Season XXXII: Highlights & Changes

BariusRad

But now how it will actually here's an example:

1. You are using Professor X, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch to kill my Loki, Daredevil and Ragnarok

2. Further you are using Red Hulk, Iceman and Hulkbuster to defeat a stronger opponent than me

3. I get and i see notice that my team was defeated by the team Professor X, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch

4. I take my 3 stars Iron Man, Kamala Khan and 2 star Storm to avenge your Professor X, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch

5. Are you surprised.

madsalad

BariusRad wrote:

But now how it will actually here's an example:

1. You are using Professor X, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch to kill my Loki, Daredevil and Ragnarok

2. Further you are using Red Hulk, Iceman and Hulkbuster to defeat a stronger opponent than me

3. I get and i see notice that my team was defeated by the team Professor X, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch

4. I take my 3 stars Iron Man, Kamala Khan and 2 star Storm to avenge your Professor X, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch

5. Are you surprised.

I'm guessing this is a Simulator scenario and not a PVP scenario.

cyineedsn

madsalad wrote:

BariusRad wrote:

But now how it will actually here's an example:

1. You are using Professor X, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch to kill my Loki, Daredevil and Ragnarok

2. Further you are using Red Hulk, Iceman and Hulkbuster to defeat a stronger opponent than me

3. I get and i see notice that my team was defeated by the team Professor X, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch

4. I take my 3 stars Iron Man, Kamala Khan and 2 star Storm to avenge your Professor X, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch

5. Are you surprised.

I'm guessing this is a Simulator scenario and not a PVP scenario.

I... uh I'm not really sure what is being implied here? Could someone explain it to me?

Cartoon Face

At least i now get to keep an extra £400 in my bank account each month now

Quebbster

Cartoon Face wrote:

At least i now get to keep an extra £400 in my bank account each month now

...I can Think of so many better ways to spend that Money.

mohio

cyineedsn wrote:

madsalad wrote:

BariusRad wrote:

But now how it will actually here's an example:

1. You are using Professor X, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch to kill my Loki, Daredevil and Ragnarok

2. Further you are using Red Hulk, Iceman and Hulkbuster to defeat a stronger opponent than me

3. I get and i see notice that my team was defeated by the team Professor X, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch

4. I take my 3 stars Iron Man, Kamala Khan and 2 star Storm to avenge your Professor X, Black Widow and Scarlet Witch

5. Are you surprised.

I'm guessing this is a Simulator scenario and not a PVP scenario.

I... uh I'm not really sure what is being implied here? Could someone explain it to me?

I think he's saying that player A has his "best team" as Rulk, Ice, and HB (or pick 2 since most PvP you can only pick 2), but he's beating people with a significantly weaker glass cannon team. He's assuming retals will work normally, so you will receive a retal node of the weak glass cannon team. End result is he ends up with a retal node that has a team that could never beat his team left out on defense and might be surprised by that (although shouldn't be if he takes into account retaliations).

The second guy is saying that scenario could never happen outside of shield sim, since you can't pick all 3 in any "normal" PvP, and would need to at least have one 3* character in common.

Chipster22

Quebbster wrote:

Chipster22 wrote:

Quebbster wrote:

Chipster22 wrote:

Those at the top hopping from cupcake to cupcake to reach scores of multiple thousands may have a harder time.

Those at the top aren't hopping from cupcake to cupcake, they are the ones who put out the cupcakes to begin with. The Points aren't generated by magic.

Sure, they are creating them, but aren't they also using them to climb?

If you are already at the top there isn't anything to climb off. I am sure the front runners take advantage of cupcakes further down on the ladder too, but with all opponents only being Worth a handful of Points it's slow going.

So, if cupcakes are not the way that the leaders get their high scores, is it possible scores will be even higher under the new system for those at the top? There should be more points available if the players they defeat lose less each time.

Just trying to figure out how this might work.

ZekeBarrett

It's comical how players are saying farewell to bakers but I'm sure that most didn't complain about eating them. I seriously doubt any of them ever passed one up. But hey, those with champed 5* rosters should just take on 5* rosters anyway right?!

zodiac339

It just seems to me, this is another way to get people to spend more health packs. I know that's why I try to do my last fight with the lowest level team I can: so I can gain points from retaliation against reasonable enemies rather than constantly having to use my biggest against their biggest and taking big damage that I have to heal just to keep going. I hate this change. I already get attacked by championed Epics 200 levels higher than my best. I'd like to be able to actually play PVP in between story clears rather than looking at 3 nasty boosted/Epic teams and going, "Guess I can use Hulkbuster and wait 6 hours to play again." The only way to make this better is remove persistent damage. Compromise and make a knockout take an hour or two to recover from, but a hero that's up should always go in at full health if you really want us to face off against our piers constantly.

GrumpySmurf1002

6 pages to get to the "just trying to sell more health packs" meme. Might be a record for longest hold out.

I think this is nothing more than trying to bring scores back to earth. Any time scores have gotten laughably out of control, there's been a change to the format to get them back within reason. Then the vets figure out a different way to get them. Rinse repeat.

Sentry bombing, retreat boosting, shield hopping every 15 minutes or so...all been nerfed. Scores always creep back. The only really nasty change they made to PvP came when they put in a new MMR (roughly season 15 or so, IIRC), which then led to the change from K=50 to K=75 two seasons later.

I think it works to the players advantage that it's being dropped in a 4 event season. That's a short enough time to get data and make adjustments quickly before Anniversary.

Of course, making these changes right before the anniversary and draining (some) players morale is probably not the greatest financial or PR decision they've ever made.

Vhailorx

Crowl wrote:

MrCrowley wrote:

People who have not used ccs in the past forget that because of ccs especially in shard 4 the PVP scoring is OVERALL higher. That means your enemies have more points than they should have if there were no ccs in place ---> you get to a higher score hitting A-teams because you can still beat teams that have 1k scores.

The dreadful scenario will now be that you cant find beatable targets going for 1k after you climb to 800. Every match will take long and you are visible to the whales you will whale on you (pun intended). You cant climb to 1k fast enough to reach it.

That dreadful scenario happens all the time for people playing pvp without coordinating out of game, so not likely to be much real difference for them.

Wrong. When the people who currently hit 1I and start hopping get stuck at 800 points instead, the people who used to have trouble going above 800 will now start to get crushed above 600. It's a cascade.

mckauhu

So even if you win with a 2* team and later use 3* team, your opponent sees just your 3* team to retaliate? Or if using poorly covered 5*'s, they take lead even if some 3* or 4* team you later use is actually better?

Not sure if I like that or not.

cyineedsn

Vhailorx wrote:

Crowl wrote:

MrCrowley wrote:

People who have not used ccs in the past forget that because of ccs especially in shard 4 the PVP scoring is OVERALL higher. That means your enemies have more points than they should have if there were no ccs in place ---> you get to a higher score hitting A-teams because you can still beat teams that have 1k scores.

The dreadful scenario will now be that you cant find beatable targets going for 1k after you climb to 800. Every match will take long and you are visible to the whales you will whale on you (pun intended). You cant climb to 1k fast enough to reach it.

That dreadful scenario happens all the time for people playing pvp without coordinating out of game, so not likely to be much real difference for them.

Wrong. When the people who currently hit 1I and start hopping get stuck at 800 points instead, the people who used to have trouble going above 800 will now start to get crushed above 600. It's a cascade.

This sounds like what will happen. Without cupcakes, people will just gravitate to the next easiest target they can farm: everyone transitioning a tier below them. Will changing defensive point losses help? Hopefully? But reducing your point losses might just mean instead of getting hit 1x by someone with a stronger roster than you, you'll just get hit 3x by someone with a stronger roster than you.

Astralgazer

Firstly, winfinite ProX-gwbw-switch in PvP is overated. I've taken out winfinite teams in Balance of Power. With the right combo, luck and a lot of health packs, at least 50 points will be mine.

Secondly, I think the threat to rage quit has been around since MPQ first introduced a nerf. People adapt and find new things to enjoy. Or new exploits.

Thirdly, kudos for D3 who surely has calculated the possible income loss because people rage quit. And still goes on with their plan. That's integrity. Or the calculation says that the loss will be insignificant in the long run.

fmftint

I think he's saying that player A has his "best team" as Rulk, Ice, and HB (or pick 2 since most PvP you can only pick 2), but he's beating people with a significantly weaker glass cannon team. He's assuming retals will work normally, so you will receive a retal node of the weak glass cannon team. End result is he ends up with a retal node that has a team that could never beat his team left out on defense and might be surprised by that (although shouldn't be if he takes into account retaliations).

The second guy is saying that scenario could never happen outside of shield sim, since you can't pick all 3 in any "normal" PvP, and would need to at least have one 3* character in common.

It really doesn't matter what the retal team is, if I hit someone for 65 their retal will be for 20. Only the most stubborn player will hit that retal

madsalad

Astralgazer wrote:

Firstly, winfinite ProX-gwbw-switch in PvP is overated. I've taken out winfinite teams in Balance of Power. With the right combo, luck and a lot of health packs, at least 50 points will be mine.

Secondly, I think the threat to rage quit has been around since MPQ first introduced a nerf. People adapt and find new things to enjoy. Or new exploits.

Thirdly, kudos for D3 who surely has calculated the possible income loss because people rage quit. And still goes on with their plan. That's integrity. Or the calculation says that the loss will be insignificant in the long run.

The point is that you won't be able to see a player's winfinite team because it will not be their strongest team on defense. If I play 2 5*s plus required on 3 seed teams, I can then, theoretically, proceed to climb with winfinite without worrying about reprisal on a weak defense team, as my 5*s are running interference for me. That's why we need more information about what a "much weaker team" is, and whether or not retaliation nodes still work the same way or not.

madsalad

fmftint wrote:

I think he's saying that player A has his "best team" as Rulk, Ice, and HB (or pick 2 since most PvP you can only pick 2), but he's beating people with a significantly weaker glass cannon team. He's assuming retals will work normally, so you will receive a retal node of the weak glass cannon team. End result is he ends up with a retal node that has a team that could never beat his team left out on defense and might be surprised by that (although shouldn't be if he takes into account retaliations).

The second guy is saying that scenario could never happen outside of shield sim, since you can't pick all 3 in any "normal" PvP, and would need to at least have one 3* character in common.

It really doesn't matter what the retal team is, if I hit someone for 65 their retal will be for 20. Only the most stubborn player will hit that retal

Spite is a powerful motivator.

jobob

Crowl wrote:

MrCrowley wrote:

People who have not used ccs in the past forget that because of ccs especially in shard 4 the PVP scoring is OVERALL higher. That means your enemies have more points than they should have if there were no ccs in place ---> you get to a higher score hitting A-teams because you can still beat teams that have 1k scores.

The dreadful scenario will now be that you cant find beatable targets going for 1k after you climb to 800. Every match will take long and you are visible to the whales you will whale on you (pun intended). You cant climb to 1k fast enough to reach it.

That dreadful scenario happens all the time for people playing pvp without coordinating out of game, so not likely to be much real difference for them.

Just because they weren't aware of it affecting them doesn't mean that it wasn't affecting them.

The fact that the devs bundled the CC nerf with a reduction in point losses and lowered progression targets should convince people that CCs were bringing up EVERYONE's scores, whether you realized it or not.

madsalad

jobob wrote:

Crowl wrote:

MrCrowley wrote:

People who have not used ccs in the past forget that because of ccs especially in shard 4 the PVP scoring is OVERALL higher. That means your enemies have more points than they should have if there were no ccs in place ---> you get to a higher score hitting A-teams because you can still beat teams that have 1k scores.

The dreadful scenario will now be that you cant find beatable targets going for 1k after you climb to 800. Every match will take long and you are visible to the whales you will whale on you (pun intended). You cant climb to 1k fast enough to reach it.

That dreadful scenario happens all the time for people playing pvp without coordinating out of game, so not likely to be much real difference for them.

Just because they weren't aware of it affecting them doesn't mean that it wasn't affecting them.

The fact that the devs bundled the CC nerf with a reduction in point losses and lowered progression targets should convince people that CCs were bringing up EVERYONE's scores, whether you realized it or not.

A rising tide lifts all boats.

carrion_pigeons

D3 continues to believe it can implement an unhackable system, and they continue to be wrong.

As long as OOG coordination exists, any system with static rules is going to be broken. And they can't stop the OOG coordination after incentivizing it for so long.

We will see how this plays out, but one thing is for sure: the incentives for creating a cooperative climb still exist, and will still foster an environment where people will figure out how to do it.