The problem with PVP is the shields.

kobu

Fightmastermpq wrote:

While this happens, it's really NOT the primary purpose of cupcakes, nor why they evolved. I talked about it here, but the TL;DR is that cupcakes are a product of the necessity for speed.

Speed in accumulating points from soft targets using what's essentially an invulnerability exploit. The entire system is borked to a point where several classic PvP exploits have been combined into a cottage industry and few people bat an eye at it.

Frank NewCastle

If we had no shields or baking then a 3* roster would get eaten alive before it got to 800. Try Slice 2 without shields. Miserable. The game has moved on from 3*s as a competitive level, sorry to break it to you.

The benefit of baking is that it adds points to a slice and allows weaker players to get progression rewards. And it's actually fun...

HaywireII

Fightmastermpq wrote:

- Multiple Attackers: You can get hit by multiple people at the same time on defense, often coming out of a battle to learn that you lost more points than you gained.
- Scoring: Once you pass 800 pts (I think, maybe 1k?) every point your opponent gains in fighting you is lost from your score. This makes battles over 800 pts point neutral to the slice.

Multiple attackers is a direct result of most of the targets that would be worthwhile being shielded so when a shield is dropped you jump on the radar of way way too many active players. If people were able to attack shielded as well as unshielded targets without knowing which was which you would be able to climb for more than 3 minutes at a clip without losing points.

Scoring is a problem as well. Since it is so easy to lose points it encourages stronger rosters to climb later when they will find plenty of 75 point targets to hit. I think it's stilly that a person who works hard on and off for two days is a 75 point target for someone who starts playing a few hours before the event ends. It's also demoralizing to see a 4 point retaliation offered for a team with level 375+ 5 stars when you are fielding 4* champions. There needs to be a sliding point scale based on how many fights you have participated in as well as comparitive roster strengths.

Frank NewCastle

So to all the cupcake haters, where I used to skip you for something a little tastier, I'll be turning my attention to you now.

You thought scoring was hard before, now you won't get just a tap on the way up.

Good luck, be careful what you wish for!

carrion_pigeons

Shields *are* a problem. Arguing that they aren't a problem because getting rid of them without replacing them with anything else would be worse is a straw man argument. Clearly the game needs to do something to moderate the impact of defensive losses on scores, but that doesn't mean it had to be shields.

The reason shields are in the game is because they're a source of profit for d3 and because d3 lacks the drive to choose an AI that plays like a human instead of like either a perfect or terrible computer. It has nothing to do with them being a good or inherently fin design.

Dudemon

We really don't know how much no shields would help or not. It may help ALOT by increasing the number of targets, thus decreasing individual exposure.

When everyone is shielded and you unshield, then you are one of maybe 5-6 targets. No wonder you get hit by 3-5 people at once.
They basically have no other choices but you.

It would be nice if you could protect your position with HP somehow, yet still be targeted.

A wide variety of targets would help a lot IMO

Dudemon

cardoor

If D3 put out a general explanation about what they think a typical 3*, 3-4*, 4* etc player should be able to score, then we would be able to provide better feedback about whether PVP is broken or not. For example if a 3* roster should be able to achieve 800 on average, then we would have a baseline to compare the expectation with the reality.

I don't have anything to add to the checkpoint idea other than to say, I would prefer more opponents at anytime I play too. The way people describe line it almost sounds more team based than traditional PVP.

morph3us

carrion pigeons wrote:

The reason shields are in the game is because they're a source of profit for d3 and because d3 lacks the drive to choose an AI that plays like a human instead of like either a perfect or terrible computer. It has nothing to do with them being a good or inherently fin design.

Not quite correct. Shields weren't in the original game design. Before shields, you had to keep on playing or lose your points. If you climbed above 500 to 600 points, everyone would drag you back down to 400ish. Pvp was all about who could play the most matches in the last half hour of the event.

BraneDedDev

cardoor wrote:

If D3 put out a general explanation about what they think a typical 3*, 3-4*, 4* etc player should be able to score, then we would be able to provide better feedback about whether PVP is broken or not.

However, with boosts and the AI being so horrible most players can compete higher than their roster should in theory allow. The only thought is "can I beat this team, of any combination, faster that 5 people find me and dismantle me." To me, that is broken.

Lose shields (slots for every other week character release, health packs and boosting will still overpay the bills)
Introduce checkpoints and tie them to rewards
Keep shards(slice... no, just no) but set them as the completion time only (we all start together (but later players get more time to get iso! - who cares/allow playing until the event is over for iso but no scoring after your time ends OR lose shards all together))
Throw us all together like sim.
Lose the "haha you were attacked and lost umteen million points, throw money at it for glory!" announcements. We can kinda sorta figure that out when our score goes from 999 to 665 in the time it takes to complete a single boosted match with the best board layout in recorded history.
Lose paying iso to skip.
Or all of that, and if you really want to keep shields because you are anti-fun (how many times have you lost points after shielding?) Use them as a one time use to lock in your final event score for rank purposes.

Or does any of that matter since the intention of SCL in pvp is to make the progression structure like pve so we can have all the things?

Regardless, all players need to be in the same pool sharing their cooties.

Phumade

Scary that I remember the game before Shields and cooldowns. yeah, you don't want to return to a world with no shields or the one true slice! hahahaha.

Without shields the game basically becomes 1 giant LR, Its a different kinda fight and one you will still lose to the true elite rosters.

Omega Red

Before shields pvp was a true free-for-all. Shields civilized the competition.

But shields also are the core feature that allows coordination and collaborative game. So maybe they civilized the competition a little too well, to the point where pvp no longer is competitive but collaborative.