Is the metagame bad for the game?

DrNitroman

And do you think that MPQ could have an interest in weaken the metagame?

First, metagame may have different meanings, here I just want to talk about the search for the optimal playing that maximize points or placement knowing the different mechanisms such as scaling, rubberbanding...
Well, most of the forumers are more or less involved in metagame I guess.

Metagame implies to understand the general mechanisms of the game and the precise ones for each events. Indeed, we all discuss to establish what is the best strategy for a given event, what precise timing of play, how much nodes a day to exploit optimally the refresh rate, the rubberbanding, the scaling...

This is, in part, what make this game addictive and keep this forum active. There is some strategies better than other. So the metagame promotes involved player that play regularly and consistently. Keeping a basis of involved players is certainly a good thing for MPQ

On the other hand, metagame creates inequalities such as the fact that everybody can't play the final hours of an event. It creates complexity in the way of playing. This may scare casual player or new players and ultimately reduce the number of players overall?

Recently, I was under the impression that MPQ is seeking to promote more stressless play. Rubberbanding may achieve that (if not broken). Alliances (you don't have to play optimally to win prizes, just ensure that the overall team does good), constant rate of new characters (if you miss one, you'll grab another) may too.

So do you think that MPQ is trying break the metagame to promote a casual play, easier for more players?
Do you think it's a good thing?

NorthernPolarity

I doubt that the devs designed this event to make it easier for casuals to do well. This event was a rerun of a previous event in the past, so I think what happened was that the devs decided to rerun the event with whatever scaling/rubberbanding system they were currently using. Since the event didn't have subs in the past, it doesn't have subs now, and what we currently have is just what naturally came out of applying the current scaling/rubberbanding algorithms to the past event.

This event in particular has its ups (easy for people who don't have time to grind to catch up later in the event) and downs (any grinding done before the end of the event is generally meaningless), but overall I think it's a good thing to have these types of events where you don't need to grind down a sub at exactly 11:00 every night to place in the event (cough Hulk cough) every once in a while. Simulator gets my vote for best structure: 3 day subs meant that grinding the subs actually mattered, but rubberbanding made it so that you only had to do that once every three days.

DrNitroman

I appreciate to have a more quiet event as it's true that playing daily the metagame could be quite exhausting: watching on the refresh cycle, node values...

But I was wondering whether MPQ plans to do such kind of PvE more often. To avoid that the game was perceived as a game for hardcore player (unusual for a match-3 game!) maybe? I'm curious to know how casual players perceive the game and its evolution. But, when you come to this forum, you're not really a casual player anymore so...

Unknown

I'm obviously not a casual mpq player but my wife is. I don't hate rubber banding as much as some as I prefer it over grind fests. This pve may appear more casual but even she is not that engaged in it. Subbrackets to me get even casuals more engaged. As for the meta, she hates pvp bc she doesn't tank and isn't as compulsive as me in timing refreshes but can usually score a single cover so she's happy and every once un a while can score well in a sub.

Unknown

yeah, I am not a fan of the metagame as you define it...particularly since there is no mention of it within the game itself...i had to seek out this forum to find any explanation of the mechanics behind the pve events...and ultimately it just kinda turns the pve events into a chore

Unknown

My biggest gripe with this game is the timing issues. ie. You get greater benefits if you can play at a specific time. This is the antithesis of casual gaming.

There are even times where it is detrimental to play. ie. You don't want to join an event at a time that will put you in a hard bracket. This is just dumb. There shouldn't be any mechanic that actually penalizes you for playing the game.

Then there is the whole issue of tanking. Intentionally losing leads to greater rewards? Come on..

Unknown

SteveS wrote:

There shouldn't be any mechanic that actually penalizes you for playing the game.

Health packs.

Its not really exploiting the mechanics because nothing is being broken. We are optimizing our play to best provide the most positive results, ie win. The dev's keep pushing things in the opposite direction to allow newer undeveloped rosters to win, so we need to figure out how to take the advantage back, if we can. If I cannot win rewards consistently after being so invested in the game, then why bother playing, its a fine line.

The metagame as you describe it is to educate everyone and work towards a common goal to win some deserved prizes. Nothing is more frustrating than losing because of something out of your control and you don't understand why you lost. i.e. the 150 people who passed me in ISO-8 since the 14 hours out from the end of the event.

Shadow

SteveS wrote:

My biggest gripe with this game is the timing issues. ie. You get greater benefits if you can play at a specific time. This is the antithesis of casual gaming.

There are even times where it is detrimental to play. ie. You don't want to join an event at a time that will put you in a hard bracket. This is just dumb. There shouldn't be any mechanic that actually penalizes you for playing the game.

Then there is the whole issue of tanking. Intentionally losing leads to greater rewards? Come on..

The moment a game has the concept of being multi-player, there is a limit on how casual it can be. It's the human factor that comes into play. People want to win other people. Simple. If I ran a marathon, I want to finish the last 2 km well too. I can't just run very fast for the first 40 km and be leading all the way and walk the remaining 2km. People would definitely be overtaking. It's not the fault of the game. It's the fault of the human factor.

The developers have done what they can to help the casual player by having rubberbanding which helps a casual player greatly. Not counting the current rerun of unstable iso 8 where progression rewards are generally out of reach, a casual player can actually be getting a lot of progression rewards just from casual gaming. That's 2 or even 3 *** covers that a casual gamer shouldn't have an issue picking up for very little effort. Sure it ain't the sparkling new *** that is being released but the casual player is still being rewarded.

Back to my marathon example. A casual runner would still run that marathon but he knows he won't be placing at the top and he's fine with it as he's doing it casually. Similarly, a casual gamer can still pick up *** covers through the progression rewards of PvE and still be happy with the *** covers he just picked up through casual gaming.

Chimaera wrote:

Its not really exploiting the mechanics because nothing is being broken. We are optimizing our play to best provide the most positive results, ie win. The dev's keep pushing things in the opposite direction to allow newer undeveloped rosters to win, so we need to figure out how to take the advantage back, if we can. If I cannot win rewards consistently after being so invested in the game, then why bother playing, its a fine line.

The metagame as you describe it is to educate everyone and work towards a common goal to win some deserved prizes. Nothing is more frustrating than losing because of something out of your control and you don't understand why you lost. i.e. the 150 people who passed me in ISO-8 since the 14 hours out from the end of the event.

These mechanics are readily available for everyone to understand the game better. If people really want to win the ranking rewards, then they'd take the time to understand the mechanics. But it also means that the player is now being competitive. Competition is almost like the polar opposite of casual playing. The game does pretty well to cater for the 2 different groups of players.

Unknown

ranking in pve is broken. why ppl playing last 3h get so many points ???
u can rank 1 for 6 days, if you miss the last 2 hours, u are 200th...

pve : ennemys should lvl up only if u defeat them, event should have a cap when u clean all nodes and ppl should rank 1 when full content is clean. just do it harder, we got useless boost x 30 and ennemy ia perfect without any damage taken. ( thx cheated heroes )

Unknown

Shadow wrote:

The moment a game has the concept of being multi-player, there is a limit on how casual it can be. It's the human factor that comes into play. People want to win other people. Simple. If I ran a marathon, I want to finish the last 2 km well too. I can't just run very fast for the first 40 km and be leading all the way and walk the remaining 2km. People would definitely be overtaking. It's not the fault of the game. It's the fault of the human factor.

It's not all because of human competition. The game mechanics amplify some of the issues massively. To speak in your metaphor, imagine a marathon that:

• put's you as amateur in competition with pro-athletes because you started at the same time like them
• every time you fall behind a car gives you a free ride till you catch up to the leader
• because you're not from the US you have to run 3 times per week in the middle of the night and once on the afternoon
• because you've participated in the marathon since 6 month you have to run uphill, new runners run downhill... on bikes
• after 39 kms of running everybody groups together and a final sprint decides the whole race

firethorne

PvE events: Mission scaling, and end times make a lot of this a function of when you play, especially play to the last minute. And ultimately, since this is a competition against other players to see who grinds more, the classification as PvE is questionable. It certainly isn't casual. As it is, all events are PvP. Either PvP point race against developer selected, bot ran opponents or PvP point race against player selected, bot ran opponents.

The true PvE is the prologue, and I'd love more casual content like that. It had the worst rewards, but still was my favorite content, as you could go at your own pace and not get burned out.

Another option would be to remove PvP from "PvE". You could have progression rewards only. That would be more casual.

TheHueyFreeman

Some of what you guys are talking about is discussed rather well by a youtube channel called "Extra Credits". You should look up their videos on collectable games and the skinner box.

Unknown

So that's what meta game means... Good to know. Apparently I came to this forum in search of mpqs meta game. I like that it changes and evolves - it shows that the devs are actively working to anticipate our gaming behaviors and how to give everyone their MPQ fix - whether you are a junkie or a casual. I like being able to throw the game on the back burner for the weekend and still be able to catch up before the event ends if I am willing to work a little harder.

scottee

Some of this could be fixed by just explaining the rules better in the info page. Explain when the refreshes will be, that the enemies get harder the more they get beaten, and that you get more points the farther you are behind.

I also like the idea of progression rewards only for PVE. That'd be much more casual.

Unknown

scottee wrote:

Some of this could be fixed by just explaining the rules better in the info page. Explain when the refreshes will be, that the enemies get harder the more they get beaten, and that you get more points the farther you are behind.

I'm guessing they are thinking like most game devs do these days:

"You figure it out. Some of you nerds will make a wiki page anyway, so no need for us to bother."

scottee wrote:

I also like the idea of progression rewards only for PVE. That'd be much more casual.

That's essentially more content like the Prologue. Something that this community has been crying out for since I can remember.
So, probably not going to happen.

Nemek

Dr Spaceman wrote:

scottee wrote:

Some of this could be fixed by just explaining the rules better in the info page. Explain when the refreshes will be, that the enemies get harder the more they get beaten, and that you get more points the farther you are behind.

I'm guessing they are thinking like most game devs do these days:

"You figure it out. Some of you nerds will make a wiki page anyway, so no need for us to bother."

I suspect it's more along the lines of not intimidating casual players. Reading Eddiemon's (or anybody else's) guide is daunting for somebody who just happened upon a match-3 game in the iOS/google/steam store.

I also think it helps build a community. The community theorycrafting/engagement that is introduced by all of these mechanics makes up a very large part of the forum. And, as was pointed out, is one of the primary reasons for people trying to find the forum in the first place.

Unknown

finwe wrote:

It's not because of human competition. The game mechanics amplify some of the issues massively

Not quite. The problem isn't the game mechanics themselves, the problem, if it is one, is that whatever the mechanics are, there will be an optimal way to take advantage of the rules. Metagaming will always give you an advantage. Changing rubberbanding will simply mean the metagame will shift.

Remember too that everything exists in response to a problem. Solutions inevitably cause their own problems. That soesn't necessarily mean you're better off without them. In any case rubberbanding helps casual players without hampering hardcore ones, so it's unlikely to go anywhere. The primary negative is that it easily confuses and upsets people with changing numbers.

Katai

Well, the problem is that it benefits those who play in the 2 hours the most, while others who play all day except for the last 2 hours are at a disadvantage.

The primary problem with the overall metagame as it stands is that the last moments before an event ends is always the most important. Which means if you want any chance in ranking top 50 in any tournament, you better have the 2 or 3 hours before the event ends scheduled to play the game. This is true in PvE, when rubberbanding guarantees that the nodes are worth the most points in the last hours, or in PvP where everyone pushes hard right before the tournament ends.

Unknown

Katai wrote:

Well, the problem is that it benefits those who play in the 2 hours the most, while others who play all day except for the last 2 hours are at a disadvantage.

The primary problem with the overall metagame as it stands is that the last moments before an event ends is always the most important. Which means if you want any chance in ranking top 50 in any tournament, you better have the 2 or 3 hours before the event ends scheduled to play the game. This is true in PvE, when rubberbanding guarantees that the nodes are worth the most points in the last hours, or in PvP where everyone pushes hard right before the tournament ends.

This is true in all competitions. I can't think of anything where the response is "play a bit when something starts and then forget it" and expect to win.

Spoit

jozier wrote:

Katai wrote:

Well, the problem is that it benefits those who play in the 2 hours the most, while others who play all day except for the last 2 hours are at a disadvantage.

The primary problem with the overall metagame as it stands is that the last moments before an event ends is always the most important. Which means if you want any chance in ranking top 50 in any tournament, you better have the 2 or 3 hours before the event ends scheduled to play the game. This is true in PvE, when rubberbanding guarantees that the nodes are worth the most points in the last hours, or in PvP where everyone pushes hard right before the tournament ends.

This is true in all competitions. I can't think of anything where the response is "play a bit when something starts and then forget it" and expect to win.

Yeah, but you could have spent hours grinding the missions down every day, but if you did your last set of clears only a few hours before the end of the event, you could easily have slipped out of getting any HT covers. But on the other hand, you could skip entire days in the earlier parts of the event, but because you were around in the last hour, you could easily slip into the top 10 from just 1 set of deletions. The entire last set (which was what, 36 hours?) I only did 1 set after it unlocked for the completion bonus, and then went in hard the last hour and was able to get #2/

kalex716

I don't really think the rubber banding and funny math the game uses on the back end is "bad" in the meta sense...

But I do foresee the perpetual cycles of new characters, required for powered up events, and slightly older characters not being balanced or relevant as being the eventual demise once its fully realized in the meta sense.

Its very much just a cheap "chasing the dragon" scenario.