There's a discrepancy in Progression Rewards

notamutant

GurlBYE wrote:

notamutant wrote:

Why should the PvP reward be as easy to get as PvE? Also, it IS easy, or easier than the PvE 4 star, for many players. I can spend 1 hour to get 900 points in PvP during the right boosted week. It would take like 5 hours of playing PvE if not more to get the 4 star cover there. You just have a weaker roster. PvE has scaling to help those with weak rosters out. PvP, while it has MMR, that doesn't entirely remove the fact you are COMPETING against other people who often have stronger characters than you. Of course it will be harder for you. Would you go play an MMORPG and complain that you can't win a high end competitive PvP match with a new character just because you can beat a dungeon with the same rewards as PvP on that same character? You just need to understand and accept you are not "ready" for high level PvP yet. It sucks, but that is the reality. You probably never will be top level without spending tons of money, since catching up in this game as a free to play player is almost impossible.

top 20 of a 500 person bracket isn't many players.


how do you propose people get a stronger roster then?
better rewards right?

So people don't deserve good rewards because there are stronger rosters. (also everything you're arguing about competition is what placement is for.)

No one is asking you to restate the facts to knock someone elses opinion down just because but to provoke change or state an opinion on said change.

Discussions here hit dead ends because people seem to be more interested in stating facts as we all know them instead of understanding what the topic is proposing.

it isn't enough to read it but to understand it, and to critically use that information to present new ideas.

I didn't just restate the facts. I questioned his premise in my first two sentences. Why should PvP be the same difficulty as PvE, and also that PvP is actually easier than PvE for some. He can feel free to say why he thinks they should be equal difficulty (or dispute my claim that PvP is easier for some), but I think he would find that almost all MMORPG games are similar. Playing high end PvP in all of these types of games is almost always harder than playing against the computer. In games like WoW it meant having better equipment than a lower level character. In MPQ, it means having worse characters or less covers. So I was discussing what the topic was proposing. I just disagree with the concept and brought up two counter-points. Everything else was just "restating the facts" as support. You claim I am shutting down discussion by stating facts. I claim you are shutting down constructive discussion by not allowing facts to be stated.

Also, you misunderstand what I am saying. People are supposed to get better rosters by spending money. As I said quite clearly at the end. Nothing else will allow you to catch up in this game. And not just a little money, but a lot. That is a problem, but not one with an easy solution. This is a different discussion entirely though from the original question, which is why is there a difference in difficulty to earn 4 star progression rewards between PvP and PvE. I absolutely agree there is a fundamental problem with this game that is only going to get worse and worse as it grows older, as the difference between the haves and have-nots grows. That is a separate discussion.

DaveR4470

To be a broken record here... PvP and PvE are completely different things. PvE tests roster depth more than anything else; PvP tests raw strength of your top characters.

Rosters that are good at one aren't necessarily good at the other. The same car does not win a drag race and the Daytona 500 -- different horses for different courses.

Stax the Foyer

Because they haven't yet figured out how to scale PvP to remove any feeling of progress.

notamutant

bbigler wrote:

notamutant wrote:

Why should the PvP reward be as easy to get as PvE? Also, it IS easy, or easier than the PvE 4 star, for many players. I can spend 1 hour to get 900 points in PvP during the right boosted week. It would take like 5 hours of playing PvE if not more to get the 4 star cover there. You just have a weaker roster. PvE has scaling to help those with weak rosters out. PvP, while it has MMR, that doesn't entirely remove the fact you are COMPETING against other people who often have stronger characters than you. Of course it will be harder for you. Would you go play an MMORPG and complain that you can't win a high end competitive PvP match with a new character just because you can beat a dungeon with the same rewards as PvP on that same character? You just need to understand and accept you are not "ready" for high level PvP yet. It sucks, but that is the reality. You probably never will be top level without spending tons of money, since catching up in this game as a free to play player is almost impossible.

First, I wouldn't say that I'm a free-to-play player. I've spent about $200 total in HP to roster 105 characters and I keep my VIP going. Second, I've noticed that my progress is faster than many other players, so it is possible to catch up, although it would take a year to do it.

Third, my roster is not weak given the number of days I've played. Many players on this forum are past 1000 days and I'm at 549 days. I started playing this game since the beginning, meaning November 2013. Because of the time hoard of this game, I've quit for months and then came back, quit again and then came back. This is my 4th period of playing, so I've seen the entire development of this game and many of my days were spent well before all the bonuses and rewards that we have now; back when 3* progression was as slow as 4* progression is now. There was a time in 2014 when I could hit #1 in PvP, that's right, #1. But because I've quit repeatedly, I've lost ground again and again.

Well, $200 is a lot of money, but its nothing in this game. I didn't say you need to spend money, I said you need to spend TONS of money. Like $1000+ would maybe start to put a dent in things. Realistically, $2000+ to catch up, all spent in buyers clubs to maximize your CP. You could skip straight to 5 stars if you get lucky pulls. Spending another $200-300 would barely make a difference. Also, because you haven't been playing for as many days, you had to spent lots of your HP purchase on slots, instead of on buying out vaults like the big spenders do. I am not saying you should do that, just saying that is what would be required for you to catch up to top level. Pretty screwed up, but once you get there, it is easier to stay on the top.

And you can't catch up to the top players ever, meaning the top 5%. With the introduction of championing, catching up is essentially impossible. You can finally cover max every 4 star in a year, and you will still have nothing on the people with level 550 5 stars. The players right now with level 290 Hulkbusters that are hitting you before you get to 900, will have level 330 Hulkbusters a year from now. Because you played in the past, when catching up was still possible, your perception of the game is skewed from the current reality. When a character maxed out at 13 covers, eventually you could pick the best 3 star to max and compete at top levels. Now you can get 13 covers and still be nothing compared to a guy with 113 covers.

And your roster might not be weak given the number of days you played, but that is irrelevant. That is like saying I am making good money for a non-college grad if I make 40k a year. Sure, you have a good roster for your circumstances maybe, but compared to others, who you are competing against in PvP, you have a middle-tier roster that can't easily compete for 900.

I am not saying any of this is fun or good, and I can absolutely understand your frustration. But it is the reality, and the foundation of the design in this game. Serious changes would need to be made to fix these issues, and I don't see them happening.

drag0n41

The biggest difference between pvp and PvE is that every point you get in a PvE goes towards progression, while in pvp you get hit and lose points. If the model split up points for progression and placement, meaning every fight you win or lose while playing goes towards progression. At the same time all defensive wins and losses affect your placement only.
This is the only way to make the progression rewards close to equal between pvp and PvE.

Tl:dr point loss in PvP is why the discrepancy.

notamutant

drag0n41 wrote:

The biggest difference between pvp and PvE is that every point you get in a PvE goes towards progression, while in pvp you get hit and lose points. If the model split up points for progression and placement, meaning every fight you win or lose while playing goes towards progression. At the same time all defensive wins and losses affect your placement only.
This is the only way to make the progression rewards close to equal between pvp and PvE.

Tl:dr point loss in PvP is why the discrepancy.

Never thought about that. Interesting idea. Still might be too easy to get 900 though if we are including points lost. That is achievable in 1-2 hours, 3 times a week, as opposed to 5-8 hours twice a week with PvE, if we were trying to make them equal anyhow.

acescracked

Or money....

drag0n41

notamutant wrote:

drag0n41 wrote:

The biggest difference between pvp and PvE is that every point you get in a PvE goes towards progression, while in pvp you get hit and lose points. If the model split up points for progression and placement, meaning every fight you win or lose while playing goes towards progression. At the same time all defensive wins and losses affect your placement only.
This is the only way to make the progression rewards close to equal between pvp and PvE.

Tl:dr point loss in PvP is why the discrepancy.

Never thought about that. Interesting idea. Still might be too easy to get 900 though if we are including points lost. That is achievable in 1-2 hours, 3 times a week, as opposed to 5-8 hours twice a week with PvE, if we were trying to make them equal anyhow.

They could adjust the progression rewards, say by like 1.5. I would say that your season score only increases by your placement score, so that people would still buy shields to protect their scores.

smkspy

I've finally taken the leap into pvp since starting the 4 champ phase...I can average 500-600 points.

I just don't like the format as I find it overly complicated (shield hopping, line groups, etc) and the mmr is just crazy once you reach 500 or 600 along with a massive decrease in match rewards. One goes up and the other goes down...Too much effort, so I'm focusing on winning the 10 pack and finishing the simulator by the end of every season.

And I'm okay with that for now...maybe I'll get better and reach 900 after my tenth champed 4 star, which should February of next going by it takes me about a little under a month to get enough iso to champ one.

revskip

I rarely try to hit the top rewards in the progression tree because my roster isn't up to snuff yet but I frequently bracket snipe near the end of events have had decent success getting bonus 4* covers in placement. You don't need a top flight roster to make it happen although having a boosted 4* will really help. You just need to sign up in the final hour of the event and hope to get a relatively fresh bracket.

Because brackets are only 500 people you'll know right away if you have a shot at top five because if you get in early everyone will be scrambling up at relatively the same pace and since you'll be far below the 800 mark where you show up in everyone's queue you'll actually be less likely to get hit. I've gotten top five with as little as 596 points and hit top 1 with as few as 728 points. Which is a solid two 4* covers for an hours worth of playtime.

Granted you won't always be able to hit a fresh bracket but then you know that you don't need to push for the whole hour and can easily stop once you hit 575. You won't get a 4* every event but you should easily be able to get one at least out of 3 events and the 10 CP per event means a classic pull every two events. In terms of 4* cover rewards for playtime PVP is awesome if you bracket snipe, although in terms of ISO and obviously SCL PVE is far better return although much more play required.

MarkersMake

revskip wrote:

I've gotten top five with as little as 596 points and hit top 1 with as few as 728 points. Which is a solid two 4* covers for an hours worth of playtime.

Granted you won't always be able to hit a fresh bracket but then you know that you don't need to push for the whole hour and can easily stop once you hit 575. You won't get a 4* every event but you should easily be able to get one at least out of 3 events and the 10 CP per event means a classic pull every two events. In terms of 4* cover rewards for playtime PVP is awesome if you bracket snipe, although in terms of ISO and obviously SCL PVE is far better return although much more play required.

Wait, are you really saying that someone should *easily* be able to bracket snipe their way to a top 5 finish a third of the time? (assuming a similar roster to yours, of course)

That seems... optimistic? There are only 11 people per slice who can win 4* covers through placement *via bracket sniping* (1 in scl6, and 5 each in scl7 and scl8). Unless I'm missing something obvious here?

GurlBYE

Everyone is entirely confusing

"the rewards don't fit for level of roster"

with

"I want to be get to 1200 and be #1 in each bracket"

But it seems like everyone is perfectly happy with things as they are

They could just as easily shift the 3 and 4 stars down and add more CP at the top even if those two were just replaced with 5 CP & 5 CP itd make a difference and have rewards more relevant to all.

People can be as patient as they want, unless the top stops growing this gap isn't going to get any smaller, nor will reaching that 3 and 4 star become that much easier unless a huge influx of players jump in the game and stick out waiting 2 years to cover a 4 star

MarkersMake

aesthetocyst wrote:

If you know when the brackets flip, yes, it's pretty easy to b on top on that new bracket.

If you're well-connected, you'll know exactly when those brackets flip.

The question is how often there is a last minute bracket. That's the delimiter, more so than player roster/ability, assuming we're talking about a pvp vet.

Yeah, I tried consistently late joining (last 30-60 minutes) pvp events as a test for a few weeks a while back and I only managed to join a few fresh brackets (<100) in that time. About 1 in 5 or so, IIRC. I figured those odds weren't worth it.

Perhaps Line + the advent of SCL has improved those odds, or maybe I was just unlucky. 1 in 3 just seemed a lot higher than I expected.

... Aaaaand I just figured out what I was (probably) missing. I always play the same slice (4) because that finishes after the kids are in bed and before I am. If you can track brackets for each slice (and SCL level) , and are flexible enough to choose which slice to snipe, then yeah, I could definitely see 1 in 3 odds.

revskip

MarkersMake wrote:

revskip wrote:

I've gotten top five with as little as 596 points and hit top 1 with as few as 728 points. Which is a solid two 4* covers for an hours worth of playtime.

Granted you won't always be able to hit a fresh bracket but then you know that you don't need to push for the whole hour and can easily stop once you hit 575. You won't get a 4* every event but you should easily be able to get one at least out of 3 events and the 10 CP per event means a classic pull every two events. In terms of 4* cover rewards for playtime PVP is awesome if you bracket snipe, although in terms of ISO and obviously SCL PVE is far better return although much more play required.

Wait, are you really saying that someone should *easily* be able to bracket snipe their way to a top 5 finish a third of the time? (assuming a similar roster to yours, of course)

That seems... optimistic? There are only 11 people per slice who can win 4* covers through placement *via bracket sniping* (1 in scl6, and 5 each in scl7 and scl8). Unless I'm missing something obvious here?

YMMV but I have hit top 5 in three out of the last twelve events I have entered in the final hour and hit #1 twice in that period. I always play in SCL 8 since it released so that is always 2 covers which averages out to a cover every other event. Super limited sample size and some of it might just be a function of the slice I pick but it has been working for me. It's not easy per se but isn't nearly as daunting as entering at the beginning and then punching it out with shields for 3 days. Granted when I don't hit the top 5 I usually don't end up any higher than 90ish and it is just a function of how early in the bracket I can luck into but it has worked for me.

I also save my boosts for when I get a lucky bracket that way. The other factor is most of the time you aren't even looking at a full bracket. For instance my last event (Real Steel) I got a very late start in the last 45 minutes or so. I finished 97th out of 317. Since the brackets are only 500 people they tend to only end up 1/2 to 2/3 full in that last hour which improves your chances. I also know I'm not the only person doing it that way because I see a lot of familiar names on the top ten and grouped around where I end up in each event where I don't hit a fresh bracket including plenty of names from this forum.

If I knew I could consistently hit the 900 mark using 3 or less shields I would definitely switch to doing that since you are guaranteed the cover and also get 2 event tokens, 50 HP, a 3* cover and 2500 ISO in the progression but since I can't I'd much rather take shots at bracket lottery knowing that if I hit I'll hit big and that even if I miss as long as I occasionally hit I still come out ahead of where I would using shields.

aesthetocyst wrote:

If you know when the brackets flip, yes, it's pretty easy to b on top on that new bracket.

If you're well-connected, you'll know exactly when those brackets flip.

The question is how often there is a last minute bracket. That's the delimiter, more so than player roster/ability, assuming we're talking about a pvp vet.

Sadly I am not well connected, used Line for a short while but once I found a good alliance pretty much stowed it on the shelf. But I did experiment for several events to find a sweet spot of when brackets seem to be most likely to flip and that has been pretty consistent. At least for me, again YMMV.