Progression Reward Changes in Versus Tournaments (7/20/17)

1…1213151718…32

Comments

  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited July 2017
    Vhailorx said:
    stewbacca said:
    I'm an almost 3 year player with 10+ 5* champs.. and personally I find this almost a better change than pve scaling. I'm in alliance of everyone with 2.5 years in, and this change has everyone excited to play PvP again.   I've been asking for this since I started playing.. you want to compete for final placement, have fun.. But I don't waste hp shield hopping and it's a pita going up to 899 and then getting hit 6 times while playing..  this is a most welcome change.. it will allow me to play at my leisure.  Instead of trying to time that 3 hour window at the end.. or not starting the event until 11 pm when retaliations die down.  If like to know what metrics they are using to seem this test a success so I can play it exactly as they need to see it..  
    Do you not care about lost cp?  Or do you reliably finish in the top 10, and so are confident that you will keep getting it?  And how do you feel about going from 25-30 matches per event to 40+?
    He stops at 900 with his 10+ champed 5s.
    Go figure.
  • nigelregal
    nigelregal Posts: 184 Tile Toppler
    This is the best change ever!!! thanks D3!!

    I can get progression in the first hour of the event then climb in the last hour to get 1st place. 
  • Joshe67
    Joshe67 Posts: 14 Just Dropped In
    I like the direction this is heading and the general idea of it, just seems like the amount of wins needs to be lowered.  40 seems way too high.
  • cpeyton3535
    cpeyton3535 Posts: 256 Mover and Shaker
    Punter1 said:

    10 pages in - so maybe missed this as I skipped some of the discussion.  In a system where a min of 38 pts/win is what most players look for in PVP the win count at the top end of the scale seems to be pushed too high.  I don't know why the later rewards skew so far from that total.  

    If you're getting better than 38pts, it should take at most 24 fights to hit 900, if the climb is good and you find some 60pt matches then quite a few less.  Table below shows the difference.  


    I'd argue that it looks good until around 725/800 reward mark, then jumps too quickly.  At most the win count should be 10 above the 38 pt match win count.  Based on the above I think 30 wins for 900 is reasonable, that's avg of 30pt matches, which allows for some hits.  

    Great analysis!  

    Honestly for people like me who only ever targeted 575 and then walked away, things just got better.  No backsliding means I might get there with less effort.  I might even be able to get further in progression than I ever could have previously.

    For players who were reaching max progression before?  Not so great.  More work for less reward.  Taking away the 15 cp at max progression basically removes the main incentive for playing to 1200, doesn't it?  (Not that I would know!)

    That's assuming placement is still going to remain a motivating factor. If it isn't, there's now zero incentive to hit 1200 and beyond.  That doesn't make much sense.  Wouldn't be surprised to see some of those players who hit 1200 but not t10 stop at 575 now depending on if they have any interest in the 900 reward.

    Applaud the theory, not so impressed with the execution.


  • Orion
    Orion Posts: 1,295 Chairperson of the Boards
    Punter1 said:

    For players who were reaching max progression before?  Not so great.  More work for less reward.  Taking away the 15 cp at max progression basically removes the main incentive for playing to 1200, doesn't it?  (Not that I would know!)

    Try more work for no reward.  Moving the CP to placement means that far fewer people in CL8 will ever see that 15 CP.  In slice 4, 1200 might now even get you top 50, but now all but the top 10 of those people are screwed out of their 15 CP.
  • cpeyton3535
    cpeyton3535 Posts: 256 Mover and Shaker
    Orion said:
    Punter1 said:

    For players who were reaching max progression before?  Not so great.  More work for less reward.  Taking away the 15 cp at max progression basically removes the main incentive for playing to 1200, doesn't it?  (Not that I would know!)

    Try more work for no reward.  Moving the CP to placement means that far fewer people in CL8 will ever see that 15 CP.  In slice 4, 1200 might now even get you top 50, but now all but the top 10 of those people are screwed out of their 15 CP.
    I suppose it's possible that fewer people will go past 900 now, they'll just stop at what I'm assuming is the new max progression score.  Doubt that will be enough to open up slots in top placement, though.  I know I'd be pretty disappointed to have that 15 cp taken away from me.
  • Frustrated1
    Frustrated1 Posts: 68 Match Maker
    Love the idea, but 40 wins is too high. 

    It's actually indicative of a larger problem in the game; the rewards are set too high for what's supposed to be a fun, light, superhero game. Yu shouldn't have to grind night and day to earn your favorite heroes. 
  • veny
    veny Posts: 834 Critical Contributor
    Borstock said:
    veny said:
    Borstock said:
    Ledonjon said:
    Play 40(!!!) matches for a measly 4* cover?
    If one match takes 90 seconds you have to play an hour just for that!
    Check your brain d3...
    This makes PvP a twisted PvE.
    I vote the complete team to the madhouse.
    A whole hour?!

    So?
    Kidding, right? NOW it takes me one hour to get on 575 points and i never go under 30 point rivals, to it is less than 20 wins.
    To get 4* (impossible for me right now, cuz i am loosing points faster than i am gaining them) it would take me more 2 hours (which is acceptable, comparable to PvE), but 90 second per match is a nonsense. BUT i must admit this change comes with brand new strategy - picking weak foes that gives few points only to get progress reward faster.
    I don't understand what you're talking about. It sounds like you're saying this is a negative change, and yet you've just stated that getting a 4* cover now is impossible for you. This change makes it possible, because all you have to do is win matches you were apparently already playing and winning.

    I've never counted how many matches it takes for me to get to 900. It's way more than 900 / 40. This is because of all the times my score goes down when I'm attacked and because at a certain point the matchmaking system stops giving me anything more than 30 pts per match. From a conservative estimate, I'd say that I probably come close to 40 already. The benefit here is that, if I want that 4* cover, I can now play on my own schedule.

    The way this will be tricky is what happens if I get to 900 or so with 32 matches won/played. I want to keep my points for the overall season, but I can't stop playing because I need more wins. So I have to fight matches with my shield down, and I'm going to get clobbered during that time. So to get to 40, it's probably going to cost me points for the overall season. The only way to avoid this is to rush to 40 ASAP and then play for points later.
    Obviously i am not the one who doesnt understand. But thats OK, my goal was not to make one simple statement but more like think about possible pros/cons.

    Also i was only saying that one match is always longer than 90 seconds - 2-3 minutes are absolute minimum, depends on the strenght of your opponent or f.e. amount of passive skills ticking (medusa + carnage could be a real pain in terms of passives).
    So, short sentences:
    1. Yes, 4* is impossible for me without spending HPs, no matter how hard i try, no matter how many powered 4*s i have.
    2. I dont like the fact they increased requirement for lower rewards - problem they are trying to solve (loosing points faster than gaining them) is appearing at 500-600 points, and becomes unbearable after 800 points.
    3. Ad. 2. - They made lower rewards harder but 4*s available so its like "do i want to suffer more for CPs but less to get 4*?"
    4. I was thinking about new potential tactic - prefer weaklings to kill them asap, over foes who give more points, since points are now irrelevant for progress.

    IF statement 4 proves correct, statements 3 and 2 are irrelevant while statement 1 is still valid.

    Final verdict: This change may come with 3 outcomes for me:
    1) Negative: I will be farming CPs (from 575 pts now) like i do now, and this system will make it slightly harder for me.
    2) Neutral: There will be enough of weaklings to farm CPs as quicky as today
    3) Positive: Again, there will be enough weaklings so farming 4* will be acceptable in terms of time spent.

    Better now?
  • wymtime
    wymtime Posts: 3,760 Chairperson of the Boards
    When looking at moving the top prize from progression to placement these are my issues.
    #1 more people do make top 10 compare to 1200, but there are many players who make 1200 points but don't get top 10.  You are taking the 15 CP away from players who would have earned them in the old system compared to the new.
    #2 the point of having the CP being at such a high point total was so it would so players with highly developed rosters could get more CP to earn more 5*.  Now bracket snipers and late climbers can get better rewards then those who join early.  You are punishing players for climbing early and rewarding those who start an event late.

    #3 you are now giving a greater advantage to 3* and 4* rosters in PVP.  Since you changed MMR 5* players only see 5* players.  This means no easy matches.  5* players can typically find 50-75 point matches to get to 1200+ and get the reward.  This means 5* players have to play more matches for and compete in a tighter pool for similar prizes.  3-4* players can play more for more prizes and more rewards.

    my suggestion:
    if you insist on placing progression as a number of wins you have to have the CP in there and only for certain CL.  Make CL 8+ be able to get 25 CP for 40 wins and CL 7 15CP, and CL 6 5CP.  You can then add 10 CP to the placement rewards for top 10 in CL 8 and 5 CP for CL 6-7.  CL 5 and below should not get CP.  this will encourage players to play the CL the qualify for but still give an advantage to the 5*.  

    i score 1200+ per PVP and this test feels like I am being punished for spending 3+ years playing the game and developing my roster.
  • Xenoberyll
    Xenoberyll Posts: 647 Critical Contributor
    Borstock said:
    Bowgentle said:
    Well Xeno's roster is better than yours, then.
    If his roster is better than thirty-six champed 4* characters plus everything that goes with it, that's fine, but he's also going to be better than a lot of rosters and so he's talking to fewer people than he thinks he is.
    Raising you 45 champ 4s and 6 champ 5s.

    I know that's relatively close to the top but i'd argue that's where the top rewards should be most accessible. With big groups of my mmr in one bracket it means that many of the deserving scores will lose out on the 15 cp reward. In the meantime low level players in easier brackets or fresh brackets will get the cp and end up with covers their roster won't be able to handle.
  • Wolarsen
    Wolarsen Posts: 326 Mover and Shaker
    New system looks interesting; need to know new placement rewards, but first impressions:
    * 40 wins for the equivalent of old 900 seems WAY too much.
    * Removing the last CP reward from progression seems bad.

    I have scored 1200 four times and never got close to t10
  • Pollozz
    Pollozz Posts: 82 Match Maker
    I like the idea, I have always find pvp to be very frustrating, and basically stop trying to go beyond 575 mark. If this works as intended it will be fantastic. Being able to play matches in peace and not stress out because I am missing 25 points to the 900 mark, but, yeah I got the win, but at the same time it shows, too bad, u got -49, because, two people attacked you and you were not fast enough.
  • Borstock
    Borstock Posts: 2,744 Chairperson of the Boards
    veny said:
    Borstock said:
    veny said:
    Borstock said:
    Ledonjon said:
    Play 40(!!!) matches for a measly 4* cover?
    If one match takes 90 seconds you have to play an hour just for that!
    Check your brain d3...
    This makes PvP a twisted PvE.
    I vote the complete team to the madhouse.
    A whole hour?!

    So?
    Kidding, right? NOW it takes me one hour to get on 575 points and i never go under 30 point rivals, to it is less than 20 wins.
    To get 4* (impossible for me right now, cuz i am loosing points faster than i am gaining them) it would take me more 2 hours (which is acceptable, comparable to PvE), but 90 second per match is a nonsense. BUT i must admit this change comes with brand new strategy - picking weak foes that gives few points only to get progress reward faster.
    I don't understand what you're talking about. It sounds like you're saying this is a negative change, and yet you've just stated that getting a 4* cover now is impossible for you. This change makes it possible, because all you have to do is win matches you were apparently already playing and winning.

    I've never counted how many matches it takes for me to get to 900. It's way more than 900 / 40. This is because of all the times my score goes down when I'm attacked and because at a certain point the matchmaking system stops giving me anything more than 30 pts per match. From a conservative estimate, I'd say that I probably come close to 40 already. The benefit here is that, if I want that 4* cover, I can now play on my own schedule.

    The way this will be tricky is what happens if I get to 900 or so with 32 matches won/played. I want to keep my points for the overall season, but I can't stop playing because I need more wins. So I have to fight matches with my shield down, and I'm going to get clobbered during that time. So to get to 40, it's probably going to cost me points for the overall season. The only way to avoid this is to rush to 40 ASAP and then play for points later.
    Obviously i am not the one who doesnt understand. But thats OK, my goal was not to make one simple statement but more like think about possible pros/cons.

    Also i was only saying that one match is always longer than 90 seconds - 2-3 minutes are absolute minimum, depends on the strenght of your opponent or f.e. amount of passive skills ticking (medusa + carnage could be a real pain in terms of passives).
    So, short sentences:
    1. Yes, 4* is impossible for me without spending HPs, no matter how hard i try, no matter how many powered 4*s i have.
    2. I dont like the fact they increased requirement for lower rewards - problem they are trying to solve (loosing points faster than gaining them) is appearing at 500-600 points, and becomes unbearable after 800 points.
    3. Ad. 2. - They made lower rewards harder but 4*s available so its like "do i want to suffer more for CPs but less to get 4*?"
    4. I was thinking about new potential tactic - prefer weaklings to kill them asap, over foes who give more points, since points are now irrelevant for progress.

    IF statement 4 proves correct, statements 3 and 2 are irrelevant while statement 1 is still valid.

    Final verdict: This change may come with 3 outcomes for me:
    1) Negative: I will be farming CPs (from 575 pts now) like i do now, and this system will make it slightly harder for me.
    2) Neutral: There will be enough of weaklings to farm CPs as quicky as today
    3) Positive: Again, there will be enough weaklings so farming 4* will be acceptable in terms of time spent.

    Better now?
    Actually, no. I still have no real idea where you fall on a change that seems to only help you achieve something you currently can't. But it's not important. 
  • Borstock
    Borstock Posts: 2,744 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited July 2017
    Xenoberyll said:
    Borstock said:
    Bowgentle said:
    Well Xeno's roster is better than yours, then.
    If his roster is better than thirty-six champed 4* characters plus everything that goes with it, that's fine, but he's also going to be better than a lot of rosters and so he's talking to fewer people than he thinks he is.
    Raising you 45 champ 4s and 6 champ 5s.

    I know that's relatively close to the top but i'd argue that's where the top rewards should be most accessible. With big groups of my mmr in one bracket it means that many of the deserving scores will lose out on the 15 cp reward. In the meantime low level players in easier brackets or fresh brackets will get the cp and end up with covers their roster won't be able to handle.
    Yeah, I don't buy it. This makes it easier for what I would assume is a larger section of the player base to grab 4* covers they weren't getting to before. If these are vaulted characters, it's a chance at a character they might not have, but rosters like yours do. If its a current 12, then they absolutely should have a roster spot to devote to that character, since that's where their power is going to come from.

    As for the 15cps, I understand why you're mad, but as a player who never reached 1200 anyway, it kinda feels like rich people complaining about higher taxes, especially since it sounds like I've been working twice as hard to get to 900 as some of you on Line have been working to get to higher than that. Deserving feels relative when I'm killing myself and you guys are teaming up to get there in half the matches. 
  • wymtime
    wymtime Posts: 3,760 Chairperson of the Boards
    Borstock said:
    Xenoberyll said:
    Borstock said:
    Bowgentle said:
    Well Xeno's roster is better than yours, then.
    If his roster is better than thirty-six champed 4* characters plus everything that goes with it, that's fine, but he's also going to be better than a lot of rosters and so he's talking to fewer people than he thinks he is.
    Raising you 45 champ 4s and 6 champ 5s.

    I know that's relatively close to the top but i'd argue that's where the top rewards should be most accessible. With big groups of my mmr in one bracket it means that many of the deserving scores will lose out on the 15 cp reward. In the meantime low level players in easier brackets or fresh brackets will get the cp and end up with covers their roster won't be able to handle.
    Yeah, I don't buy it. This makes it easier for what I would assume is a larger section of the player base to grab 4* covers they weren't getting to before. If these are vaulted characters, it's a chance at a character they might not have, but rosters like yours do. If its a current 12, then they absolutely should have a roster spot to devote to that character, since that's where their power is going to come from.

    As for the 15cps, I understand why you're mad, but as a player who never reached 1200 anyway, it kinda feels like rich people complaining about higher taxes, especially since it sounds like I've been working twice as hard to get to 900 as some of you on Line have been working to get to higher than that. Deserving feels relative when I'm killing myself and you guys are teaming up to get there in half the matches. 
    For the 4* cover it might be easier for more people to get the 4* cover but it will also take a longer amount of time even for the average player.  Players who go for the 40 wins will still have to grind to get the will be less frustrating for these players which is good.

    as for the 15CP and your analogy the only advantage 5* players have is being able to get the 15CP in PVP.  in this test they are not taking 5CP away from us and giving it to the lower players they are taking the CP away from players who scored 1200+ points but ended up top 25 and are giving it to players who got a better bracket but didn't score nearly as high.   With this test 5* players are being significantly punished from compared to the other style of PVP.  I get makeing it easier for players to progress, but it should not come at the expense of players who have spent years playing as well as real $$ on the game.
  • fmftint
    fmftint Posts: 3,653 Chairperson of the Boards
    Why cut off at T10 is my question?  T10 already get bonus command points for placement, if you REALLY want more players to "earn" those 15 command points why not open it up to T25?
  • Evilplayer
    Evilplayer Posts: 29 Just Dropped In
    edited July 2017
    Haters gonna hate, good job brigby :) i cant w8 to see it in action. 
  • Xenoberyll
    Xenoberyll Posts: 647 Critical Contributor
    Borstock said: 

    I don't think 5* players should be penalized and do think that's a mistake on the part of the devs. If I ran the game, I would regularly reward the whales for their contributions with special perks. My comment was mainly about the "deserving scores" thought. I am just seeing a picture here where I've been absolutely killing myself to sometimes get to 900 and the people complaining were regularly clearing 1200 in WAY fewer matches and MUCH less time. Feels like rich people complaining about lazy poor people who are actually busting their humps at that minimum wage job. 
    The whales are rewarded fine imho, it's the regular veterans that constantly get ****.

    The deserving scores thought includes the effort that comes from building your roster over years of play. I'm not saying lower tier rosters don't work hard but everybody should compete to get the rewards that fit their level. You don't get the top tier stuff at lvl 1 in other games either and when you take on the same task after improving your roster i think it would be fair to beat that task a little easier. In MPQ it's the other way around though. 

    I get that people who can now reach stuff they couldn't get before are happy for the change but i think it's very shortsighted because they'll be the ones complaining again when they reach the higher stages.

Categories