PvP and Rank 1

JamieMadrox

Ruinate wrote:

I had to ask Villains to pass first to me, though. If I was legit competing against Villains and rest of NJL, I would never get first lol.

That's why I said "could have" in my last response. If I don't have a real use for the first place cover then I'll let someone that needs it have it if I can still keep t5.

Jarvind

I got first once way back in the day on Krakadoom in a noob bracket, with a score of like 800. I remember thinking "wow this game is really easy" because I didn't know what a noob bracket was yet.

Ignorance is bliss.

rkd80

aesthetocyst wrote:

Until recently, a certain slice was a graveyard, and I was grinding out 1st place finishes on demand.

Cupcake meta spread to that slice, and that was the end of that. Easier points, harder placement.

Now I just punch the clock with 1k points and move on. Keeping it F2P for a while.

Indeed, a certain shard was once heaven for 1st place finishes. Although I would argue it is not the CC meta that did it, as that was happening for a while - but it was the infusion of certain alliances that transformed this once quiet slice into utter mayhem. It is now somewhat easier to get guaranteed 1300, but score inflation is through the roof. Over the past several events, finishing above 1650 was required for most of the brackets in that slice just to get top 10. First place was over 2,200 points across the board. Pretty sad.

The problem is championing. Top 5 placement is now extremely important due to the ISO and the covers, furthermore the elites did not much care for a duplicate 4* - but now they do. This was an expected consequence of the championing feature.

The virus like spread of 5* also guarantees dominance and further boosts scores.

drcassino

I don't even worry about placement rewards: I get 1300 and change every event, and that normally gets me top 25, and often top 10. There's no way I'm going to spend the hp on shields to keep hopping to 2K in order to get into the top 5. It just isn't worth it.

mikeylu

I can only speak with regards to my own experiences:

ive done it probably around 5 times in past 3 seasons

you do not need a maxed 5 star (i dont have one)

you do need to be in a top alliance which are "friendly" with other top alliances preferable t10-25, so you dont get sniped to helldom
you do need to spend HP like its nothing
you do need to be on LINE to watch for valuable Qs (kind of goes in hand with the alliance)
you do need to be competitive, i dont know of any f2p players at the top, just the way the game is set up.


It is usually the same people that win top1, and usually we coordinate who needs or wants t1 placement rewards, most of the top tier players are fine with top5 for the iso/CP, although with the advent of championing who wants/or needs gets a bit more complicated.

Offseason is a different animal where most people will shield out at 1300, so higher to get the 2K+scores

hope this helps.

Linkster79

mikeylu wrote:

It is usually the same people that win top1, and usually we coordinate who needs or wants t1 placement rewards, most of the top tier players are fine with top5 for the iso/CP, although with the advent of championing who wants/or needs gets a bit more complicated.

This right here. In any competitive sport in the world this is what is known as match fixing and would lead to several bans. Yes I know this is a vastly different environment to say football (or soccer if you prefer) but the principles are the same.

May we please stop referring to these events as player vs player when clearly nowadays it isn't.

jimstarooney

Linkster79 wrote:

mikeylu wrote:

It is usually the same people that win top1, and usually we coordinate who needs or wants t1 placement rewards, most of the top tier players are fine with top5 for the iso/CP, although with the advent of championing who wants/or needs gets a bit more complicated.

This right here. In any competitive sport in the world this is what is known as match fixing and would lead to several bans. Yes I know this is a vastly different environment to say football (or soccer if you prefer) but the principles are the same.

May we please stop referring to these events as player vs player when clearly nowadays it isn't.

Its always been like that,co-ordination isnt new.

Ruinate

Linkster79 wrote:

May we please stop referring to these events as player vs player when clearly nowadays it isn't.

Does it really matter what we call it? It's not even live pvp. We play against AI ffs.

mikeylu

Linkster79 wrote:

mikeylu wrote:

It is usually the same people that win top1, and usually we coordinate who needs or wants t1 placement rewards, most of the top tier players are fine with top5 for the iso/CP, although with the advent of championing who wants/or needs gets a bit more complicated.

This right here. In any competitive sport in the world this is what is known as match fixing and would lead to several bans. Yes I know this is a vastly different environment to say football (or soccer if you prefer) but the principles are the same.

May we please stop referring to these events as player vs player when clearly nowadays it isn't.

Well the top players, NOONE can beat, they are gracious to let us get t1 placement to get that 4 star cover they already have maxed. This is like pro sports except in this game if you have the $$$ you can buy your all star team that noone else can beat.

PVP is a competition, if you arent competitive you will not stand a chance, thats the way it was designed.

Sandwichboy

Been a very long time since I managed to get a top spot even in the off season, but during? Maybe a year? Just for reference, the army of one slice I was in had the top spot held at 3900pts and everyone else in the top ten was above 3200. Now, you want a competitive game, fine. But with the way things are now we could really use an update to the pvp placement rewards like the recent pve one so the rewards aren't all going to the same 1%.

Dauthi

jimstarooney wrote:

Linkster79 wrote:

mikeylu wrote:

It is usually the same people that win top1, and usually we coordinate who needs or wants t1 placement rewards, most of the top tier players are fine with top5 for the iso/CP, although with the advent of championing who wants/or needs gets a bit more complicated.

This right here. In any competitive sport in the world this is what is known as match fixing and would lead to several bans. Yes I know this is a vastly different environment to say football (or soccer if you prefer) but the principles are the same.

May we please stop referring to these events as player vs player when clearly nowadays it isn't.

Its always been like that,co-ordination isnt new.

Not true. Before shields is the last time I hit 1st, and I used to do it all the time. Granted it was a little random, but if you were there when it ended and pushed hard, you at least had a chance. The most coordination you could do without shields is promise not to hit each other. Now you have to know the right people.

I think Linkster's point stands regardless of how long this charade has been going on.

ntmad8tr

3 times last season. Have been in the top 5 for all this season except 1.

Dauthi

aesthetocyst wrote:

Dauthi wrote:

I think Linkster's point stands regardless of how long this charade has been going on.

It's demolition derby, or (gods help us) a season of Survivor or Big Brother.

Do contestants in a demolition derby cooperate to win against the others? It wouldn't be very fun to play or watch if that is the case. I think you might be right with the latter.

Pre-shields definitely felt like a demolition derby, whether that is good or bad I can't say. You smashed into the handful of other players that were playing in the last 20 minutes randomly, and hoped you were left standing at the end.

Dauthi

aesthetocyst wrote:

Dauthi wrote:

aesthetocyst wrote:

Dauthi wrote:

I think Linkster's point stands regardless of how long this charade has been going on.

It's demolition derby, or (gods help us) a season of Survivor or Big Brother.

Do contestants in a demolition derby cooperate to win against the others?

Yes.

Oops, I think the analogy is still incorrect. In a destruction derby is there one group who teams up on all other contestants who are not allied with anyone, and when they win they forfeit to let the person who needs the win among their allies the most, have it? Lets also throw in that something like 99.9% of those contestants who are not allied with anyone don't know that this is happening.

As far as I can tell that is the current way MPQ PVP works.

Daiches

Linkster79 wrote:

May we please stop referring to these events as player vs player when clearly nowadays it isn't.

Once you realize PVE is PVP and PVP is Co-op, the world is your oyster.