misleading point indicator in PvP isn't fair

beyonderbub

aesthetocyst wrote:

We_are_Venom wrote:

You're over thinking it.

You're under thinking it.

I realize in the history of the internet, no one has ever been counseled out of their butthurt, but perhaps you'll be the first.

As for you statement that you've never had a queue pay more than the "estimate" ... ****. Either you just started playing PVP today for the first time, or you can't afford attention.

:slowclap:

This and so much this. You made my Sunday, chuckle out loud as I'm watching football.

I was going to add what's worse is when I'm in the 930's in PVP at the end and I go back to that one retal node I've saved bc it belongs to a member of a top 10 pvp alliance, and even though it's showing only 20 or so points going in, at the end of my victory banner, the 1000pt progression reward pops up, all because that match was worth 72 pts. Checked the leaderboard to see he was safely shielded with almost 2000 points.
That is truly the worst :sarcasm:

avs962

We_are_Venom wrote:

You can come up with a million anecdotal justifications as to why the points shouldn't match what is being displayed, but you're wrong.

Classic internet butthurt. You can move along, folks. This is no discussion, just a simple tantrum.

We_are_Venom

acescracked wrote:

Holy mackerel this isn't that complicated.

The point total given is a snapshot in time of the points you'll get if you hit and complete that node that second. Any other time after that you may get the same, less or more points based on the disparity in total points between you and the target.

D3 has actually stated that keeping the node point total constantly accurate is too taxing to the server and data from server to client. If you wait hours to hit a node; know they are worth more, or skip and get a fresh target.

\End

What are you not understanding about it should reflect EXACTLY what you are getting every time?

Every. Single. Time.

If it's "too taxing" it should be done away with and replaced with something that A) isn't works as intended.

"D3 says...", "President Obama believes...", The third eyed prophet is of the opinion that.."
None of that matters to this discussion. The points should be accurate. The ancillary arguments to justify why the points shouldn't, or don't, reflect the actual points awarded are irrelevant.

alphabeta

We_are_Venom wrote:

acescracked wrote:

Holy mackerel this isn't that complicated.

The point total given is a snapshot in time of the points you'll get if you hit and complete that node that second. Any other time after that you may get the same, less or more points based on the disparity in total points between you and the target.

D3 has actually stated that keeping the node point total constantly accurate is too taxing to the server and data from server to client. If you wait hours to hit a node; know they are worth more, or skip and get a fresh target.

\End

What are you not understanding about it should reflect EXACTLY what you are getting every time?

Every. Single. Time.

If it's "too taxing" it should be done away with and replaced with something that A) isn't works as intended.

"D3 says...", "President Obama believes...", The third eyed prophet is of the opinion that.."
None of that matters to this discussion. The points should be accurate. The ancillary arguments to justify why the points shouldn't, or don't, reflect the actual points awarded are irrelevant.

Right - how about this for a solution - don't display the points.

Only show targets worth more than 38 points (is scores matched) but the actual point you get are same as today at the point you complete the match.

Your suggestion of keep the app open and points hold is ripe for abuse so you'd don't like the way the indicative points works then lets have them remove it entirely (maybe leaving the rest of us with the as is since majority seem to be fine with it)

IamTheDanger

This discussion has gotten to the point where it is going in circles. I think the OP understands all of what has been posted, but he feels that it's a broken system that should be changed. But it has always been this way. I, myself made a thread about this very thing over 2 years ago when I first saw the point discrepancy and didn't understand why. It was explained to me, and now I know. It is just the way it is. Saying that it's broken over and over isn't a very productive way to hold a discussion. At this point, nothing constructive is being added to the conversation.