PvP needs weight classes

Bowgentle

Crnch73 wrote:

The game should be offering you a prize worth fighting for, rather than enticing you to play at a lower level, thus stalling the progression of lower level players. Similar to what someone above said, MLB never plays against AAA, NHL never plays against AHL, the NBA doesn't play against the development league. Because, the higher ups don't get challenged and the lower levels never stand a chance to win.

Totally agree that the game needs to incentivize going for the highest CL available.

Thing is - 5* players are not _playing_ against lower tiers, we're just in the same league as them.

5* players fight other 5* players all the way from 0 to 1100+, if it's late enough in the PVP even higher.

Case in point: I went from 0 to 1420 in Starfall last night, fighting dual champed 5s all the way (with the occasional Cyke instead of a champed 5, even though the people had another 5 in their roster).

So yeah. CLs should have been leagues, really.
Instead we got this half-hearted implementation which totally breaks down in CL8.

Here's hoping 9 and 10 will be what 8 should have been in the first place.

GurlBYE

Pvp quite simply sucks for like the majority of the player base and the developers have shown endlessly that it's acceptable as is or the the 3 star wouldn't be where it is.

Crnch73

Bowgentle wrote:

Crnch73 wrote:

The game should be offering you a prize worth fighting for, rather than enticing you to play at a lower level, thus stalling the progression of lower level players. Similar to what someone above said, MLB never plays against AAA, NHL never plays against AHL, the NBA doesn't play against the development league. Because, the higher ups don't get challenged and the lower levels never stand a chance to win.

Totally agree that the game needs to incentivize going for the highest CL available.

Thing is - 5* players are not _playing_ against lower tiers, we're just in the same league as them.

5* players fight other 5* players all the way from 0 to 1100+, if it's late enough in the PVP even higher.

Case in point: I went from 0 to 1420 in Starfall last night, fighting dual champed 5s all the way (with the occasional Cyke instead of a champed 5, even though the people had another 5 in their roster).

So yeah. CLs should have been leagues, really.
Instead we got this half-hearted implementation which totally breaks down in CL8.

Here's hoping 9 and 10 will be what 8 should have been in the first place.

Yea I just meant for placement. I know you guys with awesome rosters always play against eachother regardless of where you play. I just meant that a guy with a few 3* could really use those 3* (or 4*) placement rewards and it could potentially encourage more people to play and get into the game. I shudder to think what the game would be like if I started today, it would be overwhelming and I probably would feel like there was no way for me to actually make progress. The developers really need to make it so someone wants to play at higher SCL rather than play down. That way, everyone is fighting for placement rewards they can actually use. A 2* roster wouldn't be fighting for 5* rewards, they'd much rather get 3* right now (I assume). But If you play down to my level, then I play down a level because I can't outscore you, and then so-on until everyone gets rewards they don't care about.

GurlBYE

I started a year and like 6 months and it felt like an uphill battle with 4's being the top.

If I started now I'd uninstall entirely once i understood the magnitude of time it took to participate in half the available game modes at any given rate.

I'd LOVE to see the turnover rate for players during and pre 3 star transition.

The pve changes have scratched the surface of whats needed but still aren't yet where they need to be.

ESPECIALLY CL's.

WelcomeDeath

So...you want all 5* and highest players in cl8? With the current rewards? So that, if its a super competetive bracket, the poor sous that place 51st and lower get a 2* moonstone for their efforts? The whole stated purpose for SCL was to give advanced rosters better rewards. We have yet to see a bracket rewards list that even mirrors the old system, other than top 5 and top 25 rewards (Pvp). Pve rewards take a decent jump from cl7 to cl8, why not pvp? 4* only for top 5 still? Better rewards for advanced rosters, sure....we're still waiting for those to be rolled out.

madok

Welcome Death wrote:

So...you want all 5* and highest players in cl8? With the current rewards? So that, if its a super competetive bracket, the poor sous that place 51st and lower get a 2* moonstone for their efforts? The whole stated purpose for SCL was to give advanced rosters better rewards. We have yet to see a bracket rewards list that even mirrors the old system, other than top 5 and top 25 rewards (Pvp). Pve rewards take a decent jump from cl7 to cl8, why not pvp? 4* only for top 5 still? Better rewards for advanced rosters, sure....we're still waiting for those to be rolled out.

Exactly this. I wish I could upvote it a couple hundred more times.

I qualify for CL 8 but I only had to try it once to realize I couldn't compete there. So I went back to CL 7. If they don't expand the rewards, they should at least shrink the brackets so those advanced rosters aren't killing their friends for **** rewards.

Mr_Sinister

alphabeta wrote:

"SCL 6 can make a lot of sense for a 5* roster if the 4* prize is not an attractive one to them - progression will give them 2 3* covers which are likely useful to them in progressing championed 3*s and they retain same CP at higher level and shot at a 4* cover that is of use to them."


I think you're turning an exception into a rule here. Does this happen? Yes. Is that why most of these rosters are in 6? No.

How the hell do you know? Just because you have 2 5* champs you are automatically going to have every 4* championed - not a chance. Even if they did how do you know the extra 3* doesn't trip them into a champ level reward of an LT.

You think I'm turning exceptions into rules - I'm playing at this level and know a lot of similar players because that's the MMR I face day in day out. You're inferring I'm commenting from experience. Which has a higher evidential value do you think?

"You are making some divine right of access to transitioners to 9% of the available placement spots rewarding a 4* cover at the exclusion of a segment of the player base that has once again invested considerable time and money in the game - the devs could easily have chosen to reserve prizes for those playing at that level."

The inverse, and current situation, is these placement rewards across 6,7, 8 and season rewards are thoroughly dominated by 5* players. What's being asked for is a greater equality, and somehow that's an affront to you. You are talking competition, but really want the continuance of non competition for 5* rosters. To you, it's totally fine they dominate.

Yes what I want is the winner to be the better player - unfortunately MPQ if a free to play game not a free to win game - free to play means you can play for free, you want to win for free when most 5* rosters have spent a lot of money and played a lot of MPQ - want to win as free to play go to SCL5 - you don't just want to win you want to win the big boy prizes without a big boy roster - but you've very happy to eat big boy grills to get progression - recognising your hypocrisy yet?

They could lowered the 4* progression cover from 900 which most 2*/3* rosters won't reach either but is who you are arguing should get it via placement, but they didn't and they've actively said in the launch of SCL dropping down where the prizes where less attractive at the higher level was a feature and in the podcast that they monitor the level of players dropping down SCL levels and its not something they are uncomfortable with so for your preferred anti capitalist version of competition you might need to look for an alternative game because nothing in the history of MPQ would suggest the devs agree with your version of protectionist rewarding vs my free for all survival of the fittest.

Where the podcast, I'd like to listen?

Puzzle warrior 3 - was a few ago go have a listen

"I'd also argue with the notion implicit in your argument that the 5* rosters care about 1st instinctively as winning a match in a sporting sense - maybe a few do but the vast majority see placement and progression in individual events as resource gathering and the competition such as it is take place around overall season ranking."


Doesn't make much sense. Season rankings are based on event scores so placing higher than the next guy is required for a better season score. Maybe they don't care about the event placement, but that doesn't mean they won't go for it. If they care about season ranking it pretty much forces their hand, wanting placement or not.

How many 5* rosters play in S4 - they don't all end up in t5 - quite often they will end up only in t10 - which is exactly what the OP said had happened to him - t5 is a 4* price - 6 -10 aren't getting a 4* prize but probably could have in another slice or bracket. Even season ranking is more a badge of honour than anything - most players will have bought more 10 packs through the course of a season that they will earn finishing t1 in SCL 8 and 25 Command Points isn't even a single buy club.

I'm not inferring anything.

I don't feel like continuing the argument.

Teskal

Stax the Foyer wrote:

If 5*s are winning in PvP, that's what actual competition looks like.

Normally in tournaments a Flyweight vs Heavyweight would not box against each other. Or Women vs Men in the Olympics.

There is no real competition letting fight 2* vs 5*, like there is no competition in a Volkswagen Beetle vs Abrams tank crash.

That's why we need weight class system in MPQ, too.

2*'s will have no fun fighting against a 5*.
5*'s will have no fun crushing a 2*.
In both cases it would be only boring.

Ducky

Teskal wrote:

5*'s will have no fun crushing a 2*.

This has proven to be false.

apmonte

The biggest issue is that the people that are at the top, have always been at the top. They started when the game became available. There is no catching up to these people. There is no being competitive with them.

Teskal

DuckyV wrote:

Teskal wrote:

5*'s will have no fun crushing a 2*.

This has proven to be false.

Yes, and we have a name for such behaviour: Bully. A sad part of our society.

aesthetocyst wrote:

Teskal wrote:

2*'s will have no fun fighting against a 5*.
5*'s will have no fun crushing a 2*.
In both cases it would be only boring.

So ... you're saying PVE is no fun either?

No and yes.

No:
In PVE is a scaling which makes the game much harder. This makes even 1* characters annoying. Can't tell how it will be later, I'm bringing in the moment my 2* to lvl 144 and in transition to 3*.

Yes:
The scaling based on only the top 3 characters makes the game really hard to play. It limits to options to play with and some nodes are only possible to win with much luck. While the game was fun to play till lvl 94 (not always easy!), it sucks in difficulty since then. Enemies who do damage from 2k-4k every round are to much to handle for 2* champs (don't know if it will be easier later...).

I think scaling really need rework.