No chance to recover

Beastwood

I lost out on something so lets remove that whole thing entirely...

i bet this thread wouldn't exist if you was 1st tomorrow by 1 point, bagging 4 covers, 4.5k iso and 150hp.
I've lost out by small margins plenty of times, i have snuck in on small margins aswell, any reward is better than nothing at all I've accepted heroic tokens, 500 iso etc from poor placement for a good few years slowly building my squad to compete, i expect to lose since i havent remortgaged my house to invest in the game and have a 4* super champ squad but i am actually competing for top spots in placement now which feels good after such a long slog of slow squad building n iso grinding etc top 25 is a massive milestone for me after a few years of being sub 50 or worse

Even adding % placement you will still get the same problem, oh i was in the top 5% but i missed out on 2 nodes n ended in the top 10% and lost x covers because of life/bad timing, not having the required character or tight time margins, lets remove it or make it 20% for 3 covers and 50% for 2 and everyone else gets one for showing up...

N the pure pve system is there, don't scroll past the 15cp reward and there you go, placement removed coz i doubt they'd boost the progression rewards even if they did remove it and tbf it gives you quite a bit anyway as it is.

The only place at a push I'd say ok maybe is on the sub events, i think a mini progression tree for sub events would suit it better than the placement for tokens/iso/tokens etc

notamutant

Beastwood wrote:

Even adding % placement you will still get the same problem, oh i was in the top 5% but i missed out on 2 nodes n ended in the top 10% and lost x covers because of life/bad timing, not having the required character or tight time margins, lets remove it or make it 20% for 3 covers and 50% for 2 and everyone else gets one for showing up...

I disagree with this premise. The points are only really clustered super closely at the top. Literally no more than a 1k difference between 1st and 10th place where 1st place as 127,000 points is the type of thing we are talking about. Or even more realistically, 10th is 126,500, and 11th is 126,520, and 19th is 126,650. Of course if someone got 120,000 then they shouldn't get bumped up, as those people are not doing the full number of clears. But when people are doing the full number of clears, and the only difference is a slightly slower first clear on one sub in a 4 day event, they are being punished.

morph3us

irwando wrote:

Even better, kill placement awards in PvE all together as it should be.

I used to think this. I changed my mind after Boss Rush. My reasoning is as follows:

(1) The devs clearly want to have a situation where there is a fixed level of scarcity in cover distribution
(2) They use stingy placement rewards, plus RNG to achieve this
(3) By awarding covers via a fixed placement distribution, they essentially guarantee that a fixed percentage of players will receive said rewards.
(4) If they were to change to a progression only model to award the same number of covers, there are only two ways they could achieve this:

(a) Set final progression incredibly high, so that you'd need to clear near perfectly to achieve this. This penalises the more casual players, and people entering an event late, and that would make the game unfriendly to casuals, so they won't do this. (b) Set difficulty so high that only a certain percentage of players would be able to finish off the requisite nodes, which is, in a warped way, how Boss Rush worked in the end, if you consider the number of players who actually managed to win all 3 Peggy covers. This is also unfriendly to the majority of the playerbase, so they won't do that either.

Given all of that, I think placement awards are here to stay, and unfortunately there's going to be a degree of arbitrariness in how people win placement, since placement by definition needs to be discriminatory.

El Satanno

notamutant wrote:

I disagree with this premise. The points are only really clustered super closely at the top. Literally no more than a 1k difference between 1st and 10th place where 1st place as 127,000 points is the type of thing we are talking about. Or even more realistically, 10th is 126,500, and 11th is 126,520, and 19th is 126,650. Of course if someone got 120,000 then they shouldn't get bumped up, as those people are not doing the full number of clears. But when people are doing the full number of clears, and the only difference is a slightly slower first clear on one sub in a 4 day event, they are being punished.

Man, that would be one weird-**** event when the guys in lower places have more points that the guys above...

notamutant

El Satanno wrote:

notamutant wrote:

I disagree with this premise. The points are only really clustered super closely at the top. Literally no more than a 1k difference between 1st and 10th place where 1st place as 127,000 points is the type of thing we are talking about. Or even more realistically, 10th is 126,500, and 11th is 126,520, and 19th is 126,650. Of course if someone got 120,000 then they shouldn't get bumped up, as those people are not doing the full number of clears. But when people are doing the full number of clears, and the only difference is a slightly slower first clear on one sub in a 4 day event, they are being punished.

Man, that would be one weird-**** event when the guys in lower places have more points that the guys above...

I am running on a sleep deficit can't wait until Thanksgiving break.

Heartburn

i think this would be much of an issue if the rewards were less stingy. for most events only top 10 receive a 4*, only the top 1% get 4*. i thought the clearance levels would help sort this out and it might of if they lowered the amount of people in each bracket as they went up in clearance level maybe knock off 75 people per bracket as they increased in clearance level. 1000 down to 250 at the hypothetical lvl 10. granting more rewards % as you increased. even in level 8 the % is still 1 for the 4*.

Then again i could never understand why they would not guarantee players a cover in each of the colors in the release event. It make players pony up for roster slot or lose 3 covers, gives players the chance to play with their favorites in between events so they can get a hang of their powers, and it give players the option to whale up newly released characters(now not so much, as CP is not as readily available as HP was for buying covers).

Pylgrim

morph3us wrote:

(b) Set difficulty so high that only a certain percentage of players would be able to finish off the requisite nodes, which is, in a warped way, how Boss Rush worked in the end, if you consider the number of players who actually managed to win all 3 Peggy covers. This is also unfriendly to the majority of the playerbase, so they won't do that either.

There are two reasons why this setup would be, as you point out, a bad idea. If they were addressed, a progression-only reward scheme could be potentially good enough to at least try. These two reasons are:

• Poor rewards: Even at SCL8, the very highest placement rewards are only 4* level and not particularly exciting for it. This is ridiculous in a world with several 5* players. Back before SCLs, a 1* player could theoretically access the same top rewards as a 5* given optimal timing and a favourable, quick-to-clear MMR so it was kind of understandable that the top rewards were middle-of-the-ground, instead highest possible level. Now we have SCLs which are already doing God's work and will potentially keep doing it as the later CLs are released. However, because the way SCLs were worked within the system, while lower ranks's access to higher-level rewards was limited, the highest possible CL at the moment (7) kept most of the previous, mediocre (for a 4* player) rewards. And we all know that SCL8 is barely an improvement over 7 (they really need to work on their understanding of what an average player's roster at each SCL looks like and what are their "needs"). This means that if they switched to a progression only scheme, if they kept the current highest rewards (and c'mon, you know they would), you'd have theoretically the whole 5* playerbase killing eachother in a race to the top... for 4*-level rewards. Meaning that 4* players would only be able to hope for 3*-level rewards and so on, no one ever achieving true progression-worthy prizes. At least, as it is now, a few players (except 5*) are able to get suitable rewards.
• Broken scaling: Taking your example of Boss Rush as a (kinda) progression-only event, reports had the 5* players experiencing much more hardship than the lower tiers because at their MMR, the enemies' stats curve almost vertically, trivialising even their champed 5*s' stats. Devs have recently admitted that they didn't even know of this because they don't test at those levels.

In other words, if they managed to give each player tier both a challenge and a prize relative to their station (as long as they put in the work), a progression-only reward scheme would potentially be not only possible, but much preferable.

Taking in account that after 3 years they havent figured out neither (though improvements have been made), I'll be waiting for this one sitting.

StarScream

aesthetocyst wrote:

GurlBYE wrote:

StarScream wrote:

Participation trophies all around!

You do realize that most people who are doing the "best" in this game just threw money at it right?

In PVE the winners can be said to have thrown time at it. This used to be even more true back in the days of easy/hard subs and 2hr refreshes. Basically he who played nonstop and never wiped won.

So unfair to those with jobs, school, families, self-control.

Did you just use logic towards a a person with a new school mentality? How dare you?

Won't work.

GurlBYE

StarScream wrote:

aesthetocyst wrote:

GurlBYE wrote:

StarScream wrote:

Participation trophies all around!

You do realize that most people who are doing the "best" in this game just threw money at it right?

In PVE the winners can be said to have thrown time at it. This used to be even more true back in the days of easy/hard subs and 2hr refreshes. Basically he who played nonstop and never wiped won.

So unfair to those with jobs, school, families, self-control.

Did you just use logic towards a a person with a new school mentality? How dare you?

Won't work.

Nothing he said aligns with your argument.

There isn't the slightest inkling of a connection, and i don't disagree with his last point because his and mine aren't mutually exclusive.

You should focus less on the poster and more on the discussion at hand, keeps the mind sharp.

dsds

Why is this a new topic? Shouldn't it be merged with the thread that suggested placement rewards be gone?

Really being top 10 is pretty good. This game is mostly based on luck anyway. Luck that you have the characters that are boosted. Luck that you drew a 5* roster, luck that your life fits perfectly with the Marvel puzzle quest schedule. I can't even make top 10.

We don't need participation trophies. It is what it is. If you didn't get it this time, try again next time the cover comes up in pve.

When you entered the event, you saw the rewards, you saw what was required to get the reward. You also knew that you could have bad luck or bad timing. Everyone else is vulnerable to bad luck or bad timing as well. I would assume that all players playing this game have a life too. Don't ask for exceptions or excuses.

They have to make it frustrating so you spend. If it bothers you so much, go buy the cover at the ridiculous expensive price. It's probably cheaper than getting a heart transplant because this clearly stressing you out more than it should.