PVP progression point loss is not good

cooperbigdaddy

Hey, just another reminder to the devs that I don't mind losing points in a placement model, but boy, oh boy, do I hate losing points in PROGRESSION model.

I actually wouldn't mind if I placed 1000th as long as I didn't lose points that I earned by winning battles.

Separate issue: Just fought a battle that looked like 62 points and at the end got 38 points. So...why did I pick that battle then, as opposed to another 38 or even 50 point battle? I feel like this is not how anything should work?

Brigby, would you maybe bring this up to the devs, please? You're a great red voice in the forums and I'm wondering if you've come across this in your PVP experience.

Aweberman

cooperbigdaddy wrote:

Separate issue: Just fought a battle that looked like 62 points and at the end got 38 points. So...why did I pick that battle then, as opposed to another 38 or even 50 point battle? I feel like this is not how anything should work?

Basically, the points that you see when a person shows up in your queue is how much they are worth at that moment, based on the relative distance in score between you and that player. It is not dynamic, whereas the ultimate points you get are based on your relative scores at the moment the match is played.

So if that person is unshielded, their score is likely to change in the interim -- and increasingly likely the longer you wait; if you play other matches in the meantime, your score relative to the other player is also likely to change.

Note that this works both ways. So if you queue somebody who goes on to climb several hundred points and then shield, that match will be worth a lot more than you originally thought.

Edited for clarity and consistency.

cooperbigdaddy

But I feel that's bad, right? Shouldn't the points you see be the points you get? The fights I pick are based on roster (somewhat) but even moreso the points. I'll fight a really hard team with boosts worth 75 quicker than I will fight a cupcake team worth 10. And doesn't it infuriate you when you don't get half the points you thought you were going to get?

firethorne

Aweberman wrote:

cooperbigdaddy wrote:

Separate issue: Just fought a battle that looked like 62 points and at the end got 38 points. So...why did I pick that battle then, as opposed to another 38 or even 50 point battle? I feel like this is not how anything should work?

Basically, the points that you see when a person shows up in your queue is how much they are worth at that moment, based on the relative distance in score between you and that player. It is not dynamic, whereas the ultimate points you get are based on your relative scores at the moment the match is played.

So if that person is unshielded, that score is likely to change in the interim, and increasingly likely the longer you wait; if you play other matches in the meantime, that score is also likely to change.

Note that this works both ways. So if you queue somebody who goes on to climb several hundred points and then shield, that match will be worth a lot more than you originally thought.

Yes, that is how it works. But, it doesn't make it any less ridiculous. Someone hit their progression goal, went unshielded. I have no knowledge of any of this. But, the result is a match that was worth 35 points is unbeknownst to me worth only 5? And I only learn that after playing? That is honestly my second biggest pet peeve with the game, behind wasted covers.

If a match was worth 35 points when I queued it up, just let it be worth 35 points in perpetuity. The match got no easier. It is the exact same difficulty for me as the moment I put it in my queue. I'm willing to abandon any rare instances when I get more points than advertised so long as what is advertised is accurate.

mpqr7

I would like the staff that creates mpq to try fighting to 1200 in it with a roster that's not double-champed 5*s, and then see how they feel about it. See if they enjoy it.

Watch as they slowly and patiently get almost up to 1200 points, do their final hop... and then suffer a massive amount of defensive losses, pushing them back 100+ points to a worse score than they had before unshielding.

Thanos

They really should put a refresh button on the pop-up that would let you see the most current point value. It really is annoying thinking your about to hit your progression target and then fall short.

Phumade

Its just not the way the game was designed. It would be confusing to the avg player if every pvp event was tracking 2 scores. 1. your current score, and 2, your event progression score.

If you assumed that the game tracked some second hidden progression score. I think most new players under 3 months would say? Why have I earned 2000 points, but my current placement score is only 400?


I do think that some of the new Boss formats could be used to ameliorate many of those issues, but its really hard to predict what happens to the economy.

If I was redesigning pvp events. I would make it a dual screen event like the first run of Ultron.

So the progression table is actually converted to a level table. (i.e. like how each alliance has to deplete the life/level bar to advance to next level.

In a seprate screen. you'd see the normal 3 nodes, but there would be a diminishing level bar at the top just like our traditional boss events.

So maybe each level could be locked to an opponent mmr. I.e. in level 1, you only see 1*/2* rosters, in level 2, you see 2*/3* and in level 9, you only see 5* rosters.

Of course these things could be tweaked to other things like score.


Alot of dynamics would change in this format, and it would be a challenge to balance the prizes according to their internal benchmarks. In additoin, it would be hard to predict how players would react. Do you design the levels so that as you advance in tiers, you no longer have the ability to que people in tiers below you? What happens when you get to the 5* tier and their are only 10 players who's past the treshold?

These things could all be solved and evaluated with more analysis, but I'll let the developers thinkg about that issue.

mega ghost

Seconding the idea that progression and placement points should be tallied separately. If I make it to 900 points in PVP for the 4* cover, I'm pretty much guaranteed to be back down to 500-625 before the event ends. That's a lot of lost progression points, and it makes for a very frustrating gameplay experience. I'd play PvP more if I knew my time investment wasn't for naught.

Even only separating the season progression points alone, and not the individual event's progression points too, would be a huge step up.

And while we're at it, while individual event progression rewards have seen improvement with SCLs, the season progression rewards are laughable in comparison. I can earn 10 CP after earning 575 points in each individual event, but getting to 10,000 points in the season (which is really more like 20,000 points with all of the points you lose and need to regain) only gets me 15 CP? What a terrible payoff. That should be a LT 10-pack and like 100K ISO for that much work.

These changes are a very simple way to re-engage and please your players.

firethorne

Thanos wrote:

They really should put a refresh button on the pop-up that would let you see the most current point value. It really is annoying thinking your about to hit your progression target and then fall short.

Agreed. They could even put a skip tax on it if they're concerned people would try to abuse it and flood the servers. I'll gladly pay a small bit of iso to make sure the points I think are there actually are.

mega ghost

firethorne wrote:

Thanos wrote:

They really should put a refresh button on the pop-up that would let you see the most current point value. It really is annoying thinking your about to hit your progression target and then fall short.

Agreed. They could even put a skip tax on it if they're concerned people would try to abuse it and flood the servers. I'll gladly pay a small bit of iso to make sure the points I think are there actually are.

Doesn't exiting the event screen and then reentering do this? I could be mistaken.

BoyWonder1914

cooperbigdaddy wrote:

Hey, just another reminder to the devs that I don't mind losing points in a placement model, but boy, oh boy, do I hate losing points in PROGRESSION model.

I actually wouldn't mind if I placed 1000th as long as I didn't lose points that I earned by winning battles.

Separate issue: Just fought a battle that looked like 62 points and at the end got 38 points. So...why did I pick that battle then, as opposed to another 38 or even 50 point battle? I feel like this is not how anything should work?

Brigby, would you maybe bring this up to the devs, please? You're a great red voice in the forums and I'm wondering if you've come across this in your PVP experience.

I was actually just making this point as well. A lot more people would probably push harder in PVP for the progression rewards if they didn't have to worry about being punished above 575 for not having champed/boosted 4s.

cooperbigdaddy

BoyWonder1914 wrote:

cooperbigdaddy wrote:

Hey, just another reminder to the devs that I don't mind losing points in a placement model, but boy, oh boy, do I hate losing points in PROGRESSION model.

I actually wouldn't mind if I placed 1000th as long as I didn't lose points that I earned by winning battles.

Separate issue: Just fought a battle that looked like 62 points and at the end got 38 points. So...why did I pick that battle then, as opposed to another 38 or even 50 point battle? I feel like this is not how anything should work?

Brigby, would you maybe bring this up to the devs, please? You're a great red voice in the forums and I'm wondering if you've come across this in your PVP experience.

I was actually just making this point as well. A lot more people would probably push harder in PVP for the progression rewards if they didn't have to worry about being punished above 575 for not having champed/boosted 4s.

Yes, absolutely. There have been so many times I have quit playing a PVP event because I knew I would get hit and lose more points than I would gain, when if it DIDN'T move, I would play another match or two and then rest and then come back and play another match or two. And don't they want people to play the game more?

Ebolamonkey84

I think the faulty assumption in this thread is that if progression points were split out from placement points, the progression points would remain the same. D3/Demiurge have an ideal % of players that they think should hit top prog/4* cover/3* cover/etc.

If the actual % is less than the ideal, they will try to make a change to make it easier (max points to 75, lowering top prog to 1000).
If the actual % is more than the ideal, they will make a change to make it harder (shield cooldowns, death of easy cake ovens).

If they were to split out progression vs placement, I imagine top prog would skyrocket until PVP felt as time consuming as PVE.

mega ghost

BoyWonder1914 wrote:

I was actually just making this point as well. A lot more people would probably push harder in PVP for the progression rewards if they didn't have to worry about being punished above 575 for not having champed/boosted 4s.

I have ~13 champed 4-stars at this point and often one or two of them are boosted, but once I get above 500 I immediately start getting attacked. I can get to 575 without much frustration, and 650 if I'm on a roll, but anything above that requires careful planning and shields. Even then, anything I get is fleeting. The few times I make the effort to get to 900 I see a 100 point drop within minutes. 200 point drop not long after. By the end of the event, I typically settle around 500 - 625 points again, depending on how much time was left and how hard fought the event is.

acescracked

MPQ is hard. Toughest game evar!!