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

uzumaki_naruto

I reached 1056 with 27 wins (slice 1 - cl8). Played with my non-boosted champed 4* initially, so got hit few times. Then played with boosted champed 4*s and climbed with ~8 hours left. Shielded since I'm at 9th position at the moment.

Since I have 27 wins, haven't even received the 3* cover that I would normally get at 800.

Riguez

Honestly, I loved the change... I don't care about placement rewards in PVP so I got the necessary wins for the progression reward that I wanted and I did it at my own pace (i.e. Not worrying about going to bed and waking up to see I have 150 points less from attacks and having to work back up AGAIN so I can reach the reward I wanted).

crackninja

Got to 40 wins with a max score of 803.  I'm satisfied with how the event went for me, finding my standard 10 CP mark to be about the same effort. While 40 wins took longer than I expect to play most PvP events, it's something if be willing to do for desirable (read: vaulted) covers. 

AlluAllu

Hmm... So 3-star (and below) players can now earn a 4-star cover easier, while the same is harder for 4 and 5-star players. There's some kind of political statement in there. 

broll

OJSP said:

broll said:

The statement 'Well.. the advice to get 700+ now is still also just play.' is incorrect and you contradict that with the rest of your statement.  What you're saying is the advice to get over 700 but below 900 is just play, 700+ implies get to any value over 700 including 12 million...  

So I made a poor assumption based on a semantically poor statement, no need to beat this dead horse any longer.  Let's not detract from the topic at hand.

Yeah. I use 700+ to describe 700-800. My bad. I stick to my opinion. And continue to enjoy playing versus. It's a game. If you don't enjoy it anymore, just stop playing.

I enjoyed this test a lot more than the old system and will play much more if/when they convert to it (or something like it).

lokiagentofhotness

OJSP said:

1151. 93 wins. Still using Thor IM40 Loki. No grills. I still checked if my targets were shielded, but that could easily be done from the alliance leaderboard.

Check what?

DesertTortoise

broll said:

I enjoyed this test a lot more than the old system and will play much more if/when they convert to it (or something like it).

Same boat. I'm a 900 and quit guy currently and typically don't require shields to get that far but this change is a zero-downside improvement for me. I do want everyone to win in this change so I'd like a way for people who lean heavily on the CP prize to have a way of getting it. I'm sort of fundamentally against any progression prizes going into placement (I favor the opposite) so I hope that wrinkle gets addressed. 

Beer40

796 for 40 wins. Hit the easiest target I could find each time out of the 3 available. Could have made it in far fewer wins if I would have had any boosted 4* champions for the event. Since I didn't I mostly rode Blade, Carol, and Medusa for the wins. 

This is a pretty typical PVP experience for me. I got hit so many times that I averaged under 20 points per win, when actually almost every one of those wins was for 30+ points.

With the test, I get the best progression cover instead of being 104 points away from that cover. I still am in favor of bringing back CP into progression rewards. 

Angjo

I started earlier than normal in the knowledge that I'd have to climb and drop a few times to get to 40 wins.

My initial climb yesterday was from zero to 800 and in a "normal" pvp would have just continued to 900 and shielded to the end (well had it been in the normal timeline) but I had a fundamental problem - I'd only achieved 16 wins so would have got to 900 in maybe 19 and that would never do, so I hung around waiting to be hit.

24 hours later I'd been hit 8 times, but shock, horror of those 8 hits three of them were defensive wins. Last week if I'd scored a defensive win I'd have had a little smile to myself and thought "yay me" but not this week, this week it was disappointing.

I then spent today deliberately losing matches to drop my score so I could reclimb. This evening I was playing win one, lose two alternating between my A team and my Z team, as I didn't want my score to peak to soon and make me a target for my final progression climb. The only positive to this was I didn't pay a skip tax for any low point teams, I just sent mbw, jugs and baby storm out to get beaten up.

it is entirely possible I lost more games than I won, and my new meta was can I hit the retreat button before any ap appears on the board - it turns out I can, on a pretty consistent basis. This brings whole new meaning to "you're supposed to lose".

Surely this can not be working as intended - play three times as many matches to get smaller rewards, and optimise a strategy where by it pays to lose? 

And yes I did what everyone else with a decent roster did and dropped to CL5

mkmagius

My 40th win put me at 1156 I believe. Right now though I'm wondering if my 1399 is going to be good enough for top 10 or how much I'm going to have to hop.

I've seen so far 17 rosters in my cl6 bracket (slice 4) who regularly hit 1200+.

Punter1

Got my 40th win and shielded to end at 1119 in S1.  I'm currently 12th so will finish in top 25 no problem which is normal for me in CL7.

Took me about 20 wins to hit 900 and then took hits and floated or stayed out longer really grinding the last 20 wins for the progression.

Spent way more time on PVP than normal which is much less enjoyable.  I'd normally have been done yesterday and shielded for last 24hrs at around 1000 to get the same exact rewards.  So I've spent more HP on final hops to get 8 fights done and more time.

Normally for the same HP and Time spend I would have been smarter and hit the 1200 for CP threshold, but that's not there and top 10 looks like being 1300+ so was out of reach given personal time constraints.

Dragon_Nexus

Starfury said:

mpqr7 said:

The thrill of progression points was that if you chose the right challenging team, you could get 75 points, so you could progress quickly, winning a new prize every other match. But here, you are forced to wait 4 wins no matter what, before receiving a prize. And each match is harder and more tedious than the next.

Yeah, that's definitely a downside of the new system.

Before, you had a choice: Go for easy targets for 20 points each or go for the harder targets for 60 points. Now the choice is obvious.

On that note, do you think there's something to be said for some wins being worth more "wins" than others?

Like beating someone worth 60 points could be worth 3 wins while a 20 pointer is worth 1?
I'm just thinking out loud really. This sort of idea would need further thinking out I guess.

killerkoala

this is new health pack sink.  i barely got 20 win and already over 1100.  they need to lower the it to about 24.  they say they want us to play less but with this new system they want us to play every time health pack recharge, while i like playing for about 2 hours and shield that last under 3 hours.

killerkoala

Dragon_Nexus said:

Starfury said:

mpqr7 said:

The thrill of progression points was that if you chose the right challenging team, you could get 75 points, so you could progress quickly, winning a new prize every other match. But here, you are forced to wait 4 wins no matter what, before receiving a prize. And each match is harder and more tedious than the next.

Yeah, that's definitely a downside of the new system.

Before, you had a choice: Go for easy targets for 20 points each or go for the harder targets for 60 points. Now the choice is obvious.

On that note, do you think there's something to be said for some wins being worth more "wins" than others?

Like beating someone worth 60 points could be worth 3 wins while a 20 pointer is worth 1?
I'm just thinking out loud really. This sort of idea would need further thinking out I guess.

if they changed it to +2 wins for any fight over 40 points it would be better.

Reecoh

I'm not a heavy PVP player. I typically go for 575 but often end up just doing enough for 200-300. I finished with enough overall points for the 10 pk the last few months, but it's not a big deal to me if I hit it. Decided to push for the 4 star to see how it went.

I jumped right into the test in S1. Got to 16 no problem the first day with fewer points than it would have taken for the CP. Good up to this point, and a bit beyond.

I just got to 40 with a bit more than an hour left. I ran into a wall around 28 wins & 700 points or so where I was matched against really rough opponents which were eating a lot of time & health packs, so I took to retreating with my 2*s several times in a row to tank my score until I got more manageable opponents. Did this 3 or 4 times for maybe 50 - 75 point losses each. Have ~650 points and sitting at position 100. I'm sure I'll fall more but placement is not something I ever worry about. Not good.

If they implement this as is I'll probably continue to go for the 10 CP at 16 wins and then maybe 4 more & stop, unless it's a rare case where it's a 4* cover I really need. The effort involved beyond the 28 win mark or so just felt way too much for the rewards I received.

In short, this system has potential but it needs work. As is it won't get me to play PVP more than I do now.

Impaxcible1

I must admit that I liked this new arrangement more than the previous. But then, I am not the most active pvp player and only hit for the 10CP at 575, so my focus isn't on making top10

justicealan

I fully love and support the new PvP rewards progression!! I liked being able to know I could eventually receive the four star cover rather than keep going back and forth with the points and never get to the 900 points. I hope this comes back around.

DarthDeVo

Slice 1 of SCL finished. I ended up in 13th place with my 986 points. Tenth place was at 1053 points. First place was 1612, with second all the way down at 1344.

It's the most points I've ever had in a PvP, and the highest placement I've had in a long time. 

I sympathize with those losing out on the CP, I really do. When they ask for feedback, I'm definitely going to urge them to find some way to restore it. The best idea I've heard is a hybrid system. Get the CP at 1200 points or 60 wins, whichever comes first. 

I really doubt they would make it as easy as 40 or even 50 wins. Yes,  I said easy. I started the event a few hours after it began, and had basically three main climbs, once to 16 or so wins, another to 28, last one to 40. It did not feel all that hard or time consuming at all. If the CP was at 50, I probably would have gone for it. Probably not 60 though. But maybe others would. 

They don't seem to like to make getting that much CP very easy. Sixty wins may seem unreasonable, but if y'all can still get it by getting to 1200 instead, then it shouldn't be any big deal, from the comments I've seen. 

Personally, I thought the reward structure was about right. Being spaced four wins apart made it hard to stop, because it was only a handful of wins to get to the next prize.

Overall, I hope they roll these changes out soon. I'm already dreading going back to the old style for the next event. I really need the X-23 red cover, but my boosted list isn't favorable and am not looking forward to all the champed Iceman, Jean Grey and Star-Lord teams. With this new style, I wouldn't even care; I'd just grind through them for the guaranteed cover. 

delita007

Fwiw it takes twice as long to get the 4* cover now from a pure time perspective. Took me 20 wins to hit 900 on the nose.

DarthDeVo

delita007 said:

Fwiw it takes twice as long to get the 4* cover now from a pure time perspective. Took me 20 wins to hit 900 on the nose.

 It all depends. I hit 900 around 34 or 35 wins, not far from 40. Did I spend more time playing overall? Maybe. But it darn sure felt a lot less stressful and way more easy. I'll take this format any day, twice on Sunday.