Pvp points

Unknown

This game still needs serious work. There's no reason a player should be stuck at 1100+ points and getting 4 point matches...

acescracked

What are your suggested changes?

At what point threshold should the player be presented with only 4 point matches if not 1100? 4 point matches acceptable at 1300, 1800, 2500, 4500, 8000?

Looking forward to your PvP design changes.

Unknown

acescracked wrote:

What are your suggested changes?

At what point threshold should the player be presented with only 4 point matches if not 1100? 4 point matches acceptable at 1300, 1800, 2500, 4500, 8000?

Looking forward to your PvP design changes.

Players should never be presented with 4 point matches. There should be a minimum point match at every level.

simonsez

acescracked wrote:

At what point threshold should the player be presented with only 4 point matches if not 1100?

Preferably never. You'll never take that battle, so why make the skip tax mandatory? But if you insist on setting a level, I'd say at any point after all the progressions are cleared. I'm tired of progression success being contingent on bracket-shopping.

Unknown

I could see a 20 minimum as acceptable. It's almost 1/4 of the maximum but it means you are trying to Q at the wrong time, so if by necessity 20 is better than 4.

Also make free to skip those 20p matches.

TxMoose

ShionSinX wrote:

Also make free to skip those 20p matches.

I doubt they would do that but free skipping single digit matches would make a lot of sense, just as a minimum.

OnesOwnGrief

Deadp wrote:

acescracked wrote:

What are your suggested changes?

At what point threshold should the player be presented with only 4 point matches if not 1100? 4 point matches acceptable at 1300, 1800, 2500, 4500, 8000?

Looking forward to your PvP design changes.

Players should never be presented with 4 point matches. There should be a minimum point match at every level.

So what you're saying is that you want a free handout or to be able to attack shielded players?

simonsez

OnesOwnGrief wrote:

So what you're saying is that you want a free handout or to be able to attack shielded players?

I'd rather get a message saying "Sorry, no targets currently available", than have to pay 20 iso to keep clearing single-digit targets.

simonsez

aesthetocyst wrote:

I don't think that will satisfy the complaints.

People will always find reasons to complain. But making us skip past battles that 99.9% of the time (your altruistic hits factored in there) we'd never take, is making us waste ISO that could be put to much better use. I don't think this is controversial.

TxMoose

aesthetocyst wrote:

Hey, c'mon now, it's only 10. No need to double up

if we ever get a 'double iso' event, i sure hope skips and boosts don't double as well, I'd probably go iso negative still.

simonsez

aesthetocyst wrote:

Hey, c'mon now, it's only 10. No need to double up

I was factoring in the cost of living adjustment

Unknown

OnesOwnGrief wrote:

Deadp wrote:

acescracked wrote:

What are your suggested changes?

At what point threshold should the player be presented with only 4 point matches if not 1100? 4 point matches acceptable at 1300, 1800, 2500, 4500, 8000?

Looking forward to your PvP design changes.

Players should never be presented with 4 point matches. There should be a minimum point match at every level.

So what you're saying is that you want a free handout or to be able to attack shielded players?

No. Try reading the words written instead of imposing your attempt at snide condescension on plain language.

The point system is broken. Players shouldn't get 4 point matches.

Nellobee

I wish the devs would realize that this is yet another byproduct of the stupid meta-game. If people were forced to spend significant time unshielded, you would be able to find more in the queue.

TxMoose

Nellobee wrote:

I wish the devs would realize that this is yet another byproduct of the stupid meta-game. If people were forced to spend significant time unshielded, you would be able to find more in the queue.

and a lot less points in the system...

Unknown

Disallow skips.

Charge HP for skips instead.

Up the charge for shields.

Dunno

Unknown

Deadp wrote:

No. Try reading the words written instead of imposing your attempt at snide condescension on plain language.

The point system is broken. Players shouldn't get 4 point matches.

This is a problem I've been trying to point out for a while, but there is no fix that would be best for all at the moment.

In the meantime, if you want to bypass this roadblock, you could follow the other players who communicate outside of the game, they will let you know when they remove shields, so you can queue them.

Personally, I would never join them, they really need to fix this soon.

fmftint

Splarne wrote:

Disallow skips.

Charge HP for skips instead.

Up the charge for shields.

Dunno

Worst ideas I've ever read

simonsez

Splarne wrote:

Disallow skips.

Charge HP for skips instead.

Up the charge for shields.

Dunno

Not too sure about the first 3, but I totally agree with your last comment...

Nellobee

aesthetocyst wrote:

Nellobee wrote:

I wish the devs would realize that this is yet another byproduct of the stupid meta-game. If people were forced to spend significant time unshielded, you would be able to find more in the queue.

You'd find more players alright ... but you wouldn't find more points! Seriously if you kill shieldhopping, you're simply magnifying the OP's complaint. Everyone would either shield to the end in frustration, or grind in circles around their equilibrium point to the end, like the bad old days before shields.

The current meta-game is a design trap the developers have fallen into. Fix the stupid shield-hopping, and there are other ways to solve the remaining issues. Everyone just plays at the end? Make matches at the end of the event worth less, and early matches worth more. Overall scores are lower? Lower the progression requirements.

CrookedKnight

Deadp wrote:

The point system is broken. Players shouldn't get 4 point matches.

But then what do you do when nobody unshielded is worth more than 4 points?

Unknown

CrookedKnight wrote:

Deadp wrote:

The point system is broken. Players shouldn't get 4 point matches.

But then what do you do when nobody unshielded is worth more than 4 points?

That shouldn't happen. There should be a minimum amount of points per match that encourages gameplay.