we feel the need to "game the system"?

Because MPQ is super serious business?

udonomefoo · May 2015

Buret0 wrote:

tanis3303 wrote:

Maybe the Dev Team (and the players too!) should be asking a different question - Why do we feel the need to "game the system"?

Because MPQ is super serious business?

vudu3 · May 2015

Ben Grimm wrote:

How to fix PVP:

Eliminate losing points entirely. Even offensively. If you win offensively, you gain points, if you lose, you get zero. Defense doesn't really matter.

2.5 day grindfest aside, this would create a new loophole to abuse. All one has to do is save a seed team and then climb as high as possible. Then beat the seed team with a level 15 Bagman, etc. and it's free points for everyone else.

simonsez · May 2015

Wonko33 wrote:

Take an Ethics one

Nobody used cheat codes or employed any hacks. They're just playing the game the devs designed in the most mutually-beneficial way possible. So get off your pedestal, it's making you light-headed.

BlackIC · May 2015

Hi Devs,

It seems that the community is hitting on some commonly suggested changes. May we get a comment either way pertaining to the attached suggestions?

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=29382

aesthetocyst · May 2015

TheOncomingStorm wrote:

Players should not be able queue other players 300+ points away from them when there are other viable targets closer to their points range.

Or be able to q the same target repeatedly ... or be stuck with the same 6 targets, practically forcing them to hit the same guy again even if they don't want to.

I finished Divine Champions last night and shielded out. Sitting here watching the same handful of players bounce me repeatedly. good for them getting their points ... but shielded players aren't supposed to be q'd...right? Broken q's undermines that protection. God forbid I should stick a toe out for some reason

Pylgrim · May 2015

tanis3303 wrote:

jackstar0 wrote:

So people gaming the system are mad?

Don't you worry. You'll find another way. You always do.

Maybe the Dev Team (and the players too!) should be asking a different question - Why do we feel the need to "game the system"?

I'm guilty of a few retreat boosts to hit the 1K ladder lately, and its for one simple reason: PvP isn't enjoyable. Period. I want the 1K covers simply to provide a sense of getting somewhere, and 1K is the "easiest" way to get there. But picking the wrong, non-Crews time slice, having a bad hop (wipes, snipes etc) or just not having the kind of time to schedule perfect hops will all prevent you from getting there, because the system, quite frankly, sucks. So yea, I'll take any advantage I can get in order to actually feel like I'm getting something for my time/effort in this game. Boosting myself and a few others to the 1K progression reward with a 99% success rate was a whole heck of a lot more rewarding than slogging thru 2.5 days of 240/240/290 teams for a slim chance that you might, maybe, achieve your goal, if everything goes perfectly.

Stop applying band-aids. A lot of players that have been here for a lot of months saw this as a better way to play the game than ACTUALLY PLAYING THE GAME. If that doesn't tell you that something more far reaching than tweaking a few dials needs to happen to the PvP format, then I don't know what to tell you...

You must be kidding yourself if you are stating that in a theoretically perfectly fair game players wouldn't game the system to place on top of the players playing the game correctly, and do so with less effort.

I think this is the reason why I and many others are happy with this change, as we play "honestly" climbing little by little, shielding, planning ahead and overall making sure that we are still having fun. Sometimes that gets us 1k, sometimes 800, sometimes somewhat less. And that's fine, it's just a game. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, but either way, with whatever rewards you get, you advance a little. People who game the system either because they feel the need to place atop of everybody else every time, or because they actually hate playing the game, but want the rewards and the status with as little of it as possible, will very understandably hate this change. (Not saying that everybody that hates this change falls in that category, though.)

Seriously, what would you recommend to make players that dislike playing the game start liking it? If matching three gems of the same colour over and over bore some people, wouldn't be better for them to look for another game instead of trying to find ways to do as little of that as possible while still winning?

elvy75 · May 2015

While i do agree that retreat boosting needed to be taken care of, this is not the best way to do it. It surely will make climbing faster as you can make lots of points faster, but it will also make it more risky. In order for this system to work its needs few things to happen:

1. player can be hit no more than 2 times in the certain time frame - 10 minutes or so - this is to prevent massive hits on certain player. For example lets have 2 players in the same bracket at positions 1 and 2:

player 1 - 988 points
player 2 - 978 points

both players have no shield left, but player 2 is using out coordinated alliance chat. Both players want 1k reward and #1 place, so they break at the end of PVP, but player 2 asks his teammates to snip player 1, which in the end brings player 2 at first place, with progression reward in his pocket as well, while player 1 has nothing!

2. it needs to be tweaked who can see the player - right now you can see pretty much anyone regardless of points within your MMR range. For example lets have 3 players:

player 1 - 200 points
player 2 - 800 points
player 3 - 800 points

if player 1 hits player 2, while player 2 hits player 3, we will have following situation:
player 1 gaining 75 points (or 50 depending where they decide to cap it)
player 2 gaining 38 points and losing 60 points - netting in -22
player 3 losing 19 points

If those 2 things are not fixed this system is going to be highly unfair and will create bunch of late comers, as personally id prefer to win 50+ than to wonder whether id come out negative.

Wonko33 · May 2015

simonsez wrote:

Wonko33 wrote:

Take an Ethics one

Nobody used cheat codes or employed any hacks. They're just playing the game the devs designed in the most mutually-beneficial way possible. So get off your pedestal, it's making you light-headed.

Don't be so sad, I'm sure you and your friends will find a new way to "game theory" yourself to the top.

TheOncomingStorm · May 2015

elvy75 wrote:

While i do agree that retreat boosting needed to be taken care of, this is not the best way to do it. It surely will make climbing faster as you can make lots of points faster, but it will also make it more risky. In order for this system to work its needs few things to happen:

1. player can be hit no more than 2 times in the certain time frame - 10 minutes or so - this is to prevent massive hits on certain player. For example lets have 2 players in the same bracket at positions 1 and 2:

player 1 - 988 points
player 2 - 978 points

both players have no shield left, but player 2 is using out coordinated alliance chat. Both players want 1k reward and #1 place, so they break at the end of PVP, but player 2 asks his teammates to snip player 1, which in the end brings player 2 at first place, with progression reward in his pocket as well, while player 1 has nothing!

2. it needs to be tweaked who can see the player - right now you can see pretty much anyone regardless of points within your MMR range. For example lets have 3 players:

player 1 - 200 points
player 2 - 800 points
player 3 - 800 points

if player 1 hits player 2, while player 2 hits player 3, we will have following situation:
player 1 gaining 75 points (or 50 depending where they decide to cap it)
player 2 gaining 38 points and losing 60 points - netting in -22
player 3 losing 19 points

If those 2 things are not fixed this system is going to be highly unfair and will create bunch of late comers, as personally id prefer to win 50+ than to wonder whether id come out negative.

To build on your point in the last scenario, it is very frustrating that the player at 200 can see both at 800, but the two at 800 cannot see each other.

TheOncomingStorm · May 2015

Wonko33 wrote:

simonsez wrote:

Wonko33 wrote:

Take an Ethics one

Nobody used cheat codes or employed any hacks. They're just playing the game the devs designed in the most mutually-beneficial way possible. So get off your pedestal, it's making you light-headed.

Don't be so sad, I'm sure you and your friends will find a new way to "game theory" yourself to the top.

Could you to please stop this line of discussion? I'm not sure where it is going, but if you want to have a discussion of what constitutes cheating vs smart gameplay, please feel free to start your own thread so that topic can have a real discussion instead of getting lost in this thread.

Unknown · May 2015

While we're discussing match-making tweaks, how about another item that has been often thrown out as a solution to the out-of-game coordination...why do we need to see the name or roster of the person we are attacking before we commit? Make it blind, and a lot of the top-top-tier 'problem cases' go away.

simonsez · May 2015

Pylgrim wrote:

Seriously, what would you recommend to make players that dislike playing the game start liking it?

They could start by undoing 80% of the changes that have been made in the past few months.

You jump to the dev's defense in just about every thread where people are voicing gameplay complaints, and yet you act befuddled as to why people are disgruntled. Maybe next time, before mounting your white horse, take a moment to read and absorb the comments that you're arguing with.

Unknown · May 2015

platypusavenger wrote:

While we're discussing match-making tweaks, how about another item that has been often thrown out as a solution to the out-of-game coordination...why do we need to see the name or roster of the person we are attacking before we commit? Make it blind, and a lot of the top-top-tier 'problem cases' go away.

It's more of a psychological thing. With names, it feels more personal and less of a slog. If you fight 6 nameless XThor teams in a row, it starts to feel monotonous. However, if I'm hitting say 'platypusavenger', then it adds an additional emotional level to the game, especially if that player has hit me earlier in the round.

Unknown · May 2015

fmftint wrote:

ArkPrime wrote:

djsquillz wrote:

ArkPrime wrote:

It's also funny that this "loophole" has been used and talked about publicly for months and they decided it was an emergency now. We call it "boosting" and it's been around longer than I've played the game.

I'd say that over the past season and a half, i noticed more and more and more and more people doing it. I honestly think what happened is that too many crews started using this method too frequently for D3 to ignore it any longer.

marc

Maybe more people with average scores were doing it, but entire seasons were dominated by people who did nothing but this.

it really accelerated last off season when they posted the point loss formula, that one line was basically a tutorial on how to manufacture points.

and I think they are only calling it a loophole to avoid a mass sandbox event. loopholes don't get you banned, exploits will

Using normal in game mechanisms to play event is not an exploit. And exploit would be something like discovering that if you closed the app right after getting in to a fight made you win automatically or that if you clicked very fast in several pve nodes it increased the amount of points available.

This is as much an exploit as memorizing decklists in Magic, for instance. The game allows you to do something that gets you to your objective faster than people doing some other thing.

aesthetocyst · May 2015

daibar wrote:

platypusavenger wrote:

While we're discussing match-making tweaks, how about another item that has been often thrown out as a solution to the out-of-game coordination...why do we need to see the name or roster of the person we are attacking before we commit? Make it blind, and a lot of the top-top-tier 'problem cases' go away.

It's more of a psychological thing. With names, it feels more personal and less of a slog. If you fight 6 nameless XThor teams in a row, it starts to feel monotonous. However, if I'm hitting say 'platypusavenger', then it adds an additional emotional level to the game, especially if that player has hit me earlier in the round.

Absolutely, promoting rivalries engenders emotional play. Emotional play, acting on adrenaline / anger, is more expensive than playing the numbers. Cha-ching!

Notice how they call is "retaliation". And label covers won with the target they were won off of.

Not subtle, not accidental!

Unknown · May 2015

Wonko33 wrote:

ArkPrime wrote:

Let me just say this because it seems like a lot of people talking here don't know.

You know how all these alliances coordinate our hops? We talk via apps outside of the game. When we're not hopping, we're talking about, amongst other things, our brackets, people in this forum and life in general. But when we talk about brackets, we show a lot of screenshots, and since we're usually top 25, we see a lot of the same names around.

So believe me when I say this. We know which of you show up in higher brackets and have any idea at all of what you're talking about when you're talking about high level pvp. If we've never seen you there, you don't play pvp at a high enough level to be able to discuss it with any degree of authority. You're guessing and extrapolating from what you heard.

What happens in pvp until the 600 point mark basically doesn't matter. You can use lazy daken patch every pvp and score 600. There are no changes outside of nerfs to those characters that have any impact on your game play. Talking about sniping and hopping to 1k when none of us have ever seen you there makes you look like a clown.

I didn't know you had to have the same name in forum than in game... good to know. And I will not let you take unwarranted shots at clowns, shame on you

You don't, but people know who you are in the forums if you're around enough. The high level pvp community is not that big.

Changes To Scoring In Versus Events

Comments

Categories